I went through and struck out the statements I disagree with. Looks like we agree on about 99% of it.

>> ^Farhad2000:
Americans have been living beyond their means for years now. The let's cut taxes and everything will be peachy approach will simply not work, it will only continue to create further debt in a already debt ridden society. Just because you get an extra 10,000 dollars will not alleviate the long term problems the economy is facing. The government is far too large but the political incentive to reduce it is simply not there. Too much legislation has created too many public offices that serve no purpose, and too much of government work is already being privatized out with no real solid oversight. These are some of the steps I would take before probably being assassinated because it would rattle too many people in comfortable positions.
- Eliminate the following: Department of Health, Department of Education, Drug Enforcement Agency and the SEC. DOH and DOE statistical bodies can be rolled into the Census office for information gathering. The DEA needs to be dissolved, parts not dealing with drug enforcement rolled into the FBI. The SEC should be reformed entirely and given higher powers and responsibilities, its failure to catch the Madoff scandal is simply unforgivable.
- Slash Pentagon spending, the US spends almost 4 to 5 times as much as the nearest highest spender on defense. America has the best cold war era military force that is trying to fight guerrilla wars while constantly changing its attack profile from standard engagement to network centric warfare to COIN. Enough military readjustments on the taxpayers bill.
- Working with the infrastructure survey create open bid contracts to rebuild and improve America's basic infrastructure. Eliminate the made in USA clause which is basically protectionist scheme. Infrastructure is the most vital component in the economy, years of tax cuts meant you are living on shit built back in the 50s.
- Eliminate American protectionist schemes for agriculture. This is lunacy and only helps large agriculture firms while US consumers lose out, welcome to the globalization bitches. Africa makes cheaper bananas and mangos anyway.
- Make all private sector lobbying illegal. All lobbying should be citizen empowered only with no private interests. Currently any private firm can buy lobbying pressure to roll in laws that are only beneficial for it's own interests. This is waste and imbalance.
- Legalize drugs and tax them. This a mute point, there too much waste in capturing marijuana smokers and filling the jails with them, while culturally we all watch Weeds on HBO. There is an untapped revenue source here.
- Withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan, close down every single US military post. Needless waste on a needless war that cost too many American lives. Withdrawal must be countered with a monument to all those killed needlessly, a formal apology by the President for straining the nation.
- Create a viable social health care system while allowing private care to flourish as an alternative choice. The health of labor is the wealth of the economy, everyone should have access to affordable health care that doesn't ruin your finical portfolio if you get a heart attack. We can afford to spend trillions to build bombs, we can afford to spend trillions making sure every American is able to stay healthy.
- Incorporate legal immigration and legalize everyone in the US, firms need cheap labour, all those kids in the OC will not do the cheap labor jobs that people who immigrate will. Removing barriers will allow more people to contribute to the economy. Tax them accordingly.
- Form a WWII style incentive towards improving American education and finding alternative viable fuel sources.
- End all SOCIAL based legislation that deal with marriage and gay rights, this is not a sector the government should have any say in.
- Introduce progressive tax structures that scale to abnormal income increases, foster the creation of the middle class. End lax inheritances taxation. End favorable tax heavens for corporations. End corporate tax write offs. This is necessary to balance out the economy unfortunately.

Americans have been living beyond their means for years now. The let's cut taxes and everything will be peachy approach will simply not work, it will only continue to create further debt in a already debt ridden society. Just because you get an extra 10,000 dollars will not alleviate the long term problems the economy is facing. The government is far too large but the political incentive to reduce it is simply not there. Too much legislation has created too many public offices that serve no purpose, and too much of government work is already being privatized out with no real solid oversight. These are some of the steps I would take before probably being assassinated because it would rattle too many people in comfortable positions.

- Eliminate the following: Department of Health, Department of Education, Drug Enforcement Agency and the SEC. DOH and DOE statistical bodies can be rolled into the Census office for information gathering. The DEA needs to be dissolved, parts not dealing with drug enforcement rolled into the FBI. The SEC should be reformed entirely and given higher powers and responsibilities, its failure to catch the Madoff scandal is simply unforgivable.

