At worst Wright might affect one Democrat, while the religious right affects the entire Republican party. I agree with you, but when that one Democrat is the POTUS, it's sort of a bigger deal.
I don't think Obama is racist, but when he compared his gradmother's occasional casual racism to a man who spews it every day and with clear design, I have to question his judgement. Does he really not understand the difference? I admit people sometimes have a blind spot with people they grew up with, but still...
I have no idea who to vote for. Is Dave Barry running again?
From the creationist museum. Like I said, KOOKS. Last I read the museum was looking for funding to stay afloat. It's considered a joke by most people here.
I conclude you have no sense of scale.
Which is more dangerous in the long run? blowing up a bomb and killing 40 people or changing the law to ruin the education* and bias the development of an entire generation in a whole state? (*yup, my narrow minded viewpoint). The bomb is tragic, senseless and pointless, and sells newspapers - but which does more damage? A better question is: which is actually happening unopposed? Some ID laws sneak in, but the outcry is large, and they generally get overturned or the board members voted out or there's some consequence. Meanwhile, plenty of bombings going on making people dead, which is a bit worse than undereducated. Maybe you hear an someone in the West say "tsk tsk".
Which raises another point: bad laws can be changed, and poor education mitigated. Dead is permanent.;-)
Still you are just as entitled to your point of view as I am, but they are different. No offense intended. No problem! That's what we're here for. Hey, I'm a big Anglophile, especially with music, comedy and TV shows. American pop culture is something I'll never defend.:-)
That sort of muddy clouded rubbish is surely out of date in todays world If you assume the USA + Europe = The World and ignore the rest of it. And I don;t think I've heard anyone talk about velociraptors playing with children outside of jokes and few kooks.
Okay, my views may not be representative of society as a whole - but possibly/. will be as sympathetic an audience as I can find. I'm sorry, but that is bizarre. You know you're being unfair and painting a diverse nation with a broad stereotype brush, but instead of maybe modulating your attitude to one that's a bit healthier and more productive, you, by deliberate design, simply go somewhere that your bigoted view will be better accepted.
From my viewpoint all religious fundamentalists are just as dangerous as each other - no matter what they preach, what religion they follow, what they wear or what country they come from. Sometimes the danger is more subtle then other times. I'll let you draw your own conclusions from that. I conclude you have no sense of scale.
And this is from a Christopher Hitchens fan who agree that "religion poisons everything."
Draw a rude picture of Jesus and post it. OK, now draw a rude picture of Mohammad.
Communications techniques borrowed from the political realm will not help to promote scientific understanding, because those techniques were not designed to promote understanding. I need to consider it for a while, but could this be a case of the street finding it's own use? You think Berners-Lee had amazon.com in mind when he created HTML?
Poli-comm may not have been designed to promote understanding, but that does not mean it cannot be used as such by clever people. I can see how methods designed to obscure facts and be use to instead reveal them.
- Basic scientific method - The need for any valid theory to be falsifiable - Observation, observation and more observation - Making predictions (and ACCEPTING the outcome... I'm looking at you, hurricane season predictors) - Experimentation - Just because some 2000 year old text says so does not make it true
You wouldn't think that last one would even be necessary with grown adults, you know?
it's got all kinds of text that flies in from the left and fades out and...;) People joke about that, but it's been my experience that a little flash and dazzle *does* keep the audience focused and involved.
I know it's a common response, but I never seem to be able to get a straight answer. Asking it is not advocating total and complete moral relativism. It's a completely fair question.
You still have to answer the question: which set of morals do we declare absolute?
Time to teach again what is right and wrong and THEN live it out! You really think that will ever happen?
Who's moral code will you use to define right and wrong?
And when those gov't/policing entities fail us, we sue them. And when someone in a neighborhood tries to intervene in something, they get sued, too.
