partially funded by Bill Gates -- is "subject to no governance...experiment involves "putting something in the atmosphere to reflect more sunlight back out into space,"
However, if you are not an Amalekite, Hittite, Amorite, Canaanite, Perizzite, Hivite, or Jebusite then none of these apply to you....Islam differs because its call for jihad is against ALL non-believers
I find that a very minor distinction. A lot of people are probably related to at least one of those groups (and there's more in other scriptures), or at least one could personally believe the "bad guy" is. The point is the Bible often had God give "believers" a blank check to slaughter non-believers.
Thus, the West has not used Christianity as the basis for conflict for centuries.
They didn't change because of the text, but because of the Clue Stick of a century of bloody sectarian wars approx around 1600. The Middle East seems to not have finished that phase yet. The Clue Stick of death hasn't bashed them in the chops enough yet.
The Bilderbergers are so anti-democratic they don't let the public see their meetings...the old aristocratic families like the Rothschilds who have enormous power
You are exaggerating to the point of conspiracy theories.
you demonstrate it is you who doesn't understand the detail of the real world,
Stop projecting, it's annoying.
You hate it because it is 100% true.
No, it's a very very stupid argument. I cannot believe you are still trying to defend it. I'd feel ashamed if I were you.
How much inequality is permissible ? who gets to decide?
Civilized society negotiates and works out compromises.
Your open contempt for other citizens is why you will continue to lose elections
I've been around long enough to know it's a pendulum.
1 Samuel 15:3 - "Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.'"
Deuteronomy 20:16-18 - "However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. 17 Completely destroy[a] them--the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites--as the Lord your God has commanded you. 18 Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the Lord your God." [emph added]
Islam states that it is interpreted literally, since Muslims claim the Koran is eternal and universal
Many evangelicals say the same about the Bible
The Democrats owned slaves. No Republican representative has ever own slaves.
That's got to be the dumbest "argument" I've heard in months.
Who creates the jobs ? the rich. The poor never create jobs. The middle class create only a few jobs.
People traded heavily before rich existed. Big co's can exist without having rich managers. No law of the universe says managers must be rich.
Anyhow, Canada, Germany, and some N. European countries do fine without a bloated upper class.
The problem is that the Left considers all inequality to be the result of oppression.
Hogwash. Most progressives believe some inequality is necessary. But Yuuuuuge inequality damages democracy and has no net benefits.
They may be mostly hokey, but so are the alternatives. There's often no quick universal fixes for back problems, period. But the back is kind of like TV reception on old-fashioned sets (and sometimes cellphones): the weather, time-of-day, antenna position, and position and quantity of viewers can significantly affect the reception.
Experimenting by moving the antenna, furniture, and viewers around can at least temporarily fix TV reception. We called it the "fix-it dance" and "air Twister" back in the day. (Steve Jobs and Woz once rigged a college TV to screw with viewers using the idea. They gave themselves away by laughing too hard at posing victims.)
Chiropractors are "experienced fiddlers" who do the fix-it-dance with backs.
There were already too many topics to discuss so I left AGW out. I probably should have trimmed others.
The Bible also says violent stuff that is more or less a variation of "kill all unbelievers". What's in written scriptures and what's in the mind of believers are not necessarily tightly connected, especially since a literal reading produces many contradictions. I'm not making a statement who about rich religion is more violent, only saying that scriptural text is not a difference maker and is not the main component of actual behavior.
As far as individuals associated with the Democrat party who may have said racist statements (or some other extremist position), sure I DON'T deny it happens.
It also happens with Republicans. You seem to be cherry-picking representatives and extrapolating them into a larger group. If you have objective evidence that say for example 42.7% of Dems say objectively racist things but only 2.1% of Gops do, you might have meaningful data instead of the biased and small-sampled crap you give here.
As far as tax cuts and the economy, IF the bottleneck were investment, tax cuts on the wealthy could indeed produce a notable boost to the economy. But recently lack of regular consumers (with money) has been the bottleneck. Tax-cuts for the rich won't address that bottleneck. The rich tend to spend their tax-cuts on overseas factories and domestic real-estate, which does almost nothing for the consumer problem, and arguably makes it worse by jacking up house and rent prices.
Trump and his administration have accused Indian firms of using the popular H-1B work visa program to send millions of foreign tech workers to the United States to take jobs Americans could do.
Us USA citizens also have to right to have our asses chewed off by insects, managers, and other vermin. Equal Opportunity Chewin'!
