You know, the sad thing here is, there are actual conservative principals worth defending. Conserve as in conservation as in conservative as in keep things the same. Keep em stable.

So when I see "conservatives" at the Supreme Court pretty much upending 50 years of legal precedent, it - much like the laws the would supposedly conserve - is confusing. Like the man who nominated most of them at this point, previous law doesn't seem to affect their decisions if their religious zealotry needs to be front and center.

Therefore, why obey ever changing laws? Just wait until it's overturned. Wait until the other political party can install more judges who are partial to that issue.


Bah



Oh hey I saw Elon musk was the first person ever to lose $200,000,000,000 in a year. Pretty cool. Tesla stock at all time low and VW & NISSAN sold about 10x the electric vehicles in 2022 that tesla did. But you aren't invested in them, all cash in a mattress right ?

[1] My kids' primary school: first names all 'round - teachers and students. The principal: yes, we've got all the usual problems here, but we think that respect is earned; it's not about the name we use.

[2] separately (not at my kids' school) beginning to suspect that 'cool' (first names...) male teachers may be more at risk of 'dating' students.

Respect is a two way street. I seriously doubt any of these teachers think twice about using student’s first names. Turnabout is fair play….that’s why I insisted on calling my gym teacher “Cheney”…he called us by last name, but with no Mr., so I returned the favor. He hated that. He tried to get me in trouble for it. The principal set him straight.

Oops this turned into a semi rant. But I am legitimately open to discussion here, and am curious to get your thoughts on a few points Bob. That is, IF you're willing to actually think about them beyond the level of repeating talking points.

I find it interesting how divergent the two overall "sides" are in this country, in terms of where they focus. None of the issues brought up in this video are really on the radar of most progressives, beyond being aware some on the right are talking about them. And I'm guessing a lot of the concerns progressives discuss rarely come up in your chosen media landscape. A lot of the issues in the video are largely off of my radar, and I have to wonder how you feel they should be addressed - like, actual proposed solutions rather than just complaining about / worrying about them.

We only dedicate one day to remember our fallen soldiers

How many should there be? Arguably we have more than one already: there's Memorial Day and Veterans Day, and it seems that Sept 11th is often used for the purpose as well.

I'd argue we should spend more time acknowledging and understanding the principals behind WHY our soldiers died in the various conflicts which caused them to fall in the first place. Let's make sure our citizenry appreciates what we collectively rejected in the Revolutionary war. Why it was important that we kept the country together rather than allowing the south to split off in the mid-1800s. Why we chose to honor our diplomatic agreements and support our allies in WW1. Why we fought against the countries and governments we did in WW2. What our goals were in Korea and Vietnam, and what lessons we learned from those conflicts and from the Cold War in general. Commemorating and remembering those we've lost absolutely matters, but if we're ONLY doing that while forgetting why they fought OR ignoring what we learned then we're doing them an equal or greater disservice. Remember that America was built on the idea of forming "a more perfect union" - not a perfect one, a MORE perfect one - a work in progress. We're striving towards an ideal, not assuming we're already there. Learning from our past successes, failures, and our struggles around both outcomes is vital. If our self-analysis is no deeper than hero worship we'll never make real progress towards that theoretical perfect union.

The only mask that's gonna save us is duct tape on their mouths

Yeah, sound medical advice and evidence-based science is terrifying. Better to shut up those whose words we dislike, because we're reactionary authoritarian babymen. I truly do not understand being more afraid of reasonable safety measures than of a virus which has been shown to cause serious harm in the short and long terms. The only reason this "masks = liberal / maskless = conservative" crap came about is because politics has devolved to the level of team sports in the US, and one party has chosen "the opposite of whatever our political opponents say" as their entire governing philosophy. (And yes, ONE party - research and understand the GOP's 2020 platform if you want to argue the point.) This video even seems to reach a reasonable conclusion at the end, while coming up just short of that final logical leap to "maybe I should question what the public faces of MY side have been claiming in this Us vs Them madness." Seriously - keep going friend, you're almost there! George Washington was 100% right in wanting to avoid political parties being a force in the US, and it makes me immensely sad that his fears came true.

