The acts of Saddam Hussein pale in comparison of real numbers. The fact that you didn't post any supporting numbers tells the story. By most accounts, hundreds of thousands of people were gassed and yes it was a terrible thing, utterly undefendable. But then you find out that Saddam was a CIA-trained man who was supported by the U.S. and they were giving him aid and military alliances for many years. Not necessarily true. We supported Iraq over Iran, but that was about the extent of it.
Even if it were true, does that mean we should have just left him in power? That correcting "our mistake" was the wrong thing to do? Taking out our "rogue dictator" makes us hate brown people?
Any way you look at it, Americans have blood all over their hands and they're headed directly to a totalitarian police state in their own country at an accelerating rate. You say you're a veteran... are you aware that if you reported any trauma over what you saw in the war, the government won't let you own guns? A little over a year ago they started taking vet guns, look it up. And they're going to take ALL the guns if you let them. Then the people won't have any way of protecting yourself and you'll end up like a citizen of one of the socialist countries where the cops will happy tag your body and make chalk marks on the ground where you died, and put you in jail if you try to defend yourself.
Open your eyes a little wider. No one has come to take my guns. No one has come to take my brother's guns (also a vet). I had no problems getting registered to own guns in two states, one was a midwestern blue state. My brother has lived in four states since his ETS.
Pathetic - take some personal responsibility for the disaster you've created in Iraq. Pretending that you did good there is nothing but moral cowardice - rather than admitting to yourself that you've been supporting a criminal act and start working to remedy the situation, you go with the easy option and just deny the facts. Disaster? We found mass graves filled with women and children. We found the remains of mothers, still holding their toddler kids. The mother had a bullet hole in her head. The toddler was buried alive!
We know that entire villages were gassed, with 99.9% of their populations exterminated. Real world REAL LIFE GENOCIDE. And you call the US action to stop such atrocities a disaster. You call in criminal? I'm sorry, but criminal is standing aside and doing nothing while innocent men, women and children are butchered. What the UN did in the 90's toward Iraq and Rwanda and what they are doing today in Darfur is criminal.
You speak of facts! Look up how many children died due the UN's Oil for Food Program. I'll give you a hint, UNICEF has them. Compare those numbers to the total number that have died since the US led invasion of Iraq. Go ahead, look at the raw REAL numbers before you start accusing ME of denying facts. Until then, you are lying your ass off and you are well aware of it. You stand there and call me a coward while you watch good, innocent men, women and children die and all you want to do is talk and place blame. I signed up. I went there to fight for these people who can not fight for themselves. Be glad you are behind a keyboard coward, because in real life, those are the kind of words that end up being your last.
You want to prove you are not a coward? Go to Iraq yourself. Find a father who is walking his little girl to school and tell him that what he is doing is the result of a criminal act. Try to tell him that he was better off before we got there. Go to a polling place and find some old lady with a purple finger and call her a criminal. Tell her she shouldn't have the right to vote. Something tells me you'll learn first hand what a criminal act is all about. Go tell the husband and father of one of those families found in a mass grave and tell him how you wish that Saddam Hussein was still in power and removing him was cowardly, criminal act. Tell him how you wish we would have just let him and others like him die.
This condescending dick thinks that people want to live in mud huts and get their drinking water from the same watering hole they shit in. People who invite development projects do not necessarily welcome military action. Sometimes it is necessary when your engineers and construction workers are getting shot at.
He'd be asking why we were not in Afghanistan sooner to make sure that all those "brown" women could go to school, not have their clits cut off and be allowed to show ankle skin in public. Female genital mutilation does not occur in Afghanistan. OK, what about the schools, the full body burkas and the right to walk in public without a relative male? Do women's rights end at genital mutilation?
Do you have evidence of mass starvation in Syria? There are loads of tourists there these days, and no one is reporting famine and misery. As a matter of fact, I do: 1,200,000 STARVING IN SYRIA.; Rev. W.H. Hall Says 1,000 a Day Are Dying in Lebanon Mountains.
Your post deserves to get modded down because it is poorly thought out. You could make a case that America is doing good in many parts of the world, but when you should such shoddy arguments you hurt your own cause. The post I was responding to said the following:
Uhm.. you do realize that the U.S. is in practically every country in the world, throwing its weight around, killing off brown people at a horrendous rate, destabilizing governments and economies, and threatening nuclear war with its biggest peers?
I'd say that maybe America is to blame for a lot more than it'd like to admit. You bypassed THAT post to tell me that MINE had shoddy arguments?
Uhm.. you do realize that the U.S. is in practically every country in the world, throwing its weight around, killing off brown people at a horrendous rate, destabilizing governments and economies, and threatening nuclear war with its biggest peers? MOD Parent Troll. This moron has no idea what America does everywhere. He has never been to these places and seen people begging for America's help. He has never had to live under some local two bit thug who steals UN food from UN "soldiers" and then sells it to you, using your daughter's chastity as capital. This condescending dick thinks that people want to live in mud huts and get their drinking water from the same watering hole they shit in.