As far as violence in scriptures, ALL the major holy books have violent passages. They also have "get along" passages. Adherents can choose to emphasize what they want and be violent jerks or get along based on what they focus on.
The books are not precise algorithms, leaving lots of room to human interpretation. Experts suggest that the original text was probably often referring to specific situations, but the context got lost to antiquity.
You should know this. If not, you are naive.
Perhaps you know the details of the Laffer Curve,
It's merely a theory and has not proven itself in practice.
"Comcast is good and their service people smell of fresh spring flowers. Your connection problems were caused by poorly-made foreign microwave ovens. That's why you should buy domestic brands."
Sorry, but my honest observation is that most of the conservatives I debate with are NOT "detail people". Maybe there is some kind of unseen social filtering mechanism such that I for some reason am not likely to encounter the detail-oriented ones. But I'm calling the pattern as I personally observe it.
Whenever I talk to a Republican who gets all frothy about regulations, I ask for specific examples. The fairly rare times I actually get specific answers, it quite often turns out the regulation is on the books because some slimebag company abused their freedom.
They are typically related to pollution, safety, misleading consumers, and/or anti-competitive behavior to keep smaller competitors out of the market. There are indeed some bad regulations (or in need of tuning), but most are there for a legitimate reason. They were NOT invented out of the blue by some power-hungry hippie socialist.
And some of the regulations were actually lobbied into place by big co's who want to keep smaller players out of the market. This is especially common on the state and local level. Look at Tesla's trouble in selling cars because some states require licensed physical dealerships. The Big 3 car co's got those in place to keep out custom and foreign car co's.
clueless PHB would say after watching a vendor's webinar on how their new fog technology is going to save 90% over cloud services...fog is the new hotness, google it
Cloud and Fog are so 2016. Fire-and-Brimstone IT is where it's at (FBIT). I highly recommend the Satan Stack. The head even comes with Power Points.
That's what I was thinking. MS probably convinced T that if the Fed Gov't simply used only MS products, everything would be compatible and integrated with everything, and magic wizard dialog boxes and IDE Intellisense would auto-magically do most of the work.
MS-Wall is compatible with MS-Border-Guard and compatible with MS-Extreme-Vetting and MS-Mex-will-pay-for-it. Just sign the check and plug'em in!
Part of the problem with "you must always do X" edicts is that there are always exceptions to the rule. One size does NOT fit all. The trick is weeding out the legitimate exceptions from fake or exaggerated ones that are designed to stall.
Making the real-vs-fake-exception determination well often requires research and domain expertise. Somebody sitting in a central office probably cannot make that determination.
For example, one office might say, "Our staff know X but not Y, the new recommended approach. And we don't have the budget for sufficient training and/or hiring for Y." Republicans like gov't to have slim budgets, so there probably is indeed limited funds for training in general. To know what's going on for a specific site you'd have to pay a visit and interview the employees about their knowledge and training, perhaps taking a specialist along with you.
The creamiest statement will come when after "negotiating" with NASA over his pet projects, he will state, "Who knew rocket science was so complicated?"
He's already said such about the general presidency, healthcare, getting GOP to fund stuff, and one or two others I don't remember right now.
As far as consolidating similar IT services, I heard the same from the Obama administration. It's something that's free and easy to talk about, but the devil is always in the messy details.
32 may exist across nation, but in practice most consumers only have access to somewhere between 1 and 3, and they usually suck because you have nowhere else to go and they know it.
Not coincidentally, the two largest ISPs in that [worst] list just got done with massive mergers or acquisitions that resulted in higher prices and worse service than consumers saw previously.
[Some offered amnesty] Yet not a single one did anything to help control the flow of [illegal] immigration.
There's a reason for this: both parties are in on it. Democrats see them or their offspring more likely to vote Democrat; and businesses see them as cheap labor, and therefore (legally) bribe Republicans to look the other way. Thus, Republican representatives pretend to be appalled for their voting base, but have kept making excuses not to sign anything when the opportunity has arisen.
This was Trump's first plan on the agenda, put off by some liberal judge with his nuts tied around his neck like a bowtie.
Trump is doing it wrong. Directly booting people out and breaking up families is both mean and bad politics. A law needs to go after businesses with some legal teeth against owners and hiring managers, along with an army of inspectors. Much fewer illegals would come if they couldn't get jobs. It would take longer to see results than direct boot-outs, but eventually has the same effect.
But, business will never go for that: they'll lobby and bribe to stop it, and they have deep pockets. Trump seems too pro-business to fight that fight, and so does the street-hunter thing instead. Bigly sad.