- Slash Pentagon spending, the US spends almost 4 to 5 times as much as the nearest highest spender on defense. America has the best cold war era military force that is trying to fight guerrilla wars while constantly changing its attack profile from standard engagement to network centric warfare to COIN. Enough military readjustments on the taxpayers bill.

- Working with the infrastructure survey create open bid contracts to rebuild and improve America's basic infrastructure. Eliminate the made in USA clause which is basically protectionist scheme. Infrastructure is the most vital component in the economy, years of tax cuts meant you are living on shit built back in the 50s.

- Eliminate American protectionist schemes for agriculture. This is lunacy and only helps large agriculture firms while US consumers lose out, welcome to the globalization bitches. Africa makes cheaper bananas and mangos anyway.

- Make all private sector lobbying illegal. All lobbying should be citizen empowered only with no private interests. Currently any private firm can buy lobbying pressure to roll in laws that are only beneficial for it's own interests. This is waste and imbalance.

- Legalize drugs and tax them. This a mute point, there too much waste in capturing marijuana smokers and filling the jails with them, while culturally we all watch Weeds on HBO. There is an untapped revenue source here.

- Withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan, close down every single US military post. Needless waste on a needless war that cost too many American lives. Withdrawal must be countered with a monument to all those killed needlessly, a formal apology by the President for straining the nation.

- Create a viable social health care system while allowing private care to flourish as an alternative choice. The health of labor is the wealth of the economy, everyone should have access to affordable health care that doesn't ruin your finical portfolio if you get a heart attack. We can afford to spend trillions to build bombs, we can afford to spend trillions making sure every American is able to stay healthy.

- Incorporate legal immigration and legalize everyone in the US, firms need cheap labour, all those kids in the OC will not do the cheap labor jobs that people who immigrate will. Removing barriers will allow more people to contribute to the economy. Tax them accordingly.

- Form a WWII style incentive towards improving American education and finding alternative viable fuel sources.

- End all SOCIAL based legislation that deal with marriage and gay rights, this is not a sector the government should have any say in.

- Introduce progressive tax structures that scale to abnormal income increases, foster the creation of the middle class. End lax inheritances taxation. End favorable tax heavens for corporations. End corporate tax write offs. This is necessary to balance out the economy unfortunately.

>> ^gwiz665:
Burn the heretic!

Hey I used to love the Simpsons and they've constantly changed over the years. But from Season 12 onwards they just stopped being funny. Some of the writers must've quit and their replacements are hacks. They couldn't write a good episode to save their lives. Look at the great older Haloween episodes and compare them to the pathetic new ones...

The requirement for "Intuitive answers" is just foolish and obviously anti-reason.

1) "Darwinism makes chance a creative force in the universe"
Darwinism b.k.a. Evolution by Natural Selection does indeed use random mutations as an element, but Natural Selection is in fact opposite to chance. It explains the variety of the species perfectly.

2) "Why is there something instead of nothing?"

It's not certain that it really did spring into existence at any point in time. We don't have evidence of that. We have no evidence "pre Big Bang" as far as I know.

And the universe is certainly not fixed in any way. It is constantly changing. Most of the Earth is uninhabitable and an even larger percentage of the known universe is uninhabitable. We have the sheer luck that the climate, temperature and atmosphere of Earth was ideal for life when it started. The reason the Earth seems so "ideal" now, is that we evolved with the earth, not that the earth was designed with us in mind.

Moral order is learned from parents.

3) "Where do you get your morals from?"

Parents, social environment and intellectually motivated. I think that murder is wrong, because I don't want people to murder me at some point. If I treat people nice, they treat me nice. If I write someone a sonnet I fully expect to take advantage of that later... hmm, I got sidetracked there.

It is not a problem for Atheism, because morals are not that important. It is a problem for Christians, because they want morals to be divine and they are not.

4) "How did morals evolve?"
Like we evolved. Memetics, genetics, different parts same principle.