If this racist piece of shit really cared about "brown people" he'd be asking why we were not in Iraq sooner to prevent all those brown people from getting killed and thrown into mass graves. He'd be asking why we were not in Afghanistan sooner to make sure that all those "brown" women could go to school, not have their clits cut off and be allowed to show ankle skin in public. He'd be screaming for us to go into places like Iran, where they hang gays in public square and Syria, where they take food from children's mouths so they can attack children across the Israeli border. He'd be demanding that we be in Darfur, where real life genocide is happening, right now! and the UN is not doing a damn thing about it.
This selfish spoiled brat likes to blame America for the world's problems and conveniently ignore that America gave more to fight AIDS in Africa than whatever country he is in. He's standing around demanding free healthcare, free transportation and a shorter work week while my tax dollars are spent trying to save the lives of those brown people he claims we are trying to kill. I guess to him, AIDS research and saving lives are what he calls throwing its weight around and killing off brown people at a horrendous rate.
(I know I'm going to get modded down for this because it's the truth. Liberal mods know this to be true and can't come up with a convincing argument to counter it. So, they violate the moderator guidelines and down mod this comment just because they disagree.)
Ok, so what's reasonable? Does the crossing guard know all drivers are paying attention? Or that their attention isn't elsewhere due to another vehicle? Does the crossing guard know how well the car can stop (different cars have different abilities to stop)? Does the crossing guard know the reflexes of the driver are adequate? Does the crossing guard know the effect water or snow / ice on the road will have on the cars ability to stop? There's a lot of questions in there. You also now agree with my point; that peds DO have the responsibility to wait, or yield right of way. Drivers have the responsibility to pay attention and obey laws. When a crossing guard holds up a "STOP" sign, that is the law. Don't believe me? Hit a crossing guard and see what happens. Crossing guards ARE the right of way. Just like a police man directing traffic, they take precedence over all other traffic signals and signs.
And again, why does a crossing guard have that power? They are interrupting normal flow of traffic, which increases risk of an accident. It also increases pollution, because you have cars stopped that would normally be moving, burning gas. In some areas, it may lead to severe traffic congestion. Why should the crossing guard be able to stop traffic when a signal indicates the traffic has the right of way? Can't the peds wait for the next light changing? Because my kids' lives are more important than you getting to work on time.
This is how it has been everywhere I have lived; it is ALSO the responsiblity of the pedistrian to ONLY enter the crosswalk when it is safe Of course a crossing guard can't just jump out in front of a car when it has no reasonable ability to stop. However, if a crossing guard is in an intersection telling cars to stop when their light is green, the cars must stop and remain stopped, even though the green light gives that car the "right of way".
Yes, a child is the parent's responsibility. However, kids occasionally wander from their parents watchful eye. It happens to ALL parents at least once. Does that mean the child deserves to die to teach the parents a lesson? Of course not. So a second level of defense is a good idea for those rare occasions that good parents are not able to watch their kids and for the parents who NEVER watch their kids. Watchful eye? The only reason I see to have crossing guards is because the the parent has left the child to his / her own devices. If your child doesn't fully understand how to cross the street safely, or why, you probably shouldn't be letting him walk alone. That comment was not necessarily directed at you as much as it was to those that think all things meant to keep children safe should be removed. The exact opposite of "think of the children" is the "the parent is fully responsible" argument. Both are equally vile. Fact is that the best resolution lies somewhere in between. Like the guy said, keep the fence around the pool but teach kids to swim.
School zones and crosswalks are fine; having crossing guards run out and demand you stop even though you have right of way is not. Pedestrians always have the right of way. If a crossing guard runs out and tells you to stop, THEY have the right of way.
I think it's the latter that people are against, not the former. Overall, there seems to be an inclination to always blame the driver in any kind of accident. That's simply not reasonable, but the people doing this are the ones yelling "think of the children!" It's like the guy said:
At a public swimming pool we have gates, put up signs, have lifeguards and shallow ends, but we also teach children how to swim. He's not saying we should get rid of fences, gates and lifeguards. He's saying that we should ALSO teach our kids to swim in the event that children somehow get around the precautions we set up. I see it this way, it is the parents responsibility to teach their kids to swim. It is the state's responsibility to build fences around pools for the idiot parents who don't and for the kids that have not learned YET.
Yes, a child is the parent's responsibility. However, kids occasionally wander from their parents watchful eye. It happens to ALL parents at least once. Does that mean the child deserves to die to teach the parents a lesson? Of course not. So a second level of defense is a good idea for those rare occasions that good parents are not able to watch their kids and for the parents who NEVER watch their kids.
What fills us with the need to go f*#k up another planet? Since man is a 100% natural product of the earth, so is anything man does. In other words, IF this planet is f*#ked up by our doing, and we are natural product of the earth itself, the earth has f*#ked itself up, naturally.
Besides, even if we are responsible for this planet, I think we are doing a much better job with Earth than mother nature has done with any other planet in the system.
