Wouldn't that just give them more material to sample for their search?
They could do a health check and profit at the same time! Sir/Ma'am we have discovered you are lacking a variety of gut bacteria that is considered healthy, while we detain you, please feel free to purchase some probiotics from our border detainment probiotics counter.
They didn't contradict themselves; they *certainly* did.:)
Seriously though I took it as not contradictory meaning: -- We can only speculate. I'm willing to speculate that she almost certainly would have. --
Close. She does have a history of availing herself of government surveillance and in this day and age it is a certainty that any president will avail themselves of surveillance, but to what extent is speculation for Clinton, as for Trump we are going to live through it:)
"As for Secretary Clinton, it is all speculation with very little basis in reality as to what she would have done, but 100% sure yes, she would have too."
Errr...you do realize you've contradicted yourself in one sentence, yes?
Badly worded on my part. The extent and type of surveillance that a Clinton administration would undertake is speculation at this point, but like prior administrations and the history of her, it would have been a 100% certainty that surveillance would be a cornerstone of her defense platform. In this day and age it is extremely difficult for it not to be.
Yes to both, but to varying degrees and different implementations. We will see first hand and history will tell us what President-Elect Trump will do/has done. As for Secretary Clinton, it is all speculation with very little basis in reality as to what she would have done, but 100% sure yes, she would have too.
I'd say the fact that he strongly hints that discovery of wrongdoing has been reversed in a week tells me Obama should show him the door. If he isn't a corrupt partisan, he's an incompetent.
Agreed! But President Obama should stay away from this, if he fires Comey it reeks of partisanship from the President.
Totally agree. This "result" just further confirms it.
Heh. The irony, the Trump camp was cheering on the FBI when the new emails were found, and now that the emails have been cleared, the Trump campaign claims Comey has botched the investigation from the beginning. At least I can agree with them on that, Yes, he botched it, he should not have sent the letter to congress about the new emails until he actually found something, this DOES NOT change the conclusion, it just proves that he is a fucking idiot (or out to prove something), but that does not invalidate the findings, since it is VERY unlikely he was the one looking at the emails.
The first Clinton created the H1B and NAFTA assaults on USA citizens. The 2nd Clinton promises far worse.
Trump, like other business people, used the system. So change the damned system!
Yeah, thinking is not one of your skill sets is it? The first Clinton NEVER created NAFTA. The first Clinton signed NAFTA in to law after the congress had voted for it (also they had a veto override capacity too). H1B's came in to existence in the 101st congress (democrat majority - also a long time before Bill Clinton).
Most developers seem to forget that companies don't make software so it is comfortable for the developers. Most developers argue with the Product Managers that certain new features should not be done, because they are too much of a hassle or go against a policy in the development team. Most developers forget that the company makes the software to sell, and have a profit in the process. Most developers should do their job faster and with better quality and stop arguing with their Product Managers.
If you want your message to be clear, don't pepper it with "alleged" qualifications for rape accusations. This here is an internet forum, not law school, and double quotes are an established way of communicating disapproval.
The purpose of highlighting the words "alleged" is just that, to illustrate that there have been no convictions and the allegations have come from another source see here for an acceptable usage and that it is all speculative by others who have ZERO evidence of any crime beyond speculative media comments and accusations. The only people who know what happened are the Clinton's and their accusers.
As to what you allege to be your point: can you explain why you insist that women specifically should not support a candidate that they believe guilty of sexual misconduct? What about men? See, that's the most insidious form of sexism there is; it reeks of double standards so deeply engrained that even in the context of a gender-sensitive topic you fail to recognize your own bias.
Again you make an assumption and I insisted on nothing, I specifically stated women as a particular example of a recent statistic and series of interviews that I heard and I had to question why and point out I found it shocking. If I had heard interviews with males, I would have included them in my comment, but since I had not at that point, it was not valid to include them. As you said, this is an internet forum and is not a formal debate forum, so you assume because I only stated interviews with women, that somehow I believe that means males are exempt, which is far from the case and is not indicated in my original statements, so again you inject your own opinion in to my statements. For the record, I think Donald's open admittance to how he treats women and how he sexualizes his daughter to be disgusting and I am male; had you asked me whether I think it is more shocking for women to support Trump and believe he is guilty than males, I would have given you my opinion, but you resorted to:
Don't bring the "female supporter" angle into this unless you're ready to fully explore the role of Clinton in silencing and threatening the women who made rape accusations against her husband.
