I'd rather have something that can hold at least a 250GB hdd and full MacOS/Windows.
If it had 250GB and a full MacOS, it would be a Mac, sans the keyboard.
Besides, if it had a full OS and desktop level storage and power, it would compete with the Mac. The way it stands, it too big to compete with the iphone/pod and too underpowered to compete with the Mac. It's perfect from a marketing perspective. They found the niche between the two and filled it without overlapping either.
I don't recall anyone taking shots at that and it was a big, stationary target.
That's because the only people who have guns in New York City are criminals and cops. Honest citizens can't be trusted with them.
You are correct and that is the first thing that popped into my head. However, most of the people there were from out of town/state, including myself. And, in reading the signs and attitudes carried by the protesters, these were not exactly what I would call "honest citizens".
In the United States, we'll shoot at helicopters with actual people in them. If Homeland Security tried to spy on us with drones, it would become a sport to shoot them down. And they WOULD go down, too....
Really? I remember at the Republican National Convention in NY in 2004, there was a Fuji labeled blimp (balloon, actually, it was tethered) overhead the entire time and it was supposed to be there for surveillance. I don't recall anyone taking shots at that and it was a big, stationary target.
Considering that red dwarfs are expected to last trillions of years (no red dwarf has ever died. The universe is too young), we just need to move to a planet around one of them, assuming they have habitable planets.
OH, and the quote said, "The CRU maintains THE repository for temperature measurements used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)", not "A repository". In other words, the IPCC is using what is more than likely fraudulent data.
Why are you so obsessed with, out of thousands of entire papers containing tens of thousands of graphs, a single decade+ old graph which was primarily used for general public-illustrative purposes and which has been superceded many times over? What do you think you're accomplishing by harping on it? Heck, the graphs that superceded it which are *not* controversial in the scientific community (some using easier to calibrate datasets such as boreholes, for example, as well as others that use revised dendrochronology datasets) and which still have the same general shape (just with a small blip for the medieval warm period that wasn't present in Mann)
Because Mann, who made the hockey stick graph, couldn't produce his data when requested. He said he had misplaced it. You would think that the data could be found by simply going to his "works sited" section of any his papers, but evidently, he didn't site his sources. Mann is incompetent at best, fraudulent at worst, but certainly egotistical. Unfortunately, as I've shown in my previous post, Mann is still very active and large within the AGW community and still contributes to publications, decides what gets published, and this is the most unfortunate part, advises governments on climate policy.
Yes, CRU has *a* temperature dataset used in the IPCC reports. It's just one of three major and a dozen or so minor datasets. And what is your complaint with the CRU dataset?
For obvious reasons, I don't trust anything that comes out of the CRU. These guys have been proven to be frauds by using their own words. They are insult to honourable scientists worldwide. What's really sad, if man is destroying the earth via CO2 emissions, they have done more to discredit the movement and help destroy the climate than every SUV owner combined! Climate change alarmists, more than anyone, should be calling for these guy's heads on a platter!
number of papers used in this one flawed report: none
hockey stick graphs created from this: none
papers from "hide the decline" subroutines: none
errors in raw data: none (this was a error in a projection, not an observation)
accurate papers based on flawed data: some, but not in this case.
Sorry, I gotta call BS. First of all, the hockey stick graph was on the front page of a major IPCC report and other papers as well. The author of the Hockey stick graph is all over the place. From Michael E Mann's Wiki page:
He was a Lead Author on the “Observed Climate Variability and Change” chapter of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Third Scientific Assessment Report (2001). He has been organizing committee chair for the National Academy of Sciences ‘Frontiers of Science’ and has served as a committee member or advisor for other National Academy of Sciences panels. He served as editor for the Journal of Climate and has been a member of numerous international and U.S. scientific advisory panels and steering groups.
CRU, the place where all those emails came from PROVIDED TEMPERATURE DATA TO THE IPCC! From HERE
The CRU maintains the repository for temperature measurements used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
I'm sure I could find more, but I didn't have more than 2 minutes to spend on this.