I only listed the matching YES votes. He matches on some of the NO votes as well. My favorite though is one that isn't listed on the Washingon Post senate votes page I linked to: S.2390 COBURN-OBAMA Bill - Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act. It established a web-accessible database of over $1Trillion in federal spending. Any citizen can go in and search that database. It sheds sunlight on a vast pit of government contracts and spending. Obama co-sponsored the bill with Tom Coburn (R-OK). Tom's a pretty conservative guy. How's that for crossing over and working with Republicans?
Looking at that list, I only see one instance where Obama voted with Republicans where he did NOT vote with Democrats. That vote, Vote 9: S 5, was for Iraqi War funding. All the other examples where he voted with Republicans, he was also voting with Democrats.
I only listed the matching YES votes. He matches on some of the NO votes as well. My favorite though is one that isn't listed on the Washingon Post senate votes page I linked to: S.2390 COBURN-OBAMA Bill - Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act. It established a web-accessible database of over $1Trillion in federal spending. Any citizen can go in and search that database. It sheds sunlight on a vast pit of government contracts and spending. Obama co-sponsored the bill with Tom Coburn (R-OK). Tom's a pretty conservative guy. How's that for crossing over and working with Republicans?
While I would like to say that this is a pretty common sense bill that everyone could get behind so it shouldn't really count... I won't because that is the type of thing I was looking for. You have to find common ground before you can delve into the big stuff.
You seem like a decent enough guy. What bothers me is that you have fallen into the "liberal/conservative" label trap that has crippled our government for who knows how long. I suggest that instead you keep an open but suspicious mind, be open to views and evidence that don't seem to support your own, and work to find the commonalities not the differences.
I am a decent enough guy for the most part:-). I don't have a problem with liberals. I have a problem with liberal issues. It always seems to be the liberals pushing for smoking bans in my home or telling me I can't eat trans-fat. Granted, many conservatives try to tell me who I can sleep with or what drugs I can take and I disagree with them on that as well. I just agree with more conservative issues than liberal ones like taxes, border security, military spending, Iraq, Afghanistan and so on. As for my problem with Obama... well, I was kinda starting to warm up to him until I saw his campaign office in Houston. It had a Cuban flag with Che's face on it. Obama's response was that a volunteer hung the flag and did not necessarily represent the views of Obama. Wrong answer! He should have come out much stronger against it, but I guess he didn't want to offend the Cuban loving, America hating communists that may vote for him.
I may have been able to look past that, but then the Rev. Wright thing blew up. Obama pretty much gave the same answer at first and had to be pressed before he gave it a better response. He waffled on the "I was there/not there" thing which really made me question his credibility. Then he called his racist grandmother a "typical white person". No. I'm a typical white person and I'm nothing like his grandmother. Then there's the deal where he inserted a couple million into the budget for a hospital in Chicago where his wife happens to be vice president, a job she didn't get until he became a Senator. Speaking of his wife who makes over a quarter of a million a year for that job, why has she never been proud of her country until now? The list goes on, but I hope you are starting to see my point. The more I hear his views, the less I like him.
Oh, and as far as GWB and the Texas Democrats, I can only offer
Thanks for demonstrating what is exactly so messed up about American politics these days. What would constitute hard-right religious and nationalistic bigotry in Europe is merely "true" conservatism here that gets people elected on a regular basis. What constitutes centrist or perhaps even right-wing policy there is considered far left-wing here. No wonder Americans think that Europe is a communist hotbed, and Europeans think that the US is one Reichstag fire away from going Nazi on the rest of the world. While I usually don't respond to Godwin violators, may I point out that under Bush, the US has given more money to fight AIDS in Africa than all European countries combined? How can Europe possibly consider the US bigoted when they are not willing to take all that money they have NOT spent on their own defense to help those in need? You would think that with the Euro doing so well against the dollar, Europe could afford to not be such tight-ass bigots and actually do some good around the world.
As a second point, Obama has made it a cornerstone of his campaign that there is a need to end the process of politics as currently practiced. While I agree with this, I'm one of those that believe strongly that this is purely empty rhetoric. GWB went into office claiming he would be a "uniter, not a divider". Living in Texas with Bush as Governor, I knew what he meant. GWB worked closely with top Texan Democrats to reach common ground and get things done. He tried this when he entered office. He teamed up with Kennedy to create his education program. He backed a federal voucher program that gives poor minority kids the same educational opportunity as the rich kids. Unfortunately, most Texas Democrats are very different than their federal counter parts and every single item that Bush supported was voted against by Democrats, like Barak Obama. So, I would like to ask Obama about his desire to remove partisanship from government. I would like to ask him, "What have you done as a senator from Illinois to reach across party lines? Name me one instance where you voted with Republicans. Describe a single compromise you have reached with the Senate Republicans." (If you could answer that question for me, I'd appreciate it.) Of course, Democrats will be united behind Obama, but what will he do to unite Republicans behind him as well? Why has he not done that already?