Which again was contrary to the topic at hand and a distraction from my original point; you had an axe to grind, so you decided to grind it with the statement above.
The real question should be: is it acceptable for people (of all genders) to support a candidate that they believe guilty of sexual misconduct? And my answer ro that is a resounding YES because that's what democracy and freedom is all about. Support whoever the fuck you want for whatever reason you want. Just like people who are badly misinformed are still entitled to vote, and just like pedophiles deserve to be defended by the ACLU when their freedom of speech is attacked, there's no reason to look down on people who support a flawed candidate.
I have never stated a person does not have a right to support a candidate for whatever reason and yet again you inject your assumptions in to my statement.
Yes, I think Hilary Clinton is a heartless sociopath that should not be allowed to control the US nuclear stockpile, and I am disgusted by the hypocrisy of people who turn a blind eye on her obvious lack of morals because she happens to be the candidate that represents their political affiliation. But I don't think the gender of those individuals (like you) who are paving the way for that corrupt witch to become leader of the free world matters.
Irrelevant to my original post about Donald Trump and the women I heard interviewed that still supported him.
Oh and BTW:
And you know what, with your insistance on "alleged" you remind of those fuckers who let college athletes get away with rape be
Oh I didn't bring anything up... and you can fully explore the "alleged" Clinton role in suppressing the "alleged" victims of Bill Clinton all on your own.
And you know what, with your insistance on "alleged" you remind of those fuckers who let college athletes get away with rape because the team needs them for the champinship. This is repugnant. One day I hope you get to meet a rape victim that hasn't been taken seriously, maybe then you'll stop defending that witch.
No I say alleged, because until the rapist gets his or her day in court and brought to justice, they are alleged. It is the correct term in this case. My point of the original comment was the women who think the Donald committed those crimes still support him; I have yet to make any comment whether I think the Donald or Billy boy are guilty and you inferring from my posts that I support rapists is both offensive and dimwitted and attempt to distract from my original point to further your dislike of the Clinton's.
Now, back to my original comment and reflection on your charges of me supporting rapists: It would seem the women who believe the Donald committed the sexual assaults (and possible rape which he has an upcoming trial over) yet support him fall within your accusation you made against me, likewise, the women who still love Bill Clinton yet believe he committed the crimes he was accused of.
Again, I have no idea whether Bill committed acts of rape or if the Donald did as I am not qualified in anyway to make that determination (and I would wager you are not either).
The Tea Party of 2011 isn't anywhere remotely what the "Tea Party" of today is.
In 2011 it was a populist non-violent response to a government that wasn't listening too good. By the 2012 midterm election it was co-opted by monied interests, the religious right, and politicians desperate to remain relevant like Sarah Palin. Now, it's become a group of people that just want to stamp their feet and say "no" like a 4 year old.
The ones that bitch the most about George Soros having undue influence in politics are doing it with donations from the Koch brothers. Isn't Citizens United wonderful?
The initial idea behind the Tea Party on the surface seemed appealing to most; I attended some initial rallies out of interest, but stopped attending when women were holding signs, "I only want what our founding fathers wanted." and called for returning to the principals and repealing any laws and changes to the constitution that were created since the founding of our country. I was verbally assaulted when I told them they would lose the right to vote if we took their requests verbatim and perhaps we can find a happier middle ground, so I stopped attending the rallies since the mouth breathers were apparent.
in 2009 when Rick Santelli created it (I despise this dude) there were some legitimate grievances, but yes, it was taken over very quickly by the Palin's and the Glenn Beck's, Koch brothers etc and became an external entity agenda platform separate from it's grass root followers. It's a pity, because whether they are on the right or the left, non-violent discussions about our country can be very productive, as long as you are willing to head in with an open mind and listen to other ideas, even when they come from the opposing side. While I am a progressive, I am a centralist in a lot of ways, I am willing to listen to logical arguments from both the left, right, center, below, above etc..