Unfortunately, people are going to leap on this as though an error in one paragraph on one page means that all thousands of pages are totally invalid.
If this were the only error, I could look past it. Unfortunately, this kinda stuff seems to multiply. For example, how many of those thousands of papers used this one flawed report? How many of these papers used the debunked data used to create the "hockey stick graph"? How many papers used the data from models designed "hide the decline" and "fudge factor" subroutines?
The problem is not the single error. The problem is that the raw data itself is in error. Someone doing a research paper is not going to present data that contradicts his conclusion. The authors are going to find other research and data that actually backs their paper. So, how many of these otherwise accurate research papers are based on flawed data?
He may not be, but we're still paying for his wars and his tax cuts and the damage done to our reputation by his advocacy of torture. He's still fair game.
Um... forgive the off topicness here, but if you received a tax cut, doesn't that mean you were NOT paying for it? Of course, let's not bring up the fact that federal government brought in record receipts... yes... even AFTER the tax cut. It appears that the Laffer curve is alive and well.
Also, if I remember correctly, the economy was doing quite well for a few years under Bush. Of course, he inherited a recession, but that was over and done with in much less than a year. Then we had several years of awesomeness, economy wise after 9-11. And then, of course, Congress went D and the whole economy went to shit. I guess it proves the Constitution right when it says that Congress will control the purse strings, and therefor the economy. So, when you blame a president for the economy, it really just proves that you have no idea what you are talking about. You shouldn't air out your ignorance like that for all to see. Think of it as skid marks on your whitie tighties hanging on the clothes line. You really don't want everyone seeing that, do you?
And finally, the torture... Are you referring to the three, count them THREE known terrorists (not suspected terrorists, KNOWN terrorist) that were waterboarded for about 1 minute each? The same ones that started giving real world, truthful, actionable information after the "session"? Those terrorists? Or the hundreds that you dreamed up in your head because you can't justify your raw hatred of GWB without them. It's must be sad to have to resort to delusion to justify your emotions, even if just to yourself.
You know, I don't think it would have done all that much damage to our reputation if assholes like yourself would quit exaggerating what happened. I think what really makes us look bad is when our own citizens say stupid shit like that. Besides, it appears that the 0ne has brought our reputation back from the brink. Now we are all one big happy world, drinking fairy pee and smoking unicorn farts. So I guess the damage wasn't that bad after all, was it. Oh, except for, you know, the guys that want to kill us. Yeah, it turns out that they are buying the bullshit and still want to kill us. We also know that they wanted to kill us BEFORE Bush took office, so you really can't blame him for that either. Oh, and let's not forget that France, has aligned with Hugo Chavez in accusing the USA of invading Haiti since our troops are there providing security for aid agencies.
If the U.S. Constitution ensures the free speech rights of corporations, as the SCOTUS has judged, then clearly the Constitution is defective.
So, if someone decides to become a self corporation, do they lose all rights as far as you are concerned?
Remember, all companies are made up of people. They are not evil entities all on their own. They are made up of stock holders, boards and employees, all people.
The constitution doesn't give you, or a business formed by you and a friend, any rights. The constitution is there to limit the government's ability to take those rights away.
Thank you for reminding us that many of the first X amendments state "Congress shall pass no law that...", not "Citizens may..."
Palin couldn't stop Joe Biden "o'Biden", which is why she asked if she could call him "Joe" in the VP debates. She still slipped during the debate and called him o'Biden anyway.
Experience is one thing, the ability to remember your opponents names is another.
Awesome! That's what I was looking for. She also did an interview while being completely oblivious to a turkey slaughter going on behind her.
However, Obama spent several minutes talking about pie in a campaign stop and Joe Biden told a man in a wheel chair to stand up and be recognized. George HW Bush blew chunks into the Japanese PM's lap and at one point said he and Reagan had sex. Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush couldn't stop from saying "nucular" and Carter even worked on a nuclear sub. Politicians do stupid things sometimes. Actually, we all do stupid things sometimes, except not all of spend as much time in front of a camera.