We are all middle of the road in our own minds. Boy, you said it and demonstrated it. I take serious issue with your explanation of how far left and right the three candidates you discussed are. I'd bet $50 you are a conservative and/or republican, just by the fact that you labeled all three candidates as liberal to some degree. I wouldn't take that bet! You are 100% correct. I am conservative and biased. I am to the right of McCain. That's why I told the GP to do their own research as I feel the only way to be non-biased is to keep your mouth shut. However, I did vote for Hillary in the primaries.
However, as a conservative, I can tell you that McCain is NOT. Show me a bill that has McCain's name on it that conservatives agree with. McCain/Feingold? Nope. McCain/Kennedy? Nope. McCain/Lieberman? Nope. How about McCain's views? McCain on torture? Nope. McCain on the border? Nope. Sorry, John McCain is not a conservative. Sure, he is a Republican and shares many views with Republicans, but for the most part, he is not a conservative. From your own Wiki link:
McCain, as a former POW, has been recognized for his sensitivity to the issue of the detention and interrogation of detainees from the War on Terror. On October 3, 2005, McCain introduced the McCain Detainee Amendment to the Defense Appropriations bill for 2005. On October 5, 2005, the United States Senate voted 90-9 to support the amendment.[20] The McCain Detainee Amendment was commonly referred to as the Amendment on (1) the Army Field Manual and (2) Cruel, Inhumane, Degrading Treatment, amendment #1977 and also known as the McCain Amendment 1977. It became the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 as Title X of the Department of Defense Authorization bill. The amendment prohibits inhumane treatment of prisoners, including prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, by confining interrogations to the techniques in FM 34-52 Intelligence Interrogation.
McCain has also said in an interview that he would "immediately close Guantanamo Bay, move all the prisoners to Fort Leavenworth and truly expedite the judicial proceedings in their cases".[21]
McCain has historically emphasized deficit reduction over tax cuts. The contrast with George Bush's preference for tax cuts was prominent during the 2000 presidential campaign,[30] and after Bush became president McCain opposed his tax cut proposals.
On May 23, 2005, McCain was one of fourteen Senators to forge a compromise on the Democrats' use of the judicial filibuster, thus eliminating the need for the Republican leadership's attempt to implement the so-called "nuclear option" (also known as the "constitutional option").
McCain's stances on global warming and other environmental issues have put him at odds with the Bush administration and other Republicans.[57] He has also stated opposition to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and his voting record generally reflects this.
McCain is a member of The Republican Main Street Partnership and supports embryonic stem cell research despite his earlier opposition.[88] He states that he believes that stem cell research, and indeed embryonic stem cell research, will continue whether or not the U.S. sanctions it, and so it would be the wisest course of action to support it to the extent that the United States will be able to regulate and monitor the usage. So, maybe compared to YOU, John McCain is a NeoCon, but he's barely right of center when compared to the rest of the nation. He's a flippin liberal compared to most "true" conservatives.
I am one of those undecided people.. and you know what, I think both the democrats suck, and I know nothing about McCain...
I grew up in another country, and I was taught to vote for what you believe in, not the lesser of multiple evils. The last presidential election was the first time I ever voted (been in the US since 96), and honestly, I am not sure if I will vote for any of these candidates.. I have of course not decided.
Then again, I am sure I will catch plenty of crap from people who will say I have no right to complain since I did not vote, but what is the point of voting these days, I do not see any change happening in my lifetime, its just going to be the same crap with a different political point of view and lots of infighting.
Ah well.. we will see This is not meant as a campaign speech and I'm not really endorsing anyone here. But let me try to help you out:
Obama is the furthest to the left. He is the most liberal of the bunch.
Hillary is still pretty far left, but not nearly as far as Obama. I've seen left-wingers (opposite of what some would call a NeoCon) call Hillary a neo-con.
Both Hillary and Obama are pretty much steadfast Democrats.
John McCain has been called a maverick. He was the farthest left candidate (most liberal) in the Republican primaries. There has been talk of him actually switching parties. Many Republicans call McCain a RINO, or Republican In Name Only, meaning that is way to liberal to be considered a Republican. In 2000, McCain was kinda where Ron Paul is today. A straight shooter who is not afraid to take on the party establishment. He will not hesitate to join forces with Democrats if he feels the goal is just. He puts his opinions well ahead of the opinions of any political party.
So, if you're left of center, vote Hillary. If you're WAY left of center, vote Obama. If you middle of the road or right, vote McCain. Also, keep in mind that your location on the political spectrum is when compared to the rest of the nation. We are all middle of the road in our own minds.
Of course, do your own research. Don't use any single source as so many are biased. Look for the candidate meets your views the closest, can get stuff done, and you feel will do the best job. This is who you vote for. Also, keep in mind that when November comes, you will only have Hillary OR Obama running against McCain, not both.
Or, as George Carlin put it, you can stay home and masturbate on election day. At least then you'll have something to show for your efforts. As for people you say you can't bitch because you didn't vote, you reply with, "Don't blame me, I didn't vote for that A--Hole"
Hope that helps.
