and in this country, a genuine card-carrying atheist probably couldn't get himself elected as town dogcatcher
Painting with a bit of a broad brush aren't you? That card-carrying atheist would have no problem getting elected in San Francisco, Berkeley or Ithaca NY. Likewise, the fire-breathing Conservative that wants to put the 10 commandments everywhere probably wouldn't have much electoral success in any of those places.
Dude, you've got it all wrong. Let me help you fix it:
Me: *walks into DMV office*
DMV Drone #1: (on personal phone call) Yeah, like whatever!
DMV Drone #1: Yeah, totally!
DMV Drone #1: Oh, she needs to dump that loser!
DMV Drone #2: (just finishing up with guy ahead of you in line) Well, it's about lunch time! I'll be back in two hours. (puts up "next window" sign with an arrow pointing to drone #1)
Me: Can you help me?
DMV Drone #1: Ugh, can you hang on a minute? WHAT?!?!?!
PBS minds should not forget the highest-level perjurer [wikipedia.org] of all
Please explain the relevance of slick willie's purjury to a quote about PBS.
Is it that you think liking PBS makes me some sort of closed minded liberal? I choose that signature more in frustration with the quality (or lack thereof) of cable news than out of any perceived partisan bias.
Many people who are not WASPs will also expect that they have a right to not be called a racial slur as well.
They might expect that they have that right but I can't seem to locate it anywhere in the US or my State Constitution. We have freedom of speech. If that speech offends you then your choice is to stop listening to it or provide a counter-argument.
Even the KKK has the right to voice their opinions in this country. I may not agree with anything they have to say but I'm not going to silence them just because of that.
Would make a good movie theme for Tom Cruise actually!
Only if there is a filming accident and real lions somehow escape and devour him. I suppose it's not impossible -- after the box office flop that was Battlefield Earth they probably couldn't secure enough funding to afford CGI lions.
Maybe he can trip over a couch while running away from them?
I'd suggest that you spend a few days walking around calling every woman you see "cum dumpster" (to her face) including your time at work
If I did that at work I'd be fired. Free speech != freedom from the consequences of that speech. Saying it elsewhere would probably get me slapped -- which I suppose would technically be assault but I'd deserve it (again, free speech != freedom from the consequences)
Do you actually think it should be illegal to walk up to a woman and call her a cum dumpster?
The drought will be scarcity-of-oil, the food shortage will be caused by idle farming equipment, and the U.S. and E.U. will no longer be able to sustain their 250 and 500 million citizens
That farming equipment could run on natural gas even if "green" technologies are snake oil and never work out. Most of us are assuming that they aren't snake oil and that eventually our infrastructure will no longer be dependent upon oil.
I'd worry about Africa and the developing World starving to death before I'd worry about the US and EU. The US and the EU still have the capital to invest in new technologies and build economies that aren't dependent on oil. They still have other energy resources (coal if nothing else) to fall back on.
Oh please.... they said the same thing in the 50s when the Soviets launched sputnik. They were so far advanced we'd never catch up, their educational system was so much better we'd be slipping further and further behind, they had more resources, blah, blah, blah. How'd that work out again?
The truth is that when you look at the rest of the World most of it has problems at least equal to or even greater than our own. China has a growing demographic imbalance (because of one child and a preference for male babies) unprecedented in human history. They have hundreds of millions of rural poor that they still need to bring out of poverty. Europe and Russia are both losing population (births below the replacement rate). Europe is making do with immigration but is starting to see cultural blowback -- Russia has no real plan to deal with the problem. Japan is soon going to resemble Florida on crack -- lots of elderly people sucking up benefits but not contributing much to society -- and they don't know how they are going to handle it.
By many of those metrics the United States is actually in a good position. We have our own problems (lack of investment in infrastructure, lack of investment in primary education, no personal savings.... just to name a few) but most of them pale in comparison to what I mentioned above.
Should this be a call to arms?
We need a call to arms. 9/11 should have been that call but GWB and his cronies told us to go shopping. I think that's the thing I have the hardest time forgiving them for. Here's hoping for another sputnik type event from Russia or China that shakes us out of our complacency.
We clearly have our work cut out for us but I don't think we are "screwed" by any means.
"Emotional harm" is not a sufficient justification to infringe on free speech. Grow a spine and realize that your "right" not to be offended doesn't trump my right to speak my mind. If you don't like what I'm saying then start shouting an opposing point of view or walk away. Don't whine about "emotional harm" and try to censor me.
and mental health
If your mental health is so unstable that you can't handle listening to free speech then you probably shouldn't be leaving your house. What was that old adage about sticks and stones?
I know that AC's don't usually get points for reading comprehension but did you bother to read his post? "Technically it is, but it is a greenhouse gas that is in equilibrium" (emphasis mine)
Questioning whether it is humanity's fault is not the same as denying global warming
Is there some other non-humanity related source of CO2 that explains the rise in that gas since the industrial revolution?
it isn't pseudo-science just because you don't agree
It's not pseudo-science just because the GP doesn't agree. He's just some random nerd on/. The scientific community is another matter though -- and the overwhelming majority of it seems to think that we are the ones responsible for global warming.