Anyway, my point is that if you are going to disqualify Palin for saying O'Biden, then you'd have to disqualify Biden for all the incredibly stupid stuff he has said throughout the years.
You're a 'tard or a troll. Either way, having a conversation with you is akin to having one with this keyboard, so welcome to my killfile.
This isn't meant for the parent, since I have been truly honored to enter his "killfile". Notice how since he couldn't argue the facts, he threw out a personal insult and quit listening. What a class act.
What does any of your drivel have to do with my point that she's monumentally unqualified and unprepared for the job of VP?
It proves my point that PDS exists and you are exhibition B. See, you can sit there all day and accuse me of/ignoring/ the fact that Palin is not qualified for VP, all while you/ignore/ that Palin had just as many years political experience as Obama, and all of it executive, just like the job of president, while Obama had zero executive experience. His experience consisted of sitting on boards and working in legislative bodies. He shared the responsibility with everyone else around him and came up with a consensus via vote. Palin ran a small business, was a mayor and governor. She was the figurehead. When stuff went wrong, she was to blame, even if she had nothing to do with it. You've heard "The buck stops here." Only CEO's, presidents, governors and mayors say that. Legislators do not. So even if you ignore what the jobs were, and what the jobs they were applying for (president vs VICE president) Obama and Palin's political experience is a wash. However, when you consider that Obama was at the TOP of the ticket while Palin was on the bottom, it's obvious that Obama was much less qualified for the job he was running for than Palin was for the job she was running for.
And you blame ME for/ignoring/ the obvious.
But how about you read and understand what I write before engaging in internet drama?
Um... you didn't say anything except that PDS was a myth and I was a "fucking moron", which I find hilarious as in the very next post, you bring up Palin's qualifications and completely ignore Obama's, which again proves my point entirely.
BDS/PDS is a wonderful conservative invention. You have only to invoke it, and you can proceed to ignore/anything/ the person you imagine to have it has to say.
You're a fucking moron.
Um... did you read the parent post? I think it pretty much proved the point that PDS is real. Google "PDS Palin" (no quotes) and read up. Not all of it comes from conservative sites.
Seriously though. How can the media push myths like "I can see Russia from my house" and that bikini picture of the chick holding the rifle with Palin's head 'shopped on, and not show THIS. Seriously? Palin is unqualified to be VP but this guy is a good fit for the job?
So please, don't give me any shit about "ignoring/anything/" until you can stop ignoring stuff like the links above.
but never really abused it except to fight terror and the like.
Except for the domestic spying, bailing out banks, starting two failfrak wars and presiding over an administration that outspent the liberal Clinton administration Bish never exceeded his powers... Right... What planet have you been on these last eight years by chance because it sure as hell isn't Earth.
First, the domestic spying was still for national defense, trying to stop terrorism. Still you can't deny that Obama is doing domestic spying, except for political purposes, wanted Bush to bail out the banks and passed a stimulus package that made the bank bailouts look like lunch at McDonalds, continuing and expanding wars from the Bush administration, and greatly outspent any single year of the Bush presidency... Hell outspent ANY year from ANY president in the history of this country... and your still bitching about Bush, who hasn't been president in a year.
So where have I been the past 8 years? Right here. But what's really telling is that you are trying to hard to ignore the past year under Obama that you forgot that Bush was elected NINE years ago, not eight. So, ummm... Where have you been for the past ONE year?
She got people with two brain cells to rub together worked up because she was monumentally unqualified and unprepared for the job, and choosing her was such an obvious sop to the same emotional whackjobs the parent was complaining about.
Oh yeah, and because THIS is SOOOOO much better. Go ahead, watch the video and tell me again how bad Palin is.
She got people with two brain cells to rub together worked up because she was monumentally unqualified and unprepared for the job, and choosing her was such an obvious sop to the same emotional whackjobs the parent was complaining about.
You just proved the point. Thank you.
Although, I've heard it called PDS, or Palin Derangement Syndrome. Similar to BDS.