"There is something within us that understands the goal of evolution [*sigh*] that instructs us to do the best to ensure our survival"

Buzzz, you lose. Natural Selection does not care what you do. If you do the wrong thing you'll not procreate or procreate less and thus slowly be thinned from the species. Natural Selection is not to be seen from a personal perspective but a global one. There are many, many, many wrong moves that the species have gone, but they have not been viable directions and have died out, so to speak. There is no distinct goal of evolution, just a direction.

5) Ugh, just to stupid. Creationism, yay. God blew me into existence. Buzz, you lose again, dingbat.

The definition of 'hot' or 'pretty' differs greatly between individuals... so no equation can be formed here to predict certain conclusions. math is logic. Logic works around constant variables. If the variable constantly changes on you despite applying the same method you have done previously, then it's just a game of chances and random picking.



Besides what if the girl thinks herself is the most beautiful girl between all her friends? Because that's exactly how I feel around my world. JAPR and Issycat can argue all they want, but they don't even come close to my level of beauty and they know it.

Yeah, I smell dead fish. The guy is narrating through as if it is one presentation, but it is really disjointed and looks like it came from multiple sources... also, WTF is up with the constantly changing focus thing. yeah, I get it, this "out of focus" look is all popular and shit in recent games, but this used WAY too much of that effect.

Oh, and shakey-cam = shite. I don't know who the first director it was that decided that shakey-cam is a good method to film something, but I hope you got herpes.

respectfully, most of the folks here that have a problem with choggie comments who don't care for the tone, the timbre, pitch, etc., are the ones that use the place to grandstand on certain subjects-politics, atheism, racism, here of late, the fringes of the homosexual community-all I have done, by paying attention to them, is make them uncomfortable and frustrated- Like me, they are also a minority-Divine juxtaposition-opposite poles in conflict affords equilibrium, such is the nature of all things-
Too bad, this will not change, or is constantly changing, however you wish to perceive it- Traveling with prevailing dogma has always been dangerous, considering the opinions are usually not one's own, but have been shaped by years of mental manipulation, that only natural disaster or deprogramming could correct-

Think what would happen if the world had to absorb the entire population of North Korea, the anguish and conflict that would never end, as these poor folks, tainted since birth, their minds putty in the hands of one man's regime, struggling to adapt to something other than Il Il Il-Imagine those in that place, the very few who stand up to the bullshit in their minds, and work as they can within their personal circles, to save at least one or two minds/souls-If you can picture this, you can begin to imagine my indignation, regarding a few inert minds, who beat a drum continually, contrary to healthier sensibilities, and are just as damaged, as the aforementioned NK goods.

And kronos??? Dare i pick apart your diatribe above, or simply the preface that sets the tone?...That communism remark, being a label referring to some association to dupes, who, in the same manner in which the dupes of the 00's, are being manipulated to think a certain way for the sake of an agenda, then bemoan the abrupt end when they were wholly complicit in heir own demise....and then the outro, placing me in a convenient box, assuming much -You are a smart fella, figure it out-Maybe I should have used an example more directly associated with social engineering, alla, B.F. Skinner-I do agree wholeheartedly, that comment blocking, will do little to quiet the bitching, as feathers are ruffled, and life will go on-
In reality, my constant harranging of certain users who use the place as a pulpit like the very preachers the same usually call idiots and ignoramouses, is nothing more than someone pointing out the futility of the endeavor, as it relates to what is real-
never play nice
never play favorites
never give in to passive-agression
and be damned, never honor a request for respect, when none is offered in kind-These new folks, as long as I am here, will take the good with the bad-

Perception, again I say, is the crux of the biscuit-
I am only going off on his post, because I am assuming as well-assuming that the reason for the damn thing has to do with a few people who can't process information, and take shit too goddamn personally-that shit being mine-because I read a lot of other folks stuff, and none is as raw and as personal, w/o actually pointing a finger-sorry, I get project-oriented-Post some fucking music fer crissakes...or lolcats-sorry folks, ignore is not part of some monkey's vocab-

I would name names and apologize, but it would only digress into indignation, as the comments to follow said apology, would probably be like reading shit on bathroom walls, reading a newspaper, or watching the nightly news-maybe we could send you a pm....-why bother, with the new feature, one can simply light a book, relax and enjoy...