(It may be Off Topic to TFA, but it is inline with what the parent said)
Personally I think nothing has changed. Almost everyone who liked Obama before they heard the preacher still likes him. And everyone who didn't like Obama before still don't like him. I doubt a huge segment of the population has changed their minds about any of the candidates. That maybe true, but it's the undecideds that the candidates are after, not those that have made up their minds. Sure, it's possible to make someone change their minds, but people are stubborn.
Of course, that's all for the general election. Right now, the only ones really campaigning are going after "super delegates". In order to get them, each is trying to look more "electable" than the other. Because of this, little gaffes matter much more.
It'll take a while but eventually someone important will go down. So that is goal? To take down someone important? Frankly, people have been screaming for this BS since Bush won Florida in 2000. He won it fair and square, and yet, people still want to see a frog-marching. You were wrong to want it then and you are wrong now. You lost, period. Get over it. Stop being a sore loser and grow TF UP! If your not happy about it, we have an election taking place in less than eight months. Stop the blinding partisan hatred and bigotry and start campaigning if you feel so strongly.
Didn't we already go through this when Clinton was impeached? Didn't we hear all kinds of people claiming it was a witch hunt and that no good would come of it. Is that not the same situation here?
You're right. Being a granddaughter of a Fascist doesn't make her a fascist. Starting a neo-fascist political party because the leader of her former party denounced fascism makes her a fascist. While I will admit to being ignorant of Italian politics, it appears to me that she is not exactly her grandfather's fascist. Here is what I mean:
"Not only Gianfranco Fini, but the entire world, including the Vatican and the pope, should beg forgiveness of Israel," Alessandra Mussolini, granddaughter of Italy's World War II dictator and a member of parliament for the National Alliance party, declared in an interview with Haaretz on Sunday. The interview coincided with the arrival of Fini, her party's leader and Italy's deputy prime minister, for his first official visit to Israel, during which he has said he intends to apologize to the Jewish people for Italy's Holocaust-era crimes. Now I'm not saying that I agree with her politics, but calling her a Fascist in an attempt to lump her with the perpetrators of the Holocaust is probably not fair. I might be wrong, but I hope you can understand my disbelief when I see Bush called Hitler and all Republican fascists on a daily basis.
Indeed: Italy still elects avowed fascists to high government office far more often than the United States. Yeah, but those are REAL Fascists, not the made-up kind that moonbats call all politicians with whom they disagree. Admitting to being whiny little bitches wouldn't make them feel better so they have to make their opponents as evil as possible to justify their blinding hatred.
(After looking at your link, she is the grand daughter of Fascist leader Benito Mussolini. Just being a Mussolini's granddaughter makes her a Fascist like my grandfather makes me a golden gloves boxer.)
if you called a friend to ask for directions to his house, and he gave you a set of directions that worked no matter where you started from. That doesn't sound too hard. Let's say I live in NY... Tell you friend to drive to the equator, north or south you'll get there eventually. The travel East until you reach Africa. No you give directions to NY and your house from the point where Africa and the equator intersect on the west side of the continent.
In other words, all you need to do is start by giving directions to a known location, the equator in my example, and go from there.
(Hey, TFA said make it simple. I just did it a single line with no colors. Maybe I'm missing something.)
...If your buckyball can handle > 100GPa,(over one million atmospheres)... If your buckyball can handle > 100GPa,(over one million atmospheres), then you should just be able to inject a few under a piston, release the pressure and use the released pressure to drive your engine.
So what if Titan has an ocean for a mantle. That doesn't mean it could be a better habitat for humans. At least in the short term, anyway. The crust is hundreds of kilometers thick on Titan. We can't drill that deep on Earth, where we can carry huge things around. If we wanted to get the water out of Titan, or Ganymede or Enceladus or Europa or any other water-filled moon, for that matter, we'd need to bring huge drills that weigh millions of kilograms; given our present technology, that is impossible, technologically, logistically, and economically. That doesn't mean Titan isn't a lucrative place to colonize; it's entire surface composition is very rich in potential rocket fuel. Once we establish an infrastructure on to harvest methane from its atmosphere or scoop stuff out of its seas and lakes, it would take half of the problem out of colonizing the outer solar system. But we'd still need to build an extremely expensive infrastructure, first. While I'm not very familiar with Titan, I know that Europa is constantly churning, with cracks opening up and being resealed again by water rising to the surface to freeze again, forming a new ice shell. It seems to me that all we would need to do is land a probe wherever there is "new" crust (ice) and sample the water there. We might be able to actually get a probe into the under-ocean one day, but for now, I think this would be the best approach. Then again, IANARSoNE (...Rocket Scientist or NASA Employee)
This paper addresses the debate over compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) and incandescents through life-cycle analyses (LCA) conducted in the SimaPro1 life-cycle analysis program. It compares the environmental impacts of providing a given amount of light (approximately 1,600 lumens) from incandescents and CFLs for 10,000 hours. Special attention has been paid to recently raised concerns regarding CFLs--specifically that their complex manufacturing process uses so much energy that it outweighs the benefits of using CFLs, that turning CFLs on and off frequently eliminates their energy-efficiency benefits, and that they contain a large amount of mercury. The research shows that the efficiency benefits compensate for the added complexity in manufacturing, that while rapid on-off cycling of the lamp does reduce the environmental (and payback) benefits of CFLs they remain a net "win," and that the mercury emitted over a CFL's life--by power plants to power the CFL and by leakage on disposal--is still less than the mercury that can be attributed to powering the incandescent. Of course, that assumes that all power plants are coal powered plants that do not attempt reclaim mercury. I guess nuclear and gas fired plants don't exist.