Big oil runs the world / the only wars to get fought are with the countries who have natural resources they want

Solid point here, no sarcasm. The US military has long been a tool of our profit-driven form of "free market" imperialism. A really great way to combat this, specifically with an eye to ending Big Oil's goddamn death grip on our foreign policy goals, would be an aggressive implementation of renewable energy projects. Remember the space race? America can be an absolute beast at clever engineering solutions when we dedicate ourselves to it. Fuck the petrostates, we have the available land and resources to absolutely kick ass in the realms of solar and wind power, and be leaders in the the post-hydrocarbon reality. We can certainly agree on that, right Bob? Left / Right nonsense fully aside, I think any reasonable American can agree on at least two points: let's stop sending heaps of cash to buy oil off of the Saudis (etc), and Fuck Cancer.

But if a white man acts too white he's white trash / he's a racist he's a bigot he's a monster

What the fuck is this horseshit? What does "acting too white" even fucking look like? Watching NASCAR on a sailboat while listening to polka? Typically when I see racism from white people it's in the form of denying that brown-hued people deal with any additional difficulties in life due to their skin tone, or denying that there have been structural obstacles for them through history, or lamenting that their white children are being burdened with a broader lens on culture or with (gasp! shock!) an accurate accounting of actual US history, including the ugly bits that we shouldn't be proud of (but MUST learn from). I'm progressive / lefty as fuck and there is no aspect of "white culture" or "acting white" which upsets me in the slightest. UNLESS one counts "denying racism exists / has ever existed" as a fundamental value of being white. Which... why would anyone want to claim that nonsense? If you want to listen to classic country music in a rusty pickup truck while driving to an evangelical church, then discuss hockey over Buds after 18 holes with the rest of your tractor pull team, then absolutely go nuts my fellow caucusoid! Just recognize and understand that your life experiences may not be the same as those of others. Further, if we care about trying to avoid unnecessary, avoidable unfairness in life (recognizing that life will never truly be fair, for anyone), then it might be reasonable for some governmental / legal / structural recognition in furtherance of that notion. There is absolutely room for legitimate policy disagreement here without being accused of racism. It's denial of others' reality which tends to garner the label of racist (sexist etc) - steer clear of denying the lived experiences of other people, allow for the possibility they may have encountered difficulties you haven't / won't, and we've room for further discussion.

Edit / final point: I voted the video back up to 0 from the -1 where I found it. Because while I disagree with a lot of the positions taken by the performer, they may have reached them through no fault of their own and with no true malice. Misinformation / disinformation is a devious shit of a motherfucker, and the rot it causes can run deep. It is painful to abandon deeply-held beliefs, on a fundamental level. If nothing else, the video gives us room to discuss some specific viewpoints held by people who think of themselves as good, but which can lead to harm.

A reasonable school district/principal would agree, but the way "hacking" laws are written, even bypassing a password by guessing "password" is an intentional breach, and unless they have written consent ahead of time (like white-hat penetration testing companies get), then it's against the law.

So, just depends on what the school wants to do.

?

Why? There was no damage done, and they exposed potential weaknesses in a school system’s security. (Imagine a school shooter using it to tell everyone to assemble in the gym or something, they needed to know their security sucked).

Sr pranks I saw in person included covering the hallways in liquid dish soap. That caused the school to close, and cost thousands to clean up, yet no charges were pressed (I think the entire sr class got an hour of detention or something weak). I’ve seen others where teacher’s/principal’s car was put on the roof, or disassembled then reassembled in the teacher’s lounge with no way to drive it out.
As Sr pranks go, this seemed innocuous, almost pleasant.
I suppose a hard nosed principal and DA could bring charges, but both would lose all public support from their community and possibly their jobs.

Gavrilo Princip came close (he’s the assassin of Archduke Ferdinand, credited with starting WW1)

Lol. Is that what I said, or a ridiculous straw man you’re setting up to knock down?

Your fact free ilk are the decimation of a democracy that lasted over two centuries. Putting party above patriotism, principal, and phact (misspelled for alliterative purposes).

Yes, I watched some, and the trial isn’t the only source of info. I posted the video of him drinking and flashing white power signs. His own recorded actions are proof enough.
Here it is again…..



No bob, I’m talking about you, you are the one whining that the media isn’t unbiased and in the same breath posting insanely biased, partisan, fact free nonsense you call news….and god damn it it’s you’re - you are…not your - belonging to you….not yore - in ancient times . Learn English comrade. Patriots know their native tongue. What language DO you know, Bobski? Is it Russian or Mandarin?