Oh, and if you had two brain cells to rub together you would have seen the trap that the GP set for you. Only a true moron would insult Sarah Palin right after someone mentioned how much liberals truly hate Sarah Palin, even though she hasn't really done anything wrong. You should be careful who you call stupid. You know, glass houses and all.
Yeah it's amusing to hear right-wing loons like the GP say such things while they ignore that even renowned conservatives like Ronald Reagan weren't above executive branch power grabs such as these. While this doesn't excuse Obama in this, as his administration is despicable for even proposing such a thing, the legacy of the Patriot Act and Bush's legions of Executive Orders paved the way for such a thing to happen.
So... you're saying that this is Bush's fault? Really? Sure, Bush allowed government to do more to fight terror and the like but never really abused it except to fight terror and the like. Obama abuses it against his political foes (Sunstein has also recently advocated banning websites which post 'right-wing rumors') and it's Bush's fault?
Sorry, nothing in the PATRIOT Act allows the government to shut down private websites because of political speech.
We know that life arose from self-assembling molecules formed in a primitive thick atmosphere that rained into a primordial ocean where membranes wrapped around RNA packages to create unicellular life which eventually clustered and evolved into...us. Mars has not had the atmosphere with methane and ammonia needed for amino acids to form and, if it did indeed have oceans, they were too small, too shallow, and far too short-lived to have allowed life to have evolved. Ergo...life on Mars is...impossible. Cleared that right up for ya.
Assuming, of course that all life requires RNA, methane, ammonia, amino acids and oceans of water to form and that any life in the universe will have to organic in nature. (Organic as in being carbon based, not made naturally).
Slashdot Mirror
I'd rather have something that can hold at least a 250GB hdd and full MacOS/Windows.
If it had 250GB and a full MacOS, it would be a Mac, sans the keyboard.
Besides, if it had a full OS and desktop level storage and power, it would compete with the Mac. The way it stands, it too big to compete with the iphone/pod and too underpowered to compete with the Mac. It's perfect from a marketing perspective. They found the niche between the two and filled it without overlapping either.
I don't recall anyone taking shots at that and it was a big, stationary target.
That's because the only people who have guns in New York City are criminals and cops. Honest citizens can't be trusted with them.
You are correct and that is the first thing that popped into my head. However, most of the people there were from out of town/state, including myself. And, in reading the signs and attitudes carried by the protesters, these were not exactly what I would call "honest citizens".
In the United States, we'll shoot at helicopters with actual people in them. If Homeland Security tried to spy on us with drones, it would become a sport to shoot them down. And they WOULD go down, too....
Really? I remember at the Republican National Convention in NY in 2004, there was a Fuji labeled blimp (balloon, actually, it was tethered) overhead the entire time and it was supposed to be there for surveillance. I don't recall anyone taking shots at that and it was a big, stationary target.
Considering that red dwarfs are expected to last trillions of years (no red dwarf has ever died. The universe is too young), we just need to move to a planet around one of them, assuming they have habitable planets.
OH, and the quote said, "The CRU maintains THE repository for temperature measurements used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)", not "A repository". In other words, the IPCC is using what is more than likely fraudulent data.
Why are you so obsessed with, out of thousands of entire papers containing tens of thousands of graphs, a single decade+ old graph which was primarily used for general public-illustrative purposes and which has been superceded many times over? What do you think you're accomplishing by harping on it? Heck, the graphs that superceded it which are *not* controversial in the scientific community (some using easier to calibrate datasets such as boreholes, for example, as well as others that use revised dendrochronology datasets) and which still have the same general shape (just with a small blip for the medieval warm period that wasn't present in Mann)
Because Mann, who made the hockey stick graph, couldn't produce his data when requested. He said he had misplaced it. You would think that the data could be found by simply going to his "works sited" section of any his papers, but evidently, he didn't site his sources. Mann is incompetent at best, fraudulent at worst, but certainly egotistical. Unfortunately, as I've shown in my previous post, Mann is still very active and large within the AGW community and still contributes to publications, decides what gets published, and this is the most unfortunate part, advises governments on climate policy.