Why not check some of those allegations. Kissing on the cheek is now "sexual assault". Why not check who is paying the people for their "exclusive" story" and who they support politically. Yeah, you are a fucking retard.
But hey, support the lady who attacks women who were victims of sexual assault, has committed perjury, has neglected a public office leading to the deaths of numerous Americans. Those same outlets told you she was fine, and you retarded people believe them.
Trump followers are plain old anti-intellectuals, the GOP created them with Fox news. The fact their own angry mob has ripped their party apart is nothing less than poetic justice.
I disagree with this statement; while Trump has his share of mouth breathers (he falls in to this category) I know a lot of Trump supporters who are not anti-intellectuals, but are simply misguided. They feel frustrated, they see the upper crust getting ahead and feel that they are left behind. Our country is complex, and it is not unusual that many (even educated) people feel lost in the woods.
I do not have a problem with Trump reaching out to these people, I have a problem with the message that he is giving these people.
Don't bring the "female supporter" angle into this unless you're ready to fully explore the role of Clinton in silencing and threatening the women who made rape accusations against her husband.
Oh I didn't bring anything up... and you can fully explore the "alleged" Clinton role in suppressing the "alleged" victims of Bill Clinton all on your own. You will also note, that I did not accuse Trump of anything, I brought up the opinions of his female supporters who believe he sexually assaulted his accusers for his "alleged" attacks on them and yet still supports him.
But hey... I'll give you a D- for trying to distract from my original statement...
Well the Tea Party has killed the RNC. Their strategy is: Find a bunch of people that have never obtained their dreams, blame a bunch of other people for it... presto! Votes!
I forget the stats and I am to lazy to look then up atm, but listening earlier this week the number of Trump female supports who still support him yet believe he sexually assaulted those women is shocking. Not believing the allegations is one thing, but to believe them and go, "Fuck, who cares?" is something else.
Microsoft is desperate both to get their hands on some decent PCs, and also to get rid of Surfaces...
I like my Surface Pro 4; I run all my development VM's on it and take some fantastic notes in meetings. Only issue I ever had is scaling when un/docking on non 4K monitors.
Matthew Miller is exactly 100% correct. Comey just turned a law enforcement position in to a political arm of whoever is in power. Shit, J. Edgar Hoover would be gleaming, the good old days are coming back! Yeehaw!
If you're still a Hillary supporter, it has to be through willful ignorance.
Hands over ears Eyes closed Saying, lalalalalalalala
Or perhaps you need to listen to a little less Trump and read the Comey letter here .
Look here for Comey's internal email to FBI employees yeah, "Of course, we don’t ordinarily tell Congress about ongoing investigations" but since I am being forced to turn in my GOP hat, I am going to sink a presidential candidates bid for the whitehouse on something I have ZERO clue about at this point by my own admission. Yeah, Comey could have taken another week with increased scrutiny until he actually had found or not found something, instead of choose an inappropriate and reckless way to inform the general public and the congress about an on-going FBI investigation and a potential new source of data was found.
Of course the "liberal" (no such thing) media jumped all over it instantly and misled the public and Trump walks out on stage and gives a speech that is filled with so much lies and misrepresentation that the fact he was able to do it is another example of why he is not fit to be president.
Like the old joke: If you have a barrel of sewage and you add a cup of wine, you still have a barrel of sewage. If you have a barrel of wine and you add a cup of sewage, you now have a barrel of sewage.
I see you too have tried Arbor Mist (hey, I was young and broke once...);-)
There was this brilliant engineer that I'll just call S. S was amazing. He built mind astonishing things in hours that would take a mere mortal days... and he loved coffee.
Every 10-15 seconds, he'd pick up his cup, slurp like loudness was an award, then smash it down. All day long he did this. 3-4 times per minute! How could I complain? This guy could synthesize in hardware at the same speed I could write in software. Brilliant, but very distracting.