(*maybe he'll get tired and go away)

Done-still say the idea blows-

>> ^Dadeeo:
This is what happens when "scientists" accept theory AS fact. Too bad the theory's are constantly changing, yet every new one gets embraced as the truth without ever acknowledging the error of accepting the now former "defunct" theory.
How could you ever trust anyone that refuses to admit their errors?
The Bible speaks of them is "ever learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth".


Science is the constant, incrementally and iteratively tested "frontlines of human knowledge". Wiki "scientific method". Evolution happens to be an area that has been studied for over a hundred years, and there is, as would be expected, a coalescing of consensus. This is especially true for many (not all) of the basic tenants Darwin put forward. Mountains of evidence compel those who choose to look at it with an unbiased eye.

Religion is exactly what you have described, without the change part.



Of course a baby's eye develops as it grows from egg to full term, but does that prove the theory of evolution? No! Do creatures with varying degrees of eye function prove evolution? No!
Slow down. This tidbit counters a specific creationist "arguement" that is incorrectly touted to disprove evolution. The example they present is one small part of evolutions supporting evidence. Evidence that is holistically cohesive, verifiable and thus worth mentioning.

Does a blind cave fish prove there is no God? No!

Who is trying to disprove god? The video did not ever state such a claim. People have better things to do with their time.

It is true that God does become collateral damage if you intelligently interpret the observations presented in the video. Which you have seem to have done of your own accord.

(Disclaimer: if this is a joke post, I did suspect as much)

>> ^Kraz:
Not to sound cheeky, but can you kindly point out where the bible states that the Earth revolves around the Sun? I've heard this before and it piques my interest because I know of no such passage.

It doesn't say anything about it, which is why the first popes took the most recent and celebrated work on geography and cosmology at the time, that of Ptolemy, as the base of their temporal doctrine. Later some Aristotle was thrown in retroactively by Thomas Aquinas, on the epistemological level. To make an analogy, this means that if the Christ would have been born in the 17th century, the first popes would have used Newton's Laws of motion and gravitation. They would have then condemned Einstein as a Heretic for his special and general Relativity.

>> ^Dadeeo:
This is what happens when "scientists" accept theory AS fact.

Theories explain known facts and predict (as yet) unknown facts. Theories are not facts, but their predictions can be taken as such until proven otherwise by experiments.

Too bad the theory's are constantly changing, yet every new one gets embraced as the truth without ever acknowledging the error of accepting the now former "defunct" theory.

Accepted scientific theories are never "defunct": they are expanded, generalized, etc. For example, euclidean geometry still has good predictive value under certain circumstances, as when the surface you examine is sufficiently flat. So are Newton's Laws of motion a good appromixation when speeds are not near the speed of light. Pythagoras' theorem still holds and his divisions of the octave still divide the octave.

How could you ever trust anyone that refuses to admit their errors?

Scientists admit their errors all the time. Einstein admitted that the cosmological constant was the biggest mistake of his life. When they're stubborn, death makes their outdated views irrelevant, as with Einstein vs. Quantum mechanics. In religions, being dead makes you a Saint, and your opinions that of God himself (or close enough).

The Bible speaks of them is "ever learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth".

Wow, postmodernism at its 1st century's best! It's true that ultimate, absolute knowledge by observation is now thought to be impossible, but careful observation over many centuries has shown that those who don't learn can't know and are doomed to repeat their mistakes.

Of course a baby's eye develops as it grows from egg to full term, but does that prove the theory of evolution? No! Do creatures with varying degrees of eye function prove evolution? No! Does a blind cave fish prove there is no God? No!

Maybe they don't prove anything, but they don't need to, since empirical science doesn't need and can't have "proofs" in the same sense as logic and mathematics. There are facts and theories that explain the particular facts. The theory that explains all of the particular facts and that is consistent with the greatest number of other accepted theories in other fields of knowledge, is said to be the most adequate. It is not impossible that new facts should reveal a hitherto less adequate theory to now be the most adequate &mdash it happens &mdash and sometimes two or more theories will seem equally adequate. But not all theories can fit the facts and be globally consistent. Of course, if you reject all of science or all of empirical science, then you may as well go live with the Amish, 'cause it's not God that gave anyone the knowledge required to build the computers we both used to transmit these electronic messages.