Yes, CRU has *a* temperature dataset used in the IPCC reports. It's just one of three major and a dozen or so minor datasets. And what is your complaint with the CRU dataset?
For obvious reasons, I don't trust anything that comes out of the CRU. These guys have been proven to be frauds by using their own words. They are insult to honourable scientists worldwide. What's really sad, if man is destroying the earth via CO2 emissions, they have done more to discredit the movement and help destroy the climate than every SUV owner combined! Climate change alarmists, more than anyone, should be calling for these guy's heads on a platter!
reference: http://web.hwr.arizona.edu/~gleonard/2009Dec-FallAGU-Soot-PressConference-Backgrounder-Kargel.pdf
number of papers used in this one flawed report: none
hockey stick graphs created from this: none
papers from "hide the decline" subroutines: none
errors in raw data: none (this was a error in a projection, not an observation)
accurate papers based on flawed data: some, but not in this case.
Sorry, I gotta call BS. First of all, the hockey stick graph was on the front page of a major IPCC report and other papers as well. The author of the Hockey stick graph is all over the place. From Michael E Mann's Wiki page:
He was a Lead Author on the “Observed Climate Variability and Change” chapter of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Third Scientific Assessment Report (2001). He has been organizing committee chair for the National Academy of Sciences ‘Frontiers of Science’ and has served as a committee member or advisor for other National Academy of Sciences panels. He served as editor for the Journal of Climate and has been a member of numerous international and U.S. scientific advisory panels and steering groups.
CRU, the place where all those emails came from PROVIDED TEMPERATURE DATA TO THE IPCC! From HERE
The CRU maintains the repository for temperature measurements used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
I'm sure I could find more, but I didn't have more than 2 minutes to spend on this.
Unfortunately, people are going to leap on this as though an error in one paragraph on one page means that all thousands of pages are totally invalid.
If this were the only error, I could look past it. Unfortunately, this kinda stuff seems to multiply. For example, how many of those thousands of papers used this one flawed report? How many of these papers used the debunked data used to create the "hockey stick graph"? How many papers used the data from models designed "hide the decline" and "fudge factor" subroutines?
The problem is not the single error. The problem is that the raw data itself is in error. Someone doing a research paper is not going to present data that contradicts his conclusion. The authors are going to find other research and data that actually backs their paper. So, how many of these otherwise accurate research papers are based on flawed data?
He may not be, but we're still paying for his wars and his tax cuts and the damage done to our reputation by his advocacy of torture. He's still fair game.
Um... forgive the off topicness here, but if you received a tax cut, doesn't that mean you were NOT paying for it? Of course, let's not bring up the fact that federal government brought in record receipts... yes... even AFTER the tax cut. It appears that the Laffer curve is alive and well.
Also, if I remember correctly, the economy was doing quite well for a few years under Bush. Of course, he inherited a recession, but that was over and done with in much less than a year. Then we had several years of awesomeness, economy wise after 9-11. And then, of course, Congress went D and the whole economy went to shit. I guess it proves the Constitution right when it says that Congress will control the purse strings, and therefor the economy. So, when you blame a president for the economy, it really just proves that you have no idea what you are talking about. You shouldn't air out your ignorance like that for all to see. Think of it as skid marks on your whitie tighties hanging on the clothes line. You really don't want everyone seeing that, do you?
And finally, the torture... Are you referring to the three, count them THREE known terrorists (not suspected terrorists, KNOWN terrorist) that were waterboarded for about 1 minute each? The same ones that started giving real world, truthful, actionable information after the "session"? Those terrorists? Or the hundreds that you dreamed up in your head because you can't justify your raw hatred of GWB without them. It's must be sad to have to resort to delusion to justify your emotions, even if just to yourself.