This was before Soundcloud, Pandora, and Spotify. If it weren't for my iPod, I would have become enraged.
Yeah portable media players have really helped me; I know I have a sensitivity to certain sounds so I plug on in when it starts getting to me. It really is as much my own problem as it is theirs.
I love the slurping types, especially the ones that feel compelled to go on road trips to other peoples desks so they can slurp it up abroad;-)
I share the same problem with Misophonia. I really liked the guy that used to sit next to me at the one job I had (when I was in the office and not working from home), but he chewed with his mouth open and every time he drinks something it ends like he just spent the last four weeks walking the desert in the hot sun and this was his first drink back. Then there was the nut eating... one nut at a time and if they were salted gotta suck each finger with each nut.
Then there are the people that feel compelled to grab their drinks walk half the fucking floor or from the next cube to come ask me a question, "Hey... do you have a moment? I really need to talk to you about that email." Fucking hydrate in your own cube. Or the people that bring food that is so crunchy you can hear every single bite a mile away (shit I eat salads at work with no croutons, nothing that crunches not to be annoying to others). Maybe it was because I was brought up (read: punished and mocked if I did something incorrect) with impeccable table manners, but this crap bugs the shit out of me. It is amusing, when we go out as a group to lunch, it never fails someone comments, "You are so proper..." really?!?
Then there was the toxic gas man at one job that had a plethora of food allergies yet would get in the morning, consume two or three allergens he was highly sensitive to, cue an hour or so later the smell would start to emerge from his butt cheeks... by lunch time you were so put off eating, the usual loud foods and smacking of lips and crap never happened, but slowly but surely your sense of smell would become overwhelmed literally to the point of numbness and focusing on your monitors became next to impossible as you wanted to scratch your eyes out because they hurt so bad. I was his cube neighbor, and had a half height wall between us. The smell fortunately for others dissipated to less toxic state a few cubes over, but people stopped eating at their desks because it was still strong and offensive.
Oh yeah, the sputum guy... before eating each meal (perhaps to enjoy the full aroma on his taste buds and up his nostrils) would spend five minutes sniffing, gagging and hacking up everything in his nostrils and the back of his throat and spit it in to a paper cup (which he would get rid of at the end of the day), so if you ever had to visit him, you would get the first hand view of the most disgusting looking spat up crap you would ever see. Now if you were a sensitive type (I stopped gagging at him after my kid was born...) his ritual hacking would instantly make you gag as your mind suddenly goes, "uhhuh! I've seen the result and here is a razor focused memory of it for your disgusting pleasure!".
Don't even get me on the chemical types that love to toxic perfumes or colognes that are so strong your throat closes up and your chest tightens...
I am sure I have a lot of issues myself, actually having to sniff in a lot on bad allergy days probably annoys the crap out of my cube buddies and the once in the while clearing my throat (I try to take walks to the restroom to do it as to lessen the annoyance to others and the fact I am only in the office 2 - 3 days a week I am sure helps).
Yes, we all have issues, some people try to keep them to a minimal, others just are oblivious to them or do not give a crap... you add this together and the constant social interruptions and you are basically in a fight or flight state most of the day...
seems logical, i mean whenever the metal detectors go off they just shoot you immediately right?
you've clearly crossed that line between hyperbole and moved into stupidity
Yes sir they do... the amount of times I am minding my own business guns strapped to my person walking through the MS metal detectors heading in to my local federal building and all hell breaks loose, they pull their guns, they threaten to shoot me... all the while I am shouting, "open carry state! open carry state!"
Nope, it is a religion (or sect). People so often confuse race, ethic groups and types of religions with one another. Now, I am sure the poster was implying that the AC was being a religious bigot foremost, and inferring a potentially greater racial bigotry.
Slashdot Mirror
Wouldn't that just give them more material to sample for their search?
They could do a health check and profit at the same time! Sir/Ma'am we have discovered you are lacking a variety of gut bacteria that is considered healthy, while we detain you, please feel free to purchase some probiotics from our border detainment probiotics counter.