And as a random observation on my part I can't understand for the life of me why Republicans/business-people try to deny global warming. A smart business-man would realize that investments in green technology will reap benefits in the future. How would you like to see the United States as a world leader in a new technology while those morons in China are busy building a new coal-fired power plant every week? I like that future a lot better than the one where we continue on our current course of borrowing money from them to send to people that fly airplanes into our buildings.
Yeah, cuz 19th century agricultural techniques (Tractors? We don't need no stinkin' tractors!) will really scale well enough to feed 6.7 billion people.
Yeah and your friends all pay extra for the privilege of calling your mobile number..... at least in all of the European countries I've ever been in. It was one rate to call landline numbers (from your own landline or cell) -- another rate to call mobile numbers.
For better or worse in the United States (Canada as well?) it's the mobile user that pays extra for the privilege of having that mobility.
But the false hysteria being drummed up to justify war is even worse
One man's 'false hysteria' is another man's mortal threat. Would you be as dismissive if you lived within range of his missiles? You don't even need to be an Israeli.... the Saudis (and other Sunni states) aren't exactly thrilled about him either.
I don't think that such a dramatic dichotomy exists
Then maybe you should do some more reading on the subject.
It is also blatantly dishonest squirming to reach a conclusion that is palletable to the US establishment
So you dispute the conclusion of the article that you linked to support your case? I'm confused......
Given that the USA supported Saddam's invasion of Iran, resulting in about 1 million dead
Perhaps we would have chosen a different side or just remained neutral if the Iranians had acted like a civilized country and not stormed our embassy and held our diplomatic personnel hostage? I question whether or not it was sound policy to support Saddam in the 80s but don't just tell half of the story to support your arguments.
Slashdot Mirror
and in this country, a genuine card-carrying atheist probably couldn't get himself elected as town dogcatcher
Painting with a bit of a broad brush aren't you? That card-carrying atheist would have no problem getting elected in San Francisco, Berkeley or Ithaca NY. Likewise, the fire-breathing Conservative that wants to put the 10 commandments everywhere probably wouldn't have much electoral success in any of those places.
Can't remember when was the last time I saw one of those.
I've seen several of them. Problem is that they usually have the phrase "also ran" next to their names.....
People moan, but it's still a representative government, and all of the blame belongs to the people for not participating
Fixed that for you.
Dude, you've got it all wrong. Let me help you fix it:
Me: *walks into DMV office*
DMV Drone #1: (on personal phone call) Yeah, like whatever!
DMV Drone #1: Yeah, totally!
DMV Drone #1: Oh, she needs to dump that loser!
DMV Drone #2: (just finishing up with guy ahead of you in line) Well, it's about lunch time! I'll be back in two hours. (puts up "next window" sign with an arrow pointing to drone #1)
Me: Can you help me?
DMV Drone #1: Ugh, can you hang on a minute? WHAT?!?!?!
PBS minds should not forget the highest-level perjurer [wikipedia.org] of all
Please explain the relevance of slick willie's purjury to a quote about PBS.
Is it that you think liking PBS makes me some sort of closed minded liberal? I choose that signature more in frustration with the quality (or lack thereof) of cable news than out of any perceived partisan bias.
Many people who are not WASPs will also expect that they have a right to not be called a racial slur as well.
They might expect that they have that right but I can't seem to locate it anywhere in the US or my State Constitution. We have freedom of speech. If that speech offends you then your choice is to stop listening to it or provide a counter-argument.
Even the KKK has the right to voice their opinions in this country. I may not agree with anything they have to say but I'm not going to silence them just because of that.
You've been moderated informative whilst revealing top secret Scientology scripture.
I don't think the Xenu bit is exactly top-secret anymore.... there was this episode of South Park you see......
Would make a good movie theme for Tom Cruise actually!
Only if there is a filming accident and real lions somehow escape and devour him. I suppose it's not impossible -- after the box office flop that was Battlefield Earth they probably couldn't secure enough funding to afford CGI lions.
Maybe he can trip over a couch while running away from them?
Where have I seen this before? Hmm.....
Not with the amount of money they have. . .
Yeah, nobody with money or influence has ever been charged with perjury. Or lying to Federal officials.
but I've never found the pref for it. Anyone?
If you are using D2 then just click on the score... you'll get a pop-up with the moderation details.
But it is a time for the U.S government to arrest the top of CoS and ban the cult.
Exactly what part of the US Constitution do you think allows the Federal Government to "ban" a cult?
I'd suggest that you spend a few days walking around calling every woman you see "cum dumpster" (to her face) including your time at work
If I did that at work I'd be fired. Free speech != freedom from the consequences of that speech. Saying it elsewhere would probably get me slapped -- which I suppose would technically be assault but I'd deserve it (again, free speech != freedom from the consequences)
Do you actually think it should be illegal to walk up to a woman and call her a cum dumpster?