You know, I don't think it would have done all that much damage to our reputation if assholes like yourself would quit exaggerating what happened. I think what really makes us look bad is when our own citizens say stupid shit like that. Besides, it appears that the 0ne has brought our reputation back from the brink. Now we are all one big happy world, drinking fairy pee and smoking unicorn farts. So I guess the damage wasn't that bad after all, was it. Oh, except for, you know, the guys that want to kill us. Yeah, it turns out that they are buying the bullshit and still want to kill us. We also know that they wanted to kill us BEFORE Bush took office, so you really can't blame him for that either. Oh, and let's not forget that France, has aligned with Hugo Chavez in accusing the USA of invading Haiti since our troops are there providing security for aid agencies.
Damn! I must really need a smoke!
If corporations want to be individuals, it's time we start taxing them like individuals.
We would lose a lot of tax dollars that way and the corporations would love it!
If the U.S. Constitution ensures the free speech rights of corporations, as the SCOTUS has judged, then clearly the Constitution is defective.
So, if someone decides to become a self corporation, do they lose all rights as far as you are concerned?
Remember, all companies are made up of people. They are not evil entities all on their own. They are made up of stock holders, boards and employees, all people.
The U(F)SA is now a de facto fascist state.
Does this qualify as a Godwin violation?
The constitution doesn't give you, or a business formed by you and a friend, any rights. The constitution is there to limit the government's ability to take those rights away.
Thank you for reminding us that many of the first X amendments state "Congress shall pass no law that...", not "Citizens may..."
SPACE ELEVATORRRRR
(it sounds so cool when you type it in caps!)
Strange. My keys sound the same in any case... or font for that matter.
It has to be higher or the climber will pull it down.
You are correct. I think the the midpoint needs to be in geosync orbit?
Palin couldn't stop Joe Biden "o'Biden", which is why she asked if she could call him "Joe" in the VP debates. She still slipped during the debate and called him o'Biden anyway.
Experience is one thing, the ability to remember your opponents names is another.
Awesome! That's what I was looking for. She also did an interview while being completely oblivious to a turkey slaughter going on behind her.
However, Obama spent several minutes talking about pie in a campaign stop and Joe Biden told a man in a wheel chair to stand up and be recognized. George HW Bush blew chunks into the Japanese PM's lap and at one point said he and Reagan had sex. Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush couldn't stop from saying "nucular" and Carter even worked on a nuclear sub. Politicians do stupid things sometimes. Actually, we all do stupid things sometimes, except not all of spend as much time in front of a camera.
Anyway, my point is that if you are going to disqualify Palin for saying O'Biden, then you'd have to disqualify Biden for all the incredibly stupid stuff he has said throughout the years.
If you were at a payphone after the battery on your gadgets runs out...
What's a "payphone"? Is that like a charging station for gadgets? Why would you need a phone number for that? Don't they take credit cards?
You're a 'tard or a troll. Either way, having a conversation with you is akin to having one with this keyboard, so welcome to my killfile.
This isn't meant for the parent, since I have been truly honored to enter his "killfile". Notice how since he couldn't argue the facts, he threw out a personal insult and quit listening. What a class act.
What does any of your drivel have to do with my point that she's monumentally unqualified and unprepared for the job of VP?
It proves my point that PDS exists and you are exhibition B. See, you can sit there all day and accuse me of /ignoring/ the fact that Palin is not qualified for VP, all while you /ignore/ that Palin had just as many years political experience as Obama, and all of it executive, just like the job of president, while Obama had zero executive experience. His experience consisted of sitting on boards and working in legislative bodies. He shared the responsibility with everyone else around him and came up with a consensus via vote. Palin ran a small business, was a mayor and governor. She was the figurehead. When stuff went wrong, she was to blame, even if she had nothing to do with it. You've heard "The buck stops here." Only CEO's, presidents, governors and mayors say that. Legislators do not. So even if you ignore what the jobs were, and what the jobs they were applying for (president vs VICE president) Obama and Palin's political experience is a wash. However, when you consider that Obama was at the TOP of the ticket while Palin was on the bottom, it's obvious that Obama was much less qualified for the job he was running for than Palin was for the job she was running for.
And you blame ME for /ignoring/ the obvious.