They didn't contradict themselves; they *certainly* did. :)
Seriously though I took it as not contradictory meaning:
--
We can only speculate.
I'm willing to speculate that she almost certainly would have.
--
Close. She does have a history of availing herself of government surveillance and in this day and age it is a certainty that any president will avail themselves of surveillance, but to what extent is speculation for Clinton, as for Trump we are going to live through it :)
"As for Secretary Clinton, it is all speculation with very little basis in reality as to what she would have done, but 100% sure yes, she would have too."
Errr...you do realize you've contradicted yourself in one sentence, yes?
Badly worded on my part. The extent and type of surveillance that a Clinton administration would undertake is speculation at this point, but like prior administrations and the history of her, it would have been a 100% certainty that surveillance would be a cornerstone of her defense platform. In this day and age it is extremely difficult for it not to be.
Yes he will
But so would have Clinton.
Yes to both, but to varying degrees and different implementations. We will see first hand and history will tell us what President-Elect Trump will do/has done. As for Secretary Clinton, it is all speculation with very little basis in reality as to what she would have done, but 100% sure yes, she would have too.
I'd say the fact that he strongly hints that discovery of wrongdoing has been reversed in a week tells me Obama should show him the door. If he isn't a corrupt partisan, he's an incompetent.
Agreed! But President Obama should stay away from this, if he fires Comey it reeks of partisanship from the President.
Totally agree. This "result" just further confirms it.
Heh. The irony, the Trump camp was cheering on the FBI when the new emails were found, and now that the emails have been cleared, the Trump campaign claims Comey has botched the investigation from the beginning. At least I can agree with them on that, Yes, he botched it, he should not have sent the letter to congress about the new emails until he actually found something, this DOES NOT change the conclusion, it just proves that he is a fucking idiot (or out to prove something), but that does not invalidate the findings, since it is VERY unlikely he was the one looking at the emails.
And classify the security rating of each one in under a minute each, ensuring no unmarked confidential or top secret information within. Unlikely.
You make the assumption that all the 723 emails needed high level of scrutiny.
The first Clinton created the H1B and NAFTA assaults on USA citizens.
The 2nd Clinton promises far worse.
Trump, like other business people, used the system. So change the damned system!
Yeah, thinking is not one of your skill sets is it? The first Clinton NEVER created NAFTA. The first Clinton signed NAFTA in to law after the congress had voted for it (also they had a veto override capacity too). H1B's came in to existence in the 101st congress (democrat majority - also a long time before Bill Clinton).
Most developers seem to forget that companies don't make software so it is comfortable for the developers. Most developers argue with the Product Managers that certain new features should not be done, because they are too much of a hassle or go against a policy in the development team. Most developers forget that the company makes the software to sell, and have a profit in the process. Most developers should do their job faster and with better quality and stop arguing with their Product Managers.
Geez I hope that was parody.
If you want your message to be clear, don't pepper it with "alleged" qualifications for rape accusations. This here is an internet forum, not law school, and double quotes are an established way of communicating disapproval.
The purpose of highlighting the words "alleged" is just that, to illustrate that there have been no convictions and the allegations have come from another source see here for an acceptable usage and that it is all speculative by others who have ZERO evidence of any crime beyond speculative media comments and accusations. The only people who know what happened are the Clinton's and their accusers.
As to what you allege to be your point: can you explain why you insist that women specifically should not support a candidate that they believe guilty of sexual misconduct? What about men? See, that's the most insidious form of sexism there is; it reeks of double standards so deeply engrained that even in the context of a gender-sensitive topic you fail to recognize your own bias.
Again you make an assumption and I insisted on nothing, I specifically stated women as a particular example of a recent statistic and series of interviews that I heard and I had to question why and point out I found it shocking. If I had heard interviews with males, I would have included them in my comment, but since I had not at that point, it was not valid to include them. As you said, this is an internet forum and is not a formal debate forum, so you assume because I only stated interviews with women, that somehow I believe that means males are exempt, which is far from the case and is not indicated in my original statements, so again you inject your own opinion in to my statements. For the record, I think Donald's open admittance to how he treats women and how he sexualizes his daughter to be disgusting and I am male; had you asked me whether I think it is more shocking for women to support Trump and believe he is guilty than males, I would have given you my opinion, but you resorted to:
Don't bring the "female supporter" angle into this unless you're ready to fully explore the role of Clinton in silencing and threatening the women who made rape accusations against her husband.