I really think LED will be the future of lighting in most situations. It's a long-lasting, mercury-free lightsource that can be targeted to any frequency. We are already seeing them used in Grow Light applications and other such things all the time. I think it will be a great day when we start seeing LED light installations just about everywhere we are using traditional lights today. I agree. When I can buy a LED light that will put off as much light as my current 60 watt bulbs (with good color), I'll replace every light in my house with them!
Slashdot Mirror
Even if it were true, does that mean we should have just left him in power? That correcting "our mistake" was the wrong thing to do? Taking out our "rogue dictator" makes us hate brown people? Any way you look at it, Americans have blood all over their hands and they're headed directly to a totalitarian police state in their own country at an accelerating rate. You say you're a veteran... are you aware that if you reported any trauma over what you saw in the war, the government won't let you own guns? A little over a year ago they started taking vet guns, look it up. And they're going to take ALL the guns if you let them. Then the people won't have any way of protecting yourself and you'll end up like a citizen of one of the socialist countries where the cops will happy tag your body and make chalk marks on the ground where you died, and put you in jail if you try to defend yourself.
Open your eyes a little wider. No one has come to take my guns. No one has come to take my brother's guns (also a vet). I had no problems getting registered to own guns in two states, one was a midwestern blue state. My brother has lived in four states since his ETS.
We know that entire villages were gassed, with 99.9% of their populations exterminated. Real world REAL LIFE GENOCIDE. And you call the US action to stop such atrocities a disaster. You call in criminal? I'm sorry, but criminal is standing aside and doing nothing while innocent men, women and children are butchered. What the UN did in the 90's toward Iraq and Rwanda and what they are doing today in Darfur is criminal.
You speak of facts! Look up how many children died due the UN's Oil for Food Program. I'll give you a hint, UNICEF has them. Compare those numbers to the total number that have died since the US led invasion of Iraq. Go ahead, look at the raw REAL numbers before you start accusing ME of denying facts. Until then, you are lying your ass off and you are well aware of it. You stand there and call me a coward while you watch good, innocent men, women and children die and all you want to do is talk and place blame. I signed up. I went there to fight for these people who can not fight for themselves. Be glad you are behind a keyboard coward, because in real life, those are the kind of words that end up being your last.
You want to prove you are not a coward? Go to Iraq yourself. Find a father who is walking his little girl to school and tell him that what he is doing is the result of a criminal act. Try to tell him that he was better off before we got there. Go to a polling place and find some old lady with a purple finger and call her a criminal. Tell her she shouldn't have the right to vote. Something tells me you'll learn first hand what a criminal act is all about. Go tell the husband and father of one of those families found in a mass grave and tell him how you wish that Saddam Hussein was still in power and removing him was cowardly, criminal act. Tell him how you wish we would have just let him and others like him die.
1,200,000 STARVING IN SYRIA.; Rev. W.H. Hall Says 1,000 a Day Are Dying in Lebanon Mountains. Your post deserves to get modded down because it is poorly thought out. You could make a case that America is doing good in many parts of the world, but when you should such shoddy arguments you hurt your own cause. The post I was responding to said the following: Uhm.. you do realize that the U.S. is in practically every country in the world, throwing its weight around, killing off brown people at a horrendous rate, destabilizing governments and economies, and threatening nuclear war with its biggest peers?
I'd say that maybe America is to blame for a lot more than it'd like to admit. You bypassed THAT post to tell me that MINE had shoddy arguments?
If this racist piece of shit really cared about "brown people" he'd be asking why we were not in Iraq sooner to prevent all those brown people from getting killed and thrown into mass graves. He'd be asking why we were not in Afghanistan sooner to make sure that all those "brown" women could go to school, not have their clits cut off and be allowed to show ankle skin in public. He'd be screaming for us to go into places like Iran, where they hang gays in public square and Syria, where they take food from children's mouths so they can attack children across the Israeli border. He'd be demanding that we be in Darfur, where real life genocide is happening, right now! and the UN is not doing a damn thing about it.