But how about you read and understand what I write before engaging in internet drama?
Um... you didn't say anything except that PDS was a myth and I was a "fucking moron", which I find hilarious as in the very next post, you bring up Palin's qualifications and completely ignore Obama's, which again proves my point entirely.
BDS/PDS is a wonderful conservative invention. You have only to invoke it, and you can proceed to ignore /anything/ the person you imagine to have it has to say.
You're a fucking moron.
Um... did you read the parent post? I think it pretty much proved the point that PDS is real. Google "PDS Palin" (no quotes) and read up. Not all of it comes from conservative sites.
Seriously though. How can the media push myths like "I can see Russia from my house" and that bikini picture of the chick holding the rifle with Palin's head 'shopped on, and not show THIS. Seriously? Palin is unqualified to be VP but this guy is a good fit for the job?
So please, don't give me any shit about "ignoring /anything/" until you can stop ignoring stuff like the links above.
Except for the domestic spying, bailing out banks, starting two failfrak wars and presiding over an administration that outspent the liberal Clinton administration Bish never exceeded his powers... Right... What planet have you been on these last eight years by chance because it sure as hell isn't Earth.
First, the domestic spying was still for national defense, trying to stop terrorism. Still you can't deny that Obama is doing domestic spying, except for political purposes, wanted Bush to bail out the banks and passed a stimulus package that made the bank bailouts look like lunch at McDonalds, continuing and expanding wars from the Bush administration, and greatly outspent any single year of the Bush presidency... Hell outspent ANY year from ANY president in the history of this country... and your still bitching about Bush, who hasn't been president in a year.
So where have I been the past 8 years? Right here. But what's really telling is that you are trying to hard to ignore the past year under Obama that you forgot that Bush was elected NINE years ago, not eight. So, ummm... Where have you been for the past ONE year?
She got people with two brain cells to rub together worked up because she was monumentally unqualified and unprepared for the job, and choosing her was such an obvious sop to the same emotional whackjobs the parent was complaining about.
Oh yeah, and because THIS is SOOOOO much better. Go ahead, watch the video and tell me again how bad Palin is.
She got people with two brain cells to rub together worked up because she was monumentally unqualified and unprepared for the job, and choosing her was such an obvious sop to the same emotional whackjobs the parent was complaining about.
You just proved the point. Thank you.
Although, I've heard it called PDS, or Palin Derangement Syndrome. Similar to BDS.
Oh, and if you had two brain cells to rub together you would have seen the trap that the GP set for you. Only a true moron would insult Sarah Palin right after someone mentioned how much liberals truly hate Sarah Palin, even though she hasn't really done anything wrong. You should be careful who you call stupid. You know, glass houses and all.
Yeah it's amusing to hear right-wing loons like the GP say such things while they ignore that even renowned conservatives like Ronald Reagan weren't above executive branch power grabs such as these. While this doesn't excuse Obama in this, as his administration is despicable for even proposing such a thing, the legacy of the Patriot Act and Bush's legions of Executive Orders paved the way for such a thing to happen.
So... you're saying that this is Bush's fault? Really? Sure, Bush allowed government to do more to fight terror and the like but never really abused it except to fight terror and the like. Obama abuses it against his political foes (Sunstein has also recently advocated banning websites which post 'right-wing rumors') and it's Bush's fault?
Sorry, nothing in the PATRIOT Act allows the government to shut down private websites because of political speech.
We know that life arose from self-assembling molecules formed in a primitive thick atmosphere that rained into a primordial ocean where membranes wrapped around RNA packages to create unicellular life which eventually clustered and evolved into...us. Mars has not had the atmosphere with methane and ammonia needed for amino acids to form and, if it did indeed have oceans, they were too small, too shallow, and far too short-lived to have allowed life to have evolved. Ergo...life on Mars is...impossible. Cleared that right up for ya.
Assuming, of course that all life requires RNA, methane, ammonia, amino acids and oceans of water to form and that any life in the universe will have to organic in nature. (Organic as in being carbon based, not made naturally).