The problem there is the legal profession. Lawyers make the laws and then wield them like a weapon regardless of justice or even basic reality. Look at the piles of lawsuits that basically say, "Pay us $X thousand or well sue you for some tiny technical issue (which might not even be real) and ruin your business and/or life." There is legalized extortion like this happening every day, and people don't want to get caught up in that.
There's stories of people who tried to help in an emergency getting sued in spite of existing Good Samaritan laws.
The other problem, besides the institutionalized organized crime of the legal profession, is that most people are vindictive assholes with egos like the world has never seen before coupled with the sensitivity of a frightened chiwawa on crack.
And all this has been around forever. Before Bush. Before the Patriot Act. Before the Police State that the delusional and mentally ill think we actually live in now.
We live in a world where many people do not know their neighbors, nor do they even have the desire to know their neighbors. Yeah, well, I know my neighbors, and still want nothing to do with them because of what I know. So there.:-P
At the core of it all *PEOPLE* are the problem. Laws and culture are just the outflow winds.
Another possible response is, do some spying on that person. Follow them to the bathroom -- even better if it's the opposite sex. Or follow them home. Could you do that and film it and put it on YouTube? Especially that part where the person you're following turns around and punches you in the balls and hilarity ensues.
Although if we're including genetic design in the mix, I'd like a dozen Chocobos, please.:-) Especially one of those black ones. They can travel over water.
Why should we "democratize" news coverage? If you had a health problem, would you want even the most uninformed voting on your diagnosis, or would you rather see a top specialist working with advanced knowledge and experience?
I'd like to see the specialist.
But I see your point how personal decisions in health care are EXACTLY THE SAME THING as the "democratizing" of news media. [/sarcasm]
I'd just like to see a reporter ask a follow up question once in a while when a politicians makes some claim or another. All they do is parrot what the sack of shit politico says. Same thing with press releases of the "sleep causes cancer" type of "science" from "research institutes" which are actually poorly disguised activist groups conducting half assed phone polls.
Online news isn't any better. It's just as biased, perhaps even more so. It's either warmed over shallow crap or manifesto-like hysterial written by someone so mlinded by reality distortion fields it's a wonder they can find their way to the computer to post. Sometimes I can imagine them occasionally trying to type their screed into their microwave oven or their pet.
There's no in between. There's no thoughtful, unbiased analysis. And if think you found an unbiased, truthful site, most likely it's just something that agrees with whatever ideological memetic poison you personally have decided to mainline.
We take our names seriously here at the Desperation compound. Why just the other day my brothers, Utter and Six-Degrees-Of, were talking about hunting down some of those there mappers for using their email addresses. But then they had to chase away from revenooers and got all distracted like.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think Obama is racist, but when he compared his gradmother's occasional casual racism to a man who spews it every day and with clear design, I have to question his judgement. Does he really not understand the difference? I admit people sometimes have a blind spot with people they grew up with, but still...
I have no idea who to vote for. Is Dave Barry running again?
You still only face bodily harm if the slab falls on your foot or something. :-)
I conclude you have no sense of scale. Which is more dangerous in the long run? blowing up a bomb and killing 40 people or changing the law to ruin the education* and bias the development of an entire generation in a whole state? (*yup, my narrow minded viewpoint). The bomb is tragic, senseless and pointless, and sells newspapers - but which does more damage? A better question is: which is actually happening unopposed? Some ID laws sneak in, but the outcry is large, and they generally get overturned or the board members voted out or there's some consequence. Meanwhile, plenty of bombings going on making people dead, which is a bit worse than undereducated. Maybe you hear an someone in the West say "tsk tsk".
Which raises another point: bad laws can be changed, and poor education mitigated. Dead is permanent.
And this is from a Christopher Hitchens fan who agree that "religion poisons everything."
Draw a rude picture of Jesus and post it. OK, now draw a rude picture of Mohammad.
Poli-comm may not have been designed to promote understanding, but that does not mean it cannot be used as such by clever people. I can see how methods designed to obscure facts and be use to instead reveal them.
You need to lay down a lot of groundwork.