Which again was contrary to the topic at hand and a distraction from my original point; you had an axe to grind, so you decided to grind it with the statement above.
The real question should be: is it acceptable for people (of all genders) to support a candidate that they believe guilty of sexual misconduct? And my answer ro that is a resounding YES because that's what democracy and freedom is all about. Support whoever the fuck you want for whatever reason you want. Just like people who are badly misinformed are still entitled to vote, and just like pedophiles deserve to be defended by the ACLU when their freedom of speech is attacked, there's no reason to look down on people who support a flawed candidate.
I have never stated a person does not have a right to support a candidate for whatever reason and yet again you inject your assumptions in to my statement.
Yes, I think Hilary Clinton is a heartless sociopath that should not be allowed to control the US nuclear stockpile, and I am disgusted by the hypocrisy of people who turn a blind eye on her obvious lack of morals because she happens to be the candidate that represents their political affiliation. But I don't think the gender of those individuals (like you) who are paving the way for that corrupt witch to become leader of the free world matters.
Irrelevant to my original post about Donald Trump and the women I heard interviewed that still supported him.
Oh and BTW:
And you know what, with your insistance on "alleged" you remind of those fuckers who let college athletes get away with rape be
Oh I didn't bring anything up... and you can fully explore the "alleged" Clinton role in suppressing the "alleged" victims of Bill Clinton all on your own.
And you know what, with your insistance on "alleged" you remind of those fuckers who let college athletes get away with rape because the team needs them for the champinship. This is repugnant. One day I hope you get to meet a rape victim that hasn't been taken seriously, maybe then you'll stop defending that witch.
No I say alleged, because until the rapist gets his or her day in court and brought to justice, they are alleged. It is the correct term in this case. My point of the original comment was the women who think the Donald committed those crimes still support him; I have yet to make any comment whether I think the Donald or Billy boy are guilty and you inferring from my posts that I support rapists is both offensive and dimwitted and attempt to distract from my original point to further your dislike of the Clinton's.
Now, back to my original comment and reflection on your charges of me supporting rapists: It would seem the women who believe the Donald committed the sexual assaults (and possible rape which he has an upcoming trial over) yet support him fall within your accusation you made against me, likewise, the women who still love Bill Clinton yet believe he committed the crimes he was accused of.
Again, I have no idea whether Bill committed acts of rape or if the Donald did as I am not qualified in anyway to make that determination (and I would wager you are not either).
The Tea Party of 2011 isn't anywhere remotely what the "Tea Party" of today is.
In 2011 it was a populist non-violent response to a government that wasn't listening too good. By the 2012 midterm election it was co-opted by monied interests, the religious right, and politicians desperate to remain relevant like Sarah Palin. Now, it's become a group of people that just want to stamp their feet and say "no" like a 4 year old.
The ones that bitch the most about George Soros having undue influence in politics are doing it with donations from the Koch brothers. Isn't Citizens United wonderful?
The initial idea behind the Tea Party on the surface seemed appealing to most; I attended some initial rallies out of interest, but stopped attending when women were holding signs, "I only want what our founding fathers wanted." and called for returning to the principals and repealing any laws and changes to the constitution that were created since the founding of our country. I was verbally assaulted when I told them they would lose the right to vote if we took their requests verbatim and perhaps we can find a happier middle ground, so I stopped attending the rallies since the mouth breathers were apparent.
in 2009 when Rick Santelli created it (I despise this dude) there were some legitimate grievances, but yes, it was taken over very quickly by the Palin's and the Glenn Beck's, Koch brothers etc and became an external entity agenda platform separate from it's grass root followers. It's a pity, because whether they are on the right or the left, non-violent discussions about our country can be very productive, as long as you are willing to head in with an open mind and listen to other ideas, even when they come from the opposing side. While I am a progressive, I am a centralist in a lot of ways, I am willing to listen to logical arguments from both the left, right, center, below, above etc..