And Congress needs get off their butt and fund the hiring of more border guards. That's more effective than a wall. Tunnels and ladders will pop up. Again, both parties have made silly excuses not to fund guards in the past.
There are multiple entrenched special interests that collectively put up barriers (no pun int.) to real solutions.
Once again, a company is managed by sales guys not tech guys.
Investors may know and accept the trade-offs. Slimy salesy companies often can and do grow big and make investors wealthy.
I don't know what percent of investors are that way, but there are sufficient numbers to keep plenty of slimers afloat. Big investors can spread the risk so that no one slimer flame-out ruins their aggregate portfolio. They are playing the averages.
Slashdot Mirror
An old saying: An idle mind is the workshop of the devil.
Heaven forbid somebody like that ever won the Presidency.
I bet it's not really ISIS, but a troll who either gets off scaring people, or wants to trigger war, hate, etc.
The first planet-wide BSOD
I find that a very minor distinction. A lot of people are probably related to at least one of those groups (and there's more in other scriptures), or at least one could personally believe the "bad guy" is. The point is the Bible often had God give "believers" a blank check to slaughter non-believers.
They didn't change because of the text, but because of the Clue Stick of a century of bloody sectarian wars approx around 1600. The Middle East seems to not have finished that phase yet. The Clue Stick of death hasn't bashed them in the chops enough yet.
You are exaggerating to the point of conspiracy theories.
Stop projecting, it's annoying.
No, it's a very very stupid argument. I cannot believe you are still trying to defend it. I'd feel ashamed if I were you.
Civilized society negotiates and works out compromises.
I've been around long enough to know it's a pendulum.
1 Samuel 15:3 - "Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.'"
Deuteronomy 20:16-18 - "However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. 17 Completely destroy[a] them--the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites--as the Lord your God has commanded you. 18 Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the Lord your God." [emph added]
Many evangelicals say the same about the Bible
That's got to be the dumbest "argument" I've heard in months.
People traded heavily before rich existed. Big co's can exist without having rich managers. No law of the universe says managers must be rich.
Anyhow, Canada, Germany, and some N. European countries do fine without a bloated upper class.
Hogwash. Most progressives believe some inequality is necessary. But Yuuuuuge inequality damages democracy and has no net benefits.
They may be mostly hokey, but so are the alternatives. There's often no quick universal fixes for back problems, period. But the back is kind of like TV reception on old-fashioned sets (and sometimes cellphones): the weather, time-of-day, antenna position, and position and quantity of viewers can significantly affect the reception.
Experimenting by moving the antenna, furniture, and viewers around can at least temporarily fix TV reception. We called it the "fix-it dance" and "air Twister" back in the day. (Steve Jobs and Woz once rigged a college TV to screw with viewers using the idea. They gave themselves away by laughing too hard at posing victims.)
Chiropractors are "experienced fiddlers" who do the fix-it-dance with backs.
There were already too many topics to discuss so I left AGW out. I probably should have trimmed others.
The Bible also says violent stuff that is more or less a variation of "kill all unbelievers". What's in written scriptures and what's in the mind of believers are not necessarily tightly connected, especially since a literal reading produces many contradictions. I'm not making a statement who about rich religion is more violent, only saying that scriptural text is not a difference maker and is not the main component of actual behavior.
As far as individuals associated with the Democrat party who may have said racist statements (or some other extremist position), sure I DON'T deny it happens.
It also happens with Republicans. You seem to be cherry-picking representatives and extrapolating them into a larger group. If you have objective evidence that say for example 42.7% of Dems say objectively racist things but only 2.1% of Gops do, you might have meaningful data instead of the biased and small-sampled crap you give here.
As far as tax cuts and the economy, IF the bottleneck were investment, tax cuts on the wealthy could indeed produce a notable boost to the economy. But recently lack of regular consumers (with money) has been the bottleneck. Tax-cuts for the rich won't address that bottleneck. The rich tend to spend their tax-cuts on overseas factories and domestic real-estate, which does almost nothing for the consumer problem, and arguably makes it worse by jacking up house and rent prices.
Us USA citizens also have to right to have our asses chewed off by insects, managers, and other vermin. Equal Opportunity Chewin'!
As far as violence in scriptures, ALL the major holy books have violent passages. They also have "get along" passages. Adherents can choose to emphasize what they want and be violent jerks or get along based on what they focus on.
The books are not precise algorithms, leaving lots of room to human interpretation. Experts suggest that the original text was probably often referring to specific situations, but the context got lost to antiquity.
You should know this. If not, you are naive.
It's merely a theory and has not proven itself in practice.