- Basic scientific method
- The need for any valid theory to be falsifiable
- Observation, observation and more observation
- Making predictions (and ACCEPTING the outcome... I'm looking at you, hurricane season predictors)
- Experimentation
- Just because some 2000 year old text says so does not make it true
You wouldn't think that last one would even be necessary with grown adults, you know?
I know it's a common response, but I never seem to be able to get a straight answer. Asking it is not advocating total and complete moral relativism. It's a completely fair question.
You still have to answer the question: which set of morals do we declare absolute?
Who's moral code will you use to define right and wrong? And when those gov't/policing entities fail us, we sue them. And when someone in a neighborhood tries to intervene in something, they get sued, too.
The problem there is the legal profession. Lawyers make the laws and then wield them like a weapon regardless of justice or even basic reality. Look at the piles of lawsuits that basically say, "Pay us $X thousand or well sue you for some tiny technical issue (which might not even be real) and ruin your business and/or life." There is legalized extortion like this happening every day, and people don't want to get caught up in that.
There's stories of people who tried to help in an emergency getting sued in spite of existing Good Samaritan laws.
The other problem, besides the institutionalized organized crime of the legal profession, is that most people are vindictive assholes with egos like the world has never seen before coupled with the sensitivity of a frightened chiwawa on crack.
And all this has been around forever. Before Bush. Before the Patriot Act. Before the Police State that the delusional and mentally ill think we actually live in now. We live in a world where many people do not know their neighbors, nor do they even have the desire to know their neighbors. Yeah, well, I know my neighbors, and still want nothing to do with them because of what I know. So there.
At the core of it all *PEOPLE* are the problem. Laws and culture are just the outflow winds.
Only if you volunteer to sweep up the shit.
:-) Especially one of those black ones. They can travel over water.
Although if we're including genetic design in the mix, I'd like a dozen Chocobos, please.
Always modding down the painful truth about your precious intertoobs. Cowering, sniveling little asshats.
I'd like to see the specialist.
But I see your point how personal decisions in health care are EXACTLY THE SAME THING as the "democratizing" of news media. [/sarcasm]
Everyone knows that.
I'd just like to see a reporter ask a follow up question once in a while when a politicians makes some claim or another. All they do is parrot what the sack of shit politico says. Same thing with press releases of the "sleep causes cancer" type of "science" from "research institutes" which are actually poorly disguised activist groups conducting half assed phone polls.
Online news isn't any better. It's just as biased, perhaps even more so. It's either warmed over shallow crap or manifesto-like hysterial written by someone so mlinded by reality distortion fields it's a wonder they can find their way to the computer to post. Sometimes I can imagine them occasionally trying to type their screed into their microwave oven or their pet.
There's no in between. There's no thoughtful, unbiased analysis. And if think you found an unbiased, truthful site, most likely it's just something that agrees with whatever ideological memetic poison you personally have decided to mainline.
Wow. That was really pointless. Someone punch you in the balls today or something?
Do I lose all geek cred if I admit I think celebrating a mathematical constant is silly?
Dammit!
Japan has been at the forefront of cat/girl technology for *tears*.
I think given the type of forum and nature of the subject the answers were OK. Hey, they answered.
And I still think "General Lord" ranks up there in the top ten of title/name combinations.
Of nothing beats Staff Sargent Max Fightmaster, and nothing probably ever will.
I heard on the first test it rolled a 20.
As soon as they pay me for the use of my name.
We take our names seriously here at the Desperation compound. Why just the other day my brothers, Utter and Six-Degrees-Of, were talking about hunting down some of those there mappers for using their email addresses. But then they had to chase away from revenooers and got all distracted like.
*shrug* It's his life. What do I care?
;-)
His wife may have a different opinion, of course.
You can't possibly be *that* stupid that there's other laws to take care of that, or have not understood what I meant, can you? (rolls eyes)
Let's get rid of laws that proscribe when, where and under what conditions consenting adults in a free society can have sex.
I'm just sayin'.