This selfish spoiled brat likes to blame America for the world's problems and conveniently ignore that America gave more to fight AIDS in Africa than whatever country he is in. He's standing around demanding free healthcare, free transportation and a shorter work week while my tax dollars are spent trying to save the lives of those brown people he claims we are trying to kill. I guess to him, AIDS research and saving lives are what he calls throwing its weight around and killing off brown people at a horrendous rate.
(I know I'm going to get modded down for this because it's the truth. Liberal mods know this to be true and can't come up with a convincing argument to counter it. So, they violate the moderator guidelines and down mod this comment just because they disagree.)
Yes, a child is the parent's responsibility. However, kids occasionally wander from their parents watchful eye. It happens to ALL parents at least once. Does that mean the child deserves to die to teach the parents a lesson? Of course not. So a second level of defense is a good idea for those rare occasions that good parents are not able to watch their kids and for the parents who NEVER watch their kids.
Besides, even if we are responsible for this planet, I think we are doing a much better job with Earth than mother nature has done with any other planet in the system.
I only listed the matching YES votes. He matches on some of the NO votes as well. My favorite though is one that isn't listed on the Washingon Post senate votes page I linked to: S.2390 COBURN-OBAMA Bill - Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act. It established a web-accessible database of over $1Trillion in federal spending. Any citizen can go in and search that database. It sheds sunlight on a vast pit of government contracts and spending. Obama co-sponsored the bill with Tom Coburn (R-OK). Tom's a pretty conservative guy. How's that for crossing over and working with Republicans?
Looking at that list, I only see one instance where Obama voted with Republicans where he did NOT vote with Democrats. That vote, Vote 9: S 5, was for Iraqi War funding. All the other examples where he voted with Republicans, he was also voting with Democrats.
I only listed the matching YES votes. He matches on some of the NO votes as well. My favorite though is one that isn't listed on the Washingon Post senate votes page I linked to: S.2390 COBURN-OBAMA Bill - Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act. It established a web-accessible database of over $1Trillion in federal spending. Any citizen can go in and search that database. It sheds sunlight on a vast pit of government contracts and spending. Obama co-sponsored the bill with Tom Coburn (R-OK). Tom's a pretty conservative guy. How's that for crossing over and working with Republicans?
While I would like to say that this is a pretty common sense bill that everyone could get behind so it shouldn't really count... I won't because that is the type of thing I was looking for. You have to find common ground before you can delve into the big stuff.
You seem like a decent enough guy. What bothers me is that you have fallen into the "liberal/conservative" label trap that has crippled our government for who knows how long. I suggest that instead you keep an open but suspicious mind, be open to views and evidence that don't seem to support your own, and work to find the commonalities not the differences.
I am a decent enough guy for the most part :-). I don't have a problem with liberals. I have a problem with liberal issues. It always seems to be the liberals pushing for smoking bans in my home or telling me I can't eat trans-fat. Granted, many conservatives try to tell me who I can sleep with or what drugs I can take and I disagree with them on that as well. I just agree with more conservative issues than liberal ones like taxes, border security, military spending, Iraq, Afghanistan and so on.
As for my problem with Obama... well, I was kinda starting to warm up to him until I saw his campaign office in Houston. It had a Cuban flag with Che's face on it. Obama's response was that a volunteer hung the flag and did not necessarily represent the views of Obama. Wrong answer! He should have come out much stronger against it, but I guess he didn't want to offend the Cuban loving, America hating communists that may vote for him.
I may have been able to look past that, but then the Rev. Wright thing blew up. Obama pretty much gave the same answer at first and had to be pressed before he gave it a better response. He waffled on the "I was there/not there" thing which really made me question his credibility. Then he called his racist grandmother a "typical white person". No. I'm a typical white person and I'm nothing like his grandmother. Then there's the deal where he inserted a couple million into the budget for a hospital in Chicago where his wife happens to be vice president, a job she didn't get until he became a Senator. Speaking of his wife who makes over a quarter of a million a year for that job, why has she never been proud of her country until now?
The list goes on, but I hope you are starting to see my point. The more I hear his views, the less I like him.
Oh, and as far as GWB and the Texas Democrats, I can only offer
However, as a conservative, I can tell you that McCain is NOT. Show me a bill that has McCain's name on it that conservatives agree with. McCain/Feingold? Nope. McCain/Kennedy? Nope. McCain/Lieberman? Nope. How about McCain's views? McCain on torture? Nope. McCain on the border? Nope. Sorry, John McCain is not a conservative. Sure, he is a Republican and shares many views with Republicans, but for the most part, he is not a conservative.
From your own Wiki link: McCain, as a former POW, has been recognized for his sensitivity to the issue of the detention and interrogation of detainees from the War on Terror. On October 3, 2005, McCain introduced the McCain Detainee Amendment to the Defense Appropriations bill for 2005. On October 5, 2005, the United States Senate voted 90-9 to support the amendment.[20] The McCain Detainee Amendment was commonly referred to as the Amendment on (1) the Army Field Manual and (2) Cruel, Inhumane, Degrading Treatment, amendment #1977 and also known as the McCain Amendment 1977. It became the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 as Title X of the Department of Defense Authorization bill. The amendment prohibits inhumane treatment of prisoners, including prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, by confining interrogations to the techniques in FM 34-52 Intelligence Interrogation.
