And straight into a war that left Germany divided and devastated. The degree of economic damage the Nazis did to Germany was pretty high.
And most certainly the mass militarization project that Hitler undertook could not have been sustained forever. What he did was find a short term cure to a problem, but with a side effect that was immeasurably worse than the original disease.
There is enough knowledge of the untainted writings of Josephus to give weight to the notion that there was a man named Jesus teaching around the third decade of the 1st century AD. When you look at it that way, all Josephus was doing was giving some relatively minor notice to a religious figure who had been executed by the Romans and who had a number of followers.
There are plenty of ludicrous things in the Bible, and specifically ludicrous claims about Jesus, but that the man, no matter how much nonsense may have been piled on him later, did exist I don't think one can reasonably question.
The original KJV, while certainly one of the great masterpieces of Early Modern English, is notorious for errors in translation. I own a copy simply because it's probably the most readable of all English Bibles, but when I'm in serious debate with a true believer, it's not what I view as a good source. The American Standard and modern KJV are much better Bibles.
Starship Troopers was Heinlein's Dianetics. He may have been a Libertarian at one point, but he became much worse than that (and Libertarianism is bad enough).
If you're are so pathetically thin-skinned that someone taunting you leads you to take out your gun to defend your "honor", then you have no honor. You're a cowardly worthless piece of freedom-hating shit.
Fuck religious whackjobs, fuck their gods, fuck every single about them. Fuck them fuck them fuck them fuck them. Fuck their miserable offspring, fuck their wives, fuck mothers and fathers, fuck their religious leaders, fuck their holy books, fuck their traditions, fuck their culture, fuck it all.
England had dispensed with the idea of Absolutism over a century before. The Glorious Revolution was as far reaching as the French Revolution, and considerably less bloody.
And look what the French Revolution produces; the Jacobins, Robespierre, the Reign of Terror, the Directory, and ultimately Napoleon. Yes, poor silly well-meaning ill-advised Louis XVI lost his head, along with a bunch of equally silly foppish aristocrats, but the average Frenchman's lot really didn't improve until the Bourbon Restoration and the rise of Napoleon III.
Like any other country with democratic elections. If you can't even muster sufficient support to raise some cash, how precisely do you propose to actually win an election? Hanging chads?
Let's put it this way. A would-be Congresscritter who wants to play with the big boys at the debate, but who can't raise $50,000, is like the would-be ace pilot who can't even afford a pair of aviator's sunglasses.
Most of the Tea Parties *are* Libertarians, except when it comes to *their* Medicare, or any other government benefit they're receiving. I look upon Tea Partiers as the low-hanging fruit of the Libertarian movement. The full-blooded Libertarians are far more clever in burying their fundamentally sociopathic ideology and high-sounding rhetoric.
Life is filled with difficult decisions requiring pragmatism. You should consider Isaac asimov's axiom "Never let your sense of morality prevent you from doing what's right."
He wasn't all that likes even by the moderates. His tendency towards charting his own path and bipartisanship made him a frequent target of anger by wide swathes of the Republican Party.
Slashdot Mirror
The Japanese didn't have a lot of Jews to do bad things to. Not to worry, there were no lack of Chinese and Koreans.
And straight into a war that left Germany divided and devastated. The degree of economic damage the Nazis did to Germany was pretty high.
And most certainly the mass militarization project that Hitler undertook could not have been sustained forever. What he did was find a short term cure to a problem, but with a side effect that was immeasurably worse than the original disease.
There is enough knowledge of the untainted writings of Josephus to give weight to the notion that there was a man named Jesus teaching around the third decade of the 1st century AD. When you look at it that way, all Josephus was doing was giving some relatively minor notice to a religious figure who had been executed by the Romans and who had a number of followers.
There are plenty of ludicrous things in the Bible, and specifically ludicrous claims about Jesus, but that the man, no matter how much nonsense may have been piled on him later, did exist I don't think one can reasonably question.
And which councils were these?
The original KJV, while certainly one of the great masterpieces of Early Modern English, is notorious for errors in translation. I own a copy simply because it's probably the most readable of all English Bibles, but when I'm in serious debate with a true believer, it's not what I view as a good source. The American Standard and modern KJV are much better Bibles.
I think I understand what Libertarianism is all about.
Starship Troopers was Heinlein's Dianetics. He may have been a Libertarian at one point, but he became much worse than that (and Libertarianism is bad enough).
The religiosity of at least some of the Founding Fathers is questionable.
Heinlein became a grade A fascist. I prefer Asimov, who kept his senses and his fundamental decency.
If you're are so pathetically thin-skinned that someone taunting you leads you to take out your gun to defend your "honor", then you have no honor. You're a cowardly worthless piece of freedom-hating shit.
Fuck religious whackjobs, fuck their gods, fuck every single about them. Fuck them fuck them fuck them fuck them. Fuck their miserable offspring, fuck their wives, fuck mothers and fathers, fuck their religious leaders, fuck their holy books, fuck their traditions, fuck their culture, fuck it all.
Yeah. It might even get as high as 5 or 6% market share!
England had dispensed with the idea of Absolutism over a century before. The Glorious Revolution was as far reaching as the French Revolution, and considerably less bloody.
And look what the French Revolution produces; the Jacobins, Robespierre, the Reign of Terror, the Directory, and ultimately Napoleon. Yes, poor silly well-meaning ill-advised Louis XVI lost his head, along with a bunch of equally silly foppish aristocrats, but the average Frenchman's lot really didn't improve until the Bourbon Restoration and the rise of Napoleon III.
It does if you want to do it on TV.
Like any other country with democratic elections. If you can't even muster sufficient support to raise some cash, how precisely do you propose to actually win an election? Hanging chads?
Let's put it this way. A would-be Congresscritter who wants to play with the big boys at the debate, but who can't raise $50,000, is like the would-be ace pilot who can't even afford a pair of aviator's sunglasses.
Most of the Tea Parties *are* Libertarians, except when it comes to *their* Medicare, or any other government benefit they're receiving. I look upon Tea Partiers as the low-hanging fruit of the Libertarian movement. The full-blooded Libertarians are far more clever in burying their fundamentally sociopathic ideology and high-sounding rhetoric.
Strange as it seems, not everyone on /. is a sociopathic Libertarian.
Life is filled with difficult decisions requiring pragmatism. You should consider Isaac asimov's axiom "Never let your sense of morality prevent you from doing what's right."
You don't like abortions, don't have one.
Is this the opening of a Fear And Loathing On The Campaign Trail sequel?
He wasn't all that likes even by the moderates. His tendency towards charting his own path and bipartisanship made him a frequent target of anger by wide swathes of the Republican Party.
It's hard to tell now. He seems to have decided to start switching his positions.
Romney: "Okay, I kicked Obama's ass in the first debate, so how do I bring this baby home."
Campaign Team: "Yeah, Mitty-baby, we've been working on that. We've had our boys working with the focus groups and we think we've found the answer."
Romney: "Great! What is it?"
Campaign Team: "Okay, what we've figured out is that you need to take all of Obama's positions."
Romney: "What?"
Campaign Team: "Yeah. Now you like the other 47% and agree with a woman's right to choose, and even like bits of Obamacare."
Romney: <speechless>
Campaign Team: Yeah, and maybe you should change your name to something ethnic sounding, and start talking about "hope and change" a lot more.
Once you're in you're in. Politics is the art of the possible.
And yet it is Ryan that espouses 19th century views, particularly on women's rights.