Why not check some of those allegations. Kissing on the cheek is now "sexual assault". Why not check who is paying the people for their "exclusive" story" and who they support politically. Yeah, you are a fucking retard.
But hey, support the lady who attacks women who were victims of sexual assault, has committed perjury, has neglected a public office leading to the deaths of numerous Americans. Those same outlets told you she was fine, and you retarded people believe them.
Good luck to you Trump supporter.
Trump followers are plain old anti-intellectuals, the GOP created them with Fox news. The fact their own angry mob has ripped their party apart is nothing less than poetic justice.
I disagree with this statement; while Trump has his share of mouth breathers (he falls in to this category) I know a lot of Trump supporters who are not anti-intellectuals, but are simply misguided. They feel frustrated, they see the upper crust getting ahead and feel that they are left behind. Our country is complex, and it is not unusual that many (even educated) people feel lost in the woods.
I do not have a problem with Trump reaching out to these people, I have a problem with the message that he is giving these people.
Don't bring the "female supporter" angle into this unless you're ready to fully explore the role of Clinton in silencing and threatening the women who made rape accusations against her husband.
Oh I didn't bring anything up... and you can fully explore the "alleged" Clinton role in suppressing the "alleged" victims of Bill Clinton all on your own. You will also note, that I did not accuse Trump of anything, I brought up the opinions of his female supporters who believe he sexually assaulted his accusers for his "alleged" attacks on them and yet still supports him.
But hey... I'll give you a D- for trying to distract from my original statement...
Well the Tea Party has killed the RNC. Their strategy is: Find a bunch of people that have never obtained their dreams, blame a bunch of other people for it... presto! Votes!
I forget the stats and I am to lazy to look then up atm, but listening earlier this week the number of Trump female supports who still support him yet believe he sexually assaulted those women is shocking. Not believing the allegations is one thing, but to believe them and go, "Fuck, who cares?" is something else.
Microsoft is desperate both to get their hands on some decent PCs, and also to get rid of Surfaces...
I like my Surface Pro 4; I run all my development VM's on it and take some fantastic notes in meetings. Only issue I ever had is scaling when un/docking on non 4K monitors.
Matthew Miller is exactly 100% correct. Comey just turned a law enforcement position in to a political arm of whoever is in power. Shit, J. Edgar Hoover would be gleaming, the good old days are coming back! Yeehaw!
If you're still a Hillary supporter, it has to be through willful ignorance.
Hands over ears
Eyes closed
Saying, lalalalalalalala
Or perhaps you need to listen to a little less Trump and read the Comey letter here .
Look here for Comey's internal email to FBI employees yeah, "Of course, we don’t ordinarily tell Congress about ongoing investigations" but since I am being forced to turn in my GOP hat, I am going to sink a presidential candidates bid for the whitehouse on something I have ZERO clue about at this point by my own admission. Yeah, Comey could have taken another week with increased scrutiny until he actually had found or not found something, instead of choose an inappropriate and reckless way to inform the general public and the congress about an on-going FBI investigation and a potential new source of data was found.
Of course the "liberal" (no such thing) media jumped all over it instantly and misled the public and Trump walks out on stage and gives a speech that is filled with so much lies and misrepresentation that the fact he was able to do it is another example of why he is not fit to be president.
Like the old joke: If you have a barrel of sewage and you add a cup of wine, you still have a barrel of sewage. If you have a barrel of wine and you add a cup of sewage, you now have a barrel of sewage.
I see you too have tried Arbor Mist (hey, I was young and broke once...) ;-)
Yes. To expand upon this phenomenon (drinking):
There was this brilliant engineer that I'll just call S. S was amazing. He built mind astonishing things in hours that would take a mere mortal days... and he loved coffee.