>> ^Dadeeo:
This is what happens when "scientists" accept theory AS fact. Too bad the theory's are constantly changing, yet every new one gets embraced as the truth without ever acknowledging the error of accepting the now former "defunct" theory.
How could you ever trust anyone that refuses to admit their errors?
The Bible speaks of them is "ever learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth".
Of course a baby's eye develops as it grows from egg to full term, but does that prove the theory of evolution? No! Do creatures with varying degrees of eye function prove evolution? No! Does a blind cave fish prove there is no God? No!

I can only hope that this is a poor attempt at irony, because I am fed up with undereducated morons saying that evolution is only a theory. If theory's are constantly changing maybe you could name a few? How about Copernican theory (Earth goes round sun etc.) which has been accepted for century's, even the church does not bother to contest anymore it despite contradicting the Bible.

Does this video prove evolution? No, but no one is claiming so. It is one of thousands of pieces of evidence supporting evolution via natural selection. The point of the video is that it disproves the IDist claims that the eye is irreducibly complex.

This is what happens when "scientists" accept theory AS fact. Too bad the theory's are constantly changing, yet every new one gets embraced as the truth without ever acknowledging the error of accepting the now former "defunct" theory.
How could you ever trust anyone that refuses to admit their errors?
The Bible speaks of them is "ever learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth".

Of course a baby's eye develops as it grows from egg to full term, but does that prove the theory of evolution? No! Do creatures with varying degrees of eye function prove evolution? No! Does a blind cave fish prove there is no God? No!

Congrats, schmawy! Welcome to the 100 club. You can now enter our washroom and piss with the Executives. You're certainly an asset to this place, and I enjoy your witty banter. Oh, and your constant changing icons are really cool, too, though just between you and me, I think uhohzombies is biting your style with the avatar motif thing. But, whatever. *assgravy

>> ^quantumushroom:
> Gerrymandering ... Trying to pin it on just one party is ...

... in this case, completely warranted. they are protesting specific acts.
by specific Republicans, as outlined in the description.
and hinted at further in my notes above. i'd be happy to spell it out for you.

why not sift a clip of specific Democrats, doing it? if true, and relevant, i'll ^vote.
but you blow this off, just because the ones doing it are 'on your team'?

> ...it was Republicans who ended slavery.

yeah, so we've heard.
whenever the words 'black' and 'Republican' are used in the same sentence.

the kneejerk 'party of Lincoln' response. useless high school crap.
skipping 100 years of constant change, in all American political parties, since then.

you can't find a more recent example, of your party's equal rights leadership?
fuck, i'm a Libertarian, and i can list Republicans in Congress that qualify!

> So who exactly is keeping Blacks down?
> Probably the folks telling Blacks they are still slaves (rhymes with temocrat).

ooh! how many guesses do i get? is it the same party that has a black guy running?

> An "Historically Black" university complaining of racism? Go ahead and let that one sink in.

by all means, please do. let that one sink in.

were most "historically black" universities founded, due to their desire, to remain segregated?
were blacks being invited to attend "historically white" universities?
and then refusing to attend??


great odin's beard, shroom. honestly.

why do you think i've invited smart conservatives, that i've met, to this site?
you represent them so poorly. and you refuse to learn, from anyone else.

j, if you insist on writing out absurdist scenarios with constantly changing parameters, then why not just write whatever ending you like.

Here is one you might like:

FBI Superagents: The Next Generation (Chicago)
Episode 17 - "The papercut is mightier than the pen"

Interior, Interrogation room. A bound prisoner sits in a chair with a light illuminating his face. Stout African American FBI chief Bernard B. Bythebooke sits, clearly frustrated, just a few feet away from the prisoner.

"The kid will die along with half of Chicago, and there is nothing you can do about it, FBI director Bythebooke" says the terrorist in a deep scary voice.