McCain has also said in an interview that he would "immediately close Guantanamo Bay, move all the prisoners to Fort Leavenworth and truly expedite the judicial proceedings in their cases".[21] McCain has historically emphasized deficit reduction over tax cuts. The contrast with George Bush's preference for tax cuts was prominent during the 2000 presidential campaign,[30] and after Bush became president McCain opposed his tax cut proposals. On May 23, 2005, McCain was one of fourteen Senators to forge a compromise on the Democrats' use of the judicial filibuster, thus eliminating the need for the Republican leadership's attempt to implement the so-called "nuclear option" (also known as the "constitutional option"). McCain's stances on global warming and other environmental issues have put him at odds with the Bush administration and other Republicans.[57] He has also stated opposition to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and his voting record generally reflects this. McCain is a member of The Republican Main Street Partnership and supports embryonic stem cell research despite his earlier opposition.[88] He states that he believes that stem cell research, and indeed embryonic stem cell research, will continue whether or not the U.S. sanctions it, and so it would be the wisest course of action to support it to the extent that the United States will be able to regulate and monitor the usage. So, maybe compared to YOU, John McCain is a NeoCon, but he's barely right of center when compared to the rest of the nation. He's a flippin liberal compared to most "true" conservatives.
I grew up in another country, and I was taught to vote for what you believe in, not the lesser of multiple evils. The last presidential election was the first time I ever voted (been in the US since 96), and honestly, I am not sure if I will vote for any of these candidates.. I have of course not decided.
Then again, I am sure I will catch plenty of crap from people who will say I have no right to complain since I did not vote, but what is the point of voting these days, I do not see any change happening in my lifetime, its just going to be the same crap with a different political point of view and lots of infighting.
Ah well.. we will see This is not meant as a campaign speech and I'm not really endorsing anyone here. But let me try to help you out:
Obama is the furthest to the left. He is the most liberal of the bunch.
Hillary is still pretty far left, but not nearly as far as Obama. I've seen left-wingers (opposite of what some would call a NeoCon) call Hillary a neo-con.
Both Hillary and Obama are pretty much steadfast Democrats.
John McCain has been called a maverick. He was the farthest left candidate (most liberal) in the Republican primaries. There has been talk of him actually switching parties. Many Republicans call McCain a RINO, or Republican In Name Only, meaning that is way to liberal to be considered a Republican. In 2000, McCain was kinda where Ron Paul is today. A straight shooter who is not afraid to take on the party establishment. He will not hesitate to join forces with Democrats if he feels the goal is just. He puts his opinions well ahead of the opinions of any political party.
So, if you're left of center, vote Hillary. If you're WAY left of center, vote Obama. If you middle of the road or right, vote McCain. Also, keep in mind that your location on the political spectrum is when compared to the rest of the nation. We are all middle of the road in our own minds.
Of course, do your own research. Don't use any single source as so many are biased. Look for the candidate meets your views the closest, can get stuff done, and you feel will do the best job. This is who you vote for. Also, keep in mind that when November comes, you will only have Hillary OR Obama running against McCain, not both.
Or, as George Carlin put it, you can stay home and masturbate on election day. At least then you'll have something to show for your efforts. As for people you say you can't bitch because you didn't vote, you reply with, "Don't blame me, I didn't vote for that A--Hole"
Hope that helps.
(It may be Off Topic to TFA, but it is inline with what the parent said)
Of course, that's all for the general election. Right now, the only ones really campaigning are going after "super delegates". In order to get them, each is trying to look more "electable" than the other. Because of this, little gaffes matter much more.
Didn't we already go through this when Clinton was impeached? Didn't we hear all kinds of people claiming it was a witch hunt and that no good would come of it. Is that not the same situation here?
The interview coincided with the arrival of Fini, her party's leader and Italy's deputy prime minister, for his first official visit to Israel, during which he has said he intends to apologize to the Jewish people for Italy's Holocaust-era crimes. Now I'm not saying that I agree with her politics, but calling her a Fascist in an attempt to lump her with the perpetrators of the Holocaust is probably not fair. I might be wrong, but I hope you can understand my disbelief when I see Bush called Hitler and all Republican fascists on a daily basis.
(After looking at your link, she is the grand daughter of Fascist leader Benito Mussolini. Just being a Mussolini's granddaughter makes her a Fascist like my grandfather makes me a golden gloves boxer.)
In other words, all you need to do is start by giving directions to a known location, the equator in my example, and go from there.
(Hey, TFA said make it simple. I just did it a single line with no colors. Maybe I'm missing something.)
...If your buckyball can handle > 100GPa,(over one million atmospheres)... If your buckyball can handle > 100GPa,(over one million atmospheres), then you should just be able to inject a few under a piston, release the pressure and use the released pressure to drive your engine.