Every 10-15 seconds, he'd pick up his cup, slurp like loudness was an award, then smash it down. All day long he did this. 3-4 times per minute! How could I complain? This guy could synthesize in hardware at the same speed I could write in software. Brilliant, but very distracting.
This was before Soundcloud, Pandora, and Spotify. If it weren't for my iPod, I would have become enraged.
Yeah portable media players have really helped me; I know I have a sensitivity to certain sounds so I plug on in when it starts getting to me. It really is as much my own problem as it is theirs.
I love the slurping types, especially the ones that feel compelled to go on road trips to other peoples desks so they can slurp it up abroad ;-)
"Hey... do you *slurp* have a moment? *slurp* I really need to *slurp* talk to you about that email *slurp*."
I share the same problem with Misophonia. I really liked the guy that used to sit next to me at the one job I had (when I was in the office and not working from home), but he chewed with his mouth open and every time he drinks something it ends like he just spent the last four weeks walking the desert in the hot sun and this was his first drink back. Then there was the nut eating... one nut at a time and if they were salted gotta suck each finger with each nut.
Then there are the people that feel compelled to grab their drinks walk half the fucking floor or from the next cube to come ask me a question, "Hey... do you have a moment? I really need to talk to you about that email ." Fucking hydrate in your own cube. Or the people that bring food that is so crunchy you can hear every single bite a mile away (shit I eat salads at work with no croutons, nothing that crunches not to be annoying to others). Maybe it was because I was brought up (read: punished and mocked if I did something incorrect) with impeccable table manners, but this crap bugs the shit out of me. It is amusing, when we go out as a group to lunch, it never fails someone comments, "You are so proper..." really?!?
Then there was the toxic gas man at one job that had a plethora of food allergies yet would get in the morning, consume two or three allergens he was highly sensitive to, cue an hour or so later the smell would start to emerge from his butt cheeks... by lunch time you were so put off eating, the usual loud foods and smacking of lips and crap never happened, but slowly but surely your sense of smell would become overwhelmed literally to the point of numbness and focusing on your monitors became next to impossible as you wanted to scratch your eyes out because they hurt so bad. I was his cube neighbor, and had a half height wall between us. The smell fortunately for others dissipated to less toxic state a few cubes over, but people stopped eating at their desks because it was still strong and offensive.
Oh yeah, the sputum guy... before eating each meal (perhaps to enjoy the full aroma on his taste buds and up his nostrils) would spend five minutes sniffing, gagging and hacking up everything in his nostrils and the back of his throat and spit it in to a paper cup (which he would get rid of at the end of the day), so if you ever had to visit him, you would get the first hand view of the most disgusting looking spat up crap you would ever see. Now if you were a sensitive type (I stopped gagging at him after my kid was born...) his ritual hacking would instantly make you gag as your mind suddenly goes, "uhhuh! I've seen the result and here is a razor focused memory of it for your disgusting pleasure!".
Don't even get me on the chemical types that love to toxic perfumes or colognes that are so strong your throat closes up and your chest tightens...
I am sure I have a lot of issues myself, actually having to sniff in a lot on bad allergy days probably annoys the crap out of my cube buddies and the once in the while clearing my throat (I try to take walks to the restroom to do it as to lessen the annoyance to others and the fact I am only in the office 2 - 3 days a week I am sure helps).
Yes, we all have issues, some people try to keep them to a minimal, others just are oblivious to them or do not give a crap... you add this together and the constant social interruptions and you are basically in a fight or flight state most of the day...
seems logical, i mean whenever the metal detectors go off they just shoot you immediately right?
you've clearly crossed that line between hyperbole and moved into stupidity
Yes sir they do... the amount of times I am minding my own business guns strapped to my person walking through the MS metal detectors heading in to my local federal building and all hell breaks loose, they pull their guns, they threaten to shoot me... all the while I am shouting, "open carry state! open carry state!"
Yup... seems perfectly *sic* logical to me...
Is Islam a race?
Nope, it is a religion (or sect). People so often confuse race, ethic groups and types of religions with one another. Now, I am sure the poster was implying that the AC was being a religious bigot foremost, and inferring a potentially greater racial bigotry.