The drought will be scarcity-of-oil, the food shortage will be caused by idle farming equipment, and the U.S. and E.U. will no longer be able to sustain their 250 and 500 million citizens
That farming equipment could run on natural gas even if "green" technologies are snake oil and never work out. Most of us are assuming that they aren't snake oil and that eventually our infrastructure will no longer be dependent upon oil.
I'd worry about Africa and the developing World starving to death before I'd worry about the US and EU. The US and the EU still have the capital to invest in new technologies and build economies that aren't dependent on oil. They still have other energy resources (coal if nothing else) to fall back on.
Truth is, we're screwed
Oh please.... they said the same thing in the 50s when the Soviets launched sputnik. They were so far advanced we'd never catch up, their educational system was so much better we'd be slipping further and further behind, they had more resources, blah, blah, blah. How'd that work out again?
The truth is that when you look at the rest of the World most of it has problems at least equal to or even greater than our own. China has a growing demographic imbalance (because of one child and a preference for male babies) unprecedented in human history. They have hundreds of millions of rural poor that they still need to bring out of poverty. Europe and Russia are both losing population (births below the replacement rate). Europe is making do with immigration but is starting to see cultural blowback -- Russia has no real plan to deal with the problem. Japan is soon going to resemble Florida on crack -- lots of elderly people sucking up benefits but not contributing much to society -- and they don't know how they are going to handle it.
By many of those metrics the United States is actually in a good position. We have our own problems (lack of investment in infrastructure, lack of investment in primary education, no personal savings.... just to name a few) but most of them pale in comparison to what I mentioned above.
Should this be a call to arms?
We need a call to arms. 9/11 should have been that call but GWB and his cronies told us to go shopping. I think that's the thing I have the hardest time forgiving them for. Here's hoping for another sputnik type event from Russia or China that shakes us out of our complacency.
We clearly have our work cut out for us but I don't think we are "screwed" by any means.
Both claim that the US government is developing alien technology.
I hope it doesn't run on oil..... ;)
Err... Are you completely ignoring emotional harm
"Emotional harm" is not a sufficient justification to infringe on free speech. Grow a spine and realize that your "right" not to be offended doesn't trump my right to speak my mind. If you don't like what I'm saying then start shouting an opposing point of view or walk away. Don't whine about "emotional harm" and try to censor me.
and mental health
If your mental health is so unstable that you can't handle listening to free speech then you probably shouldn't be leaving your house. What was that old adage about sticks and stones?
So water vapour isn't a greenhouse gas now?
I know that AC's don't usually get points for reading comprehension but did you bother to read his post? "Technically it is, but it is a greenhouse gas that is in equilibrium" (emphasis mine)
Questioning whether it is humanity's fault is not the same as denying global warming
Is there some other non-humanity related source of CO2 that explains the rise in that gas since the industrial revolution?
it isn't pseudo-science just because you don't agree
It's not pseudo-science just because the GP doesn't agree. He's just some random nerd on /. The scientific community is another matter though -- and the overwhelming majority of it seems to think that we are the ones responsible for global warming.
And as a random observation on my part I can't understand for the life of me why Republicans/business-people try to deny global warming. A smart business-man would realize that investments in green technology will reap benefits in the future. How would you like to see the United States as a world leader in a new technology while those morons in China are busy building a new coal-fired power plant every week? I like that future a lot better than the one where we continue on our current course of borrowing money from them to send to people that fly airplanes into our buildings.
Nobody will die without fossil fuel
Yeah, cuz 19th century agricultural techniques (Tractors? We don't need no stinkin' tractors!) will really scale well enough to feed 6.7 billion people.
What could possibly go wrong?
Here in Germany we only pay for making the calls
Yeah and your friends all pay extra for the privilege of calling your mobile number..... at least in all of the European countries I've ever been in. It was one rate to call landline numbers (from your own landline or cell) -- another rate to call mobile numbers.
For better or worse in the United States (Canada as well?) it's the mobile user that pays extra for the privilege of having that mobility.
But the false hysteria being drummed up to justify war is even worse
One man's 'false hysteria' is another man's mortal threat. Would you be as dismissive if you lived within range of his missiles? You don't even need to be an Israeli.... the Saudis (and other Sunni states) aren't exactly thrilled about him either.
At least the cellphone carriers only overcharge *one* end of the conversation for airtime
Is that why I pay for my incoming SMS and calls? ;)
One question for any Chaos Theory fans: what are the long-term effects of creating large, man-made clouds over the ocean?
In Central Park you get rain instead of sunshine and a whole lot of people get eaten by prehistoric animals?
I don't think that such a dramatic dichotomy exists
Then maybe you should do some more reading on the subject.
It is also blatantly dishonest squirming to reach a conclusion that is palletable to the US establishment
So you dispute the conclusion of the article that you linked to support your case? I'm confused......
Given that the USA supported Saddam's invasion of Iran, resulting in about 1 million dead
Perhaps we would have chosen a different side or just remained neutral if the Iranians had acted like a civilized country and not stormed our embassy and held our diplomatic personnel hostage? I question whether or not it was sound policy to support Saddam in the 80s but don't just tell half of the story to support your arguments.
In other words, do as I say not as I've done?