Creepy.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

'Paradise Lost': How The Apple Became The Forbidden Fruit

This month marks 350 years since John Milton sold his publisher the copyright of Paradise Lost for the sum of five pounds.

His great work dramatizes the oldest story in the Bible, whose principal characters we know only too well: God, Adam, Eve, Satan in the form of a talking snake — and an apple.

Except, of course, that Genesis never names the apple but simply refers to "the fruit." To quote from the King James Bible:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.'"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Fruit" is also the word Milton employs in the poem's sonorous opening lines:

Of Mans First Disobedience, and the Fruit

Of that Forbidden Tree, whose mortal taste

Brought Death into the World, and all our woe

https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2017/04/30/526069512/paradise-lost-how-the-apple-became-the-forbidden-fruit

Lol....Faux news and Lary Elder, the black face of white supremacy who says descendants of slaves aren't due reparations but descendants of slave owners should be paid reparations*, are already admitting defeat and claiming vote fraud in the California recall, despite there being no results in yet, no actual fraud claims, and a week left to vote.

Polling indicates both that the recall will fail and if by chance it doesn't, Elder will lose....badly. (He's the leading republican candidate). That's why they're suddenly claiming fraud....claiming it by saying, just like Trump did, "the only way we can lose is if there's vote fraud", not by showing a scintilla of evidence of fraud.

Motherfucker, you're a republican in California in 2021, the only way for you to win any office bigger than a county office is fraud.

Republicans are a minority in California and are moving in droves to Texas now to avoid paying taxes (and they're quickly regretting it)....and Texans are pissed, they hate them and call them liberals. They have no chance of legitimately winning elections.

LMFAHS!!

* to do the math on Elder's slave owner reparation idea....$300 per slave/kidnapped and captive torture victim they had in 1863 dollars adjusted to 2021 dollars, that's $8,109 per person in just principal...add 159 years of compounding interest on $300 ($2,258,343,945.96 in interest each) as he of course thinks is only proper, and multiply by 3-4 million (number of slaves freed) it comes to well over the value of every penny the U.S. has and all assets in the country by far (approximately $6,775,000,000,000,000 on the low end).

That's apparently his brilliant plan to deal with racism and the economy...pay off those poor slave owners by giving them the whole nation lock, stock, and barrel and an iou for the other $6650000000000000 we owe those poor slave owners.

I think that's at the discretion of the judge, if you asked for 15%, likely you'll get your principal back, if you asked for 1500%, chances are you won't get a dime back as punishment, and may end up owing the borrower if you went overboard trying to collect.

I live in California, building codes change constantly. I agree, it is maddening and often backwards. He was specifically talking about codes for building stand alone solar, which are newer building codes. Even old building codes are often poorly thought out and contradictory. I'm not saying there isn't an abundance of red tape here, especially for building.
That said, his contractor should have been aware of all codes, submitted his plan, and would have approval or notes on what to change in weeks tops. There's something wrong when it takes over a year to get a shed built, some reason his plans weren't approved like they weren't to code.
Citation : personal experience - I installed solar in California, it took 3 days for my permit approval....and only that long because my contractor was being lazy.

That's the thing I disagree with, no new laws are needed at all, just a removal of exemptions/deregulations for businesses that pay large enough bribes (contributions) to elected officials. Even making all credit businesses operate on the same rules, allowing them 30% interest, seems ok, but that isn't reality today. It's unconscionable to allow 1600% interest on loans peddled to desperate people that don't actually qualify for a real, legitimate line of credit, many of whom don't understand it's what they're agreeing to, but the payday loan lobby is well funded and connected.
Citation:
Although U.S. states set their own maximum legal interest rates, a Supreme Court interpretation of the National Bank Act of 1864 preempted state usury laws and created a path toward a national consumer lending economy. The most important federal case in credit card interest rate deregulation was decided in 1978.

Her problems were multifold. The predatory loan took a fixable issue, her terrible customer service, and compounded it with insurmountable and ever expanding debt, which in turn undoubtedly hurt her customer service more, thus increasing her debt..... It sounds like she never should have purchased a service oriented business, and likely overextended herself from day one just to do it.

I'm unsure of your point in the last paragraph.