Examples?
"We can tell because Windows 10 runs tons of snoopware."
"Comcast is good and their service people smell of fresh spring flowers. Your connection problems were caused by poorly-made foreign microwave ovens. That's why you should buy domestic brands."
That's a lot of M&M's; you're gonna get chubby.
You can't hit them over the head with a 2x4 because there ain't none.
Sorry, but my honest observation is that most of the conservatives I debate with are NOT "detail people". Maybe there is some kind of unseen social filtering mechanism such that I for some reason am not likely to encounter the detail-oriented ones. But I'm calling the pattern as I personally observe it.
Just tell Trump that Muslims are using drones; THEN he will regulate them up the wazoo.
Whenever I talk to a Republican who gets all frothy about regulations, I ask for specific examples. The fairly rare times I actually get specific answers, it quite often turns out the regulation is on the books because some slimebag company abused their freedom.
They are typically related to pollution, safety, misleading consumers, and/or anti-competitive behavior to keep smaller competitors out of the market. There are indeed some bad regulations (or in need of tuning), but most are there for a legitimate reason. They were NOT invented out of the blue by some power-hungry hippie socialist.
And some of the regulations were actually lobbied into place by big co's who want to keep smaller players out of the market. This is especially common on the state and local level. Look at Tesla's trouble in selling cars because some states require licensed physical dealerships. The Big 3 car co's got those in place to keep out custom and foreign car co's.
Cloud and Fog are so 2016. Fire-and-Brimstone IT is where it's at (FBIT). I highly recommend the Satan Stack. The head even comes with Power Points.
That's what I was thinking. MS probably convinced T that if the Fed Gov't simply used only MS products, everything would be compatible and integrated with everything, and magic wizard dialog boxes and IDE Intellisense would auto-magically do most of the work.
MS-Wall is compatible with MS-Border-Guard and compatible with MS-Extreme-Vetting and MS-Mex-will-pay-for-it. Just sign the check and plug'em in!
Part of the problem with "you must always do X" edicts is that there are always exceptions to the rule. One size does NOT fit all. The trick is weeding out the legitimate exceptions from fake or exaggerated ones that are designed to stall.
Making the real-vs-fake-exception determination well often requires research and domain expertise. Somebody sitting in a central office probably cannot make that determination.
For example, one office might say, "Our staff know X but not Y, the new recommended approach. And we don't have the budget for sufficient training and/or hiring for Y." Republicans like gov't to have slim budgets, so there probably is indeed limited funds for training in general. To know what's going on for a specific site you'd have to pay a visit and interview the employees about their knowledge and training, perhaps taking a specialist along with you.
The creamiest statement will come when after "negotiating" with NASA over his pet projects, he will state, "Who knew rocket science was so complicated?"
He's already said such about the general presidency, healthcare, getting GOP to fund stuff, and one or two others I don't remember right now.
As far as consolidating similar IT services, I heard the same from the Obama administration. It's something that's free and easy to talk about, but the devil is always in the messy details.
32 may exist across nation, but in practice most consumers only have access to somewhere between 1 and 3, and they usually suck because you have nowhere else to go and they know it.
Side-effect of living in a plutocracy.
There's a reason for this: both parties are in on it. Democrats see them or their offspring more likely to vote Democrat; and businesses see them as cheap labor, and therefore (legally) bribe Republicans to look the other way. Thus, Republican representatives pretend to be appalled for their voting base, but have kept making excuses not to sign anything when the opportunity has arisen.
Trump is doing it wrong. Directly booting people out and breaking up families is both mean and bad politics. A law needs to go after businesses with some legal teeth against owners and hiring managers, along with an army of inspectors. Much fewer illegals would come if they couldn't get jobs. It would take longer to see results than direct boot-outs, but eventually has the same effect.
But, business will never go for that: they'll lobby and bribe to stop it, and they have deep pockets. Trump seems too pro-business to fight that fight, and so does the street-hunter thing instead. Bigly sad.
And Congress needs get off their butt and fund the hiring of more border guards. That's more effective than a wall. Tunnels and ladders will pop up. Again, both parties have made silly excuses not to fund guards in the past.
There are multiple entrenched special interests that collectively put up barriers (no pun int.) to real solutions.
Investors may know and accept the trade-offs. Slimy salesy companies often can and do grow big and make investors wealthy.
I don't know what percent of investors are that way, but there are sufficient numbers to keep plenty of slimers afloat. Big investors can spread the risk so that no one slimer flame-out ruins their aggregate portfolio. They are playing the averages.