SLAM goes the door as devilishly handsome, rogue agent Dash Zeusman enters the room and says, "Not if I can help it terrorist scum"

Dash reaches for the pen in his notepad and thrusts it towards the terrorists head, only to be knocked away by Bythebooke, who says "As a working FBI agent, you are not permitted to use torture". Without missing a beat, Zeusman winks and says, "Then I resign" and jabs his pen into the terrorists ear canal.

The terrorist winces as blood shoots out his ear and says, "I have been trained for this very moment. I can withstand any torture you can dish out"

"O RLY?" says Zuesman, contorting his face to look like an owl.

Zuesman reaches for his note pad and brandishes it at the terrorist who laughs and says, "What are you going to do? Write me a nasty letter?"

Zeusman then begins to furiously cover the terrorists face with papercuts and says, "Bring me the salt!"

"Nooooo.... anything but that, I'll talk, I"LL TALK!", says the terrorist.

Jump cut to an abandoned saw mill. A young boy sits strapped to a huge nuclear bomb, festooned with brightly colored wires and a huge countdown clock. 20 terrorist ninjas with swords and machine guns surround the boy.

As the clock reaches 01.00.0000000....Zeusman busts through a wall and dispatches all of the ninjas with rusty saw blades and other improvised weapons. He diffuses the bomb at 00.00.00000000001.

The boys eyes light up and he says, "Agent Zeusman, you're the bomb"

They both break into laughter. Freeze frame. Roll credits.

THE END.

I guess the experts were wrong and you were right after all, jeremy. Either that or you watch too many movies.

In the book, Goldberg attempts to convince readers that six decades of conventional wisdom that have placed Italy's Benito Mussolini, Germany's Adolf Hitler and fascism on the right side of the ideological spectrum are wrong, and that fascism is really a phenomenon of the left. Goldberg also attributes fascist rhetoric and tactics to Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and describes the New Deal's descendants, modern American liberals, as carriers of this liberal-fascist DNA. In a sense, "We're All Fascists Now," as Goldberg puts it in one of his chapter titles.

The vapid stupidity of this argument is profound, Jonah cites what Mussolini said as fact, as if the usurpation of power in Germany and Italy were political campaigns run in democracies not simply two men saying and doing whatever would garner them power. The whole argument reads like an excuse to call liberals Nazis.

John Cole put it very well in saying that Goldberg basically twists words to make them mean whatever he wants them to mean.

The Salon.com interview from which I pulled the gist of the book is a hilarious read, and filled with miles of bullshit and quotable lines.

"I would argue that Nixon was not a particularly conservative guy. Measured by today's standards and today's issues, Nixon would be in the liberal wing of the Democratic Party."

[On Mussolini but could be self referential] "And he said a lot of stuff. He was sort of a buffoon in that sense; he was constantly changing his definitions of fascism and talking out of one side of the mouth, then out of the other side of his mouth, largely because of the sort of pragmatic idea he had about politics. But in terms of the policies he implemented and where he came to, once again, at the end of his life, he always clung to the policies that were associated with the left side of the political spectrum."

"But there's another dystopian understanding of the future, which we get from [Aldous] Huxley's "Brave New World." That was a fundamentally American vision ... [T]he vision of the Huxleyian "Brave New World" future is one where everyone's happy. No one's being oppressed, people are walking around chewing hormonal gum, they're having everything done for them, they're being nannied almost into nonexistence. That's the fascism in Hillary Clinton's vision. It's not the Orwellian stamping on a human face thing, it's hugs and kisses and taking care of boo-boos. It is the nanny state. That is a much more benign dystopia than "1984," but for me at least, it's still a dystopia. An unwanted hug is still as tyrannical or as oppressive -- not as oppressive, but an unwanted hug is still oppressive if you can't escape from it ... [O]ne of the biggest distinctions between what I'm calling liberal fascism ... and classical fascism, is that classical fascism was masculine and violently oppressive and today's liberalism is feminine and not oppressive but smothering with kindness."

The full interview is here at Salon.com.