I think you mean they wouldn't have to pay you the interest. They would have to pay you back the principal. And that would be under specific cases and usually when no contract is involved, also all depends on where you live.

Also, I don't think either Bill's building codes are "new" vs. the usury laws being "existing". Please cite to support.

The irony is that additional laws to stop predatory lending are, in fact, what red tape is made of, by definition. So I found it amusing that he would look at her situation, say that Nancy and team were trying to solve it for her by passing new laws, then go on to complain about all the red tape surrounding this building. That red tape exists because someone else before him saw a problem or safety issue or concern, and put yet another policy or law in place to solve it. In reality, as your posts prove, her problem was not that a predatory lender got involved in her life, but that her business was in bad shape because she had gone off the deep end and was thus losing customers.

I could easily imagine a bit where he showed a stack of papers four inches thick that he had to sign to get a loan, and complain about the processing time, then showcase an SMS based loan that works in another country and funds in one day.

Also, that Epoch times site guy... and the company


I'm not wasting more time on your nonsense than I have to

BUT LET ME BE CLEAR I WILL MAKE THE BET - THROW DOWN IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT Ya' FUCKING SELL-YOUR-OWN-COUNTRY-OUT-FASCIST-WANNABE
+buuuurp+ ooo sorry about that, just came out, anyway.

im not wasting my time digging because idk it's like at what point do you tell a person who is suffering from a mental illness that you're not taking them seriously anymore?


+pats your head+




nevertheless, from a glancing of the sources cited on the wiki, there's an...odd? story behind this site?

-------------\
Introducing|>>>>>>>>>>>> The Epoch Times! The news source that is so honest we have no fucking clue where they get their money from...except probably china...probably.
-------------/

"The Epoch Times was founded in 2000 by John Tang and other Chinese Americans affiliated with the Falun Gong new religious movement.[26] Tang was a graduate student in Georgia at the time; he began the newspaper in his basement.[21] The founders said they were responding to censorship inside China and a lack of international understanding about the Chinese government's repression of Falun Gong.[27][28] In May 2000, the paper was first published in the Chinese language in New York, with the web launch in August 2000.[29]

According to NBC News, "little is publicly known about the precise ownership, origins or influences of The Epoch Times," and it is loosely organized into several regional tax free non-profits, under the umbrella of the Epoch Media Group, together with New Tang Dynasty Television.[18][21]

The newspaper's revenue has increased rapidly in recent years, from $3.8 million in 2016 to $8.1 million in 2017 (with spending of $7.2 million) and $12.4 million in 2018.[36] Tax documents of the Epoch Media Group indicated that between 2012 and 2016, the group received $900,000 from a principal at Renaissance Technologies, a hedge fund led by the conservative political donor Robert Mercer.[37] Chris Kitze, a former NBC executive and creator of the fake news website Before It's News who also manages a cryptocurrency hedge fund, joined the paper's board as vice president in 2017.[36]

A 2020 report in The New York Times called The Epoch Times' recent wealth "something of a mystery." Steve Bannon, the former executive chairman of Breitbart News who produced a documentary with NTD, said "I’d give them a number" on a project budget and "they'd come back and say, 'We’re good for that number.'" Former employees say they were told The Epoch Times is financed by subscriptions, ads and donations from wealthy Falun Gong practitioners.[21]

Personally, I am Pro Choice for women to make their own decision on the gestation of biological cells growing in their own bodies up to a certain age of the fetus.

What I don't understand is, are you calling this man pathetic because he "gave two arguments FOR pro choice"? - based on principals laid out by Lincoln in his example?
Or because
Pro Choice doesn't align with your beliefs?

Sorry, you wrap your words up in several ways but you don't come out and say what side you're arguing for so I can't tell the tone or nature of your comments.

I personally don't feel the entity, the biological growth of cells is a person just because it has a heart beat. Does it have consciousness? Is it a thinking being with self awareness? Because I don't remember anything from when I was a fetus. In fact, I don't think the brain is developed at all ...

"not until the end of week 5 and into week 6 (usually around forty to forty-three days) does the first electrical brain activity begin to occur." ~'The Ethical Brain' - The New York Times.

And even then, it's still in development and not a an organ that can contain consciousness.

Crappy, my tablet won't play html5 videos....homie don't play dat.

Upvoting on principal, since I saw it when it aired.