what are you talking about? did we watch the same video? Have you read my previous comments? I feel like there a ton of anti-establishment Americans in here that don't even read what I wrote and get all up-in-arms just because of the subject matter.

I never said the cops were right to arrest, or that she should cooperate with an illegal search or detainment. In fact I said the opposite. But, I am saying her ridiculous, uncalled-for behavior upfront exposed her to a much greater chance of being harassed by inexperienced/incompetent cops.

I have no sympathy for people who instigate to seek out conflict just as in my previous example which does apply.

you say "She clearly told them what she was doing", but no, she does the completely unnatural and suspicious silent treatment from the get-go, when pulled over for a routine-appearing traffic stop.

You start your response with "you are wrong". That is a pretty close-minded statement. Especially when you make so many incorrect assumptions and missed so much of what I've already said? I'm not going to assume you are wrong about this encounter because we don't have all the facts about what caused the stop, but I can say you (and a few others here) are getting what I'm saying wrong.

It's hard for me to know why Putin is doing what he's doing. When he moved on Crimea, was he doing it because of the advance of European influence closer to Russia's borders? He's short on good allies unlike 'the west', so can he let people chip away at his comfort zone? Or is he a crazed imperialist?

I don't know. Why don't I know?

Because my government have shown themselves over the years to be a bunch of twats who will literally tell bare faced lies, whilst smiling, and when confronted with the horrors of what they've done they throw their heads back and laugh like a fucking sea lion swallowing a fish whole. And that's what they've done to their OWN PEOPLE. To other countries countries we declare war and send in the multinationals to rape their resources. I consider the invasion of Iraq equally dodgy as the invasion of Crimea. So my moral compass for what's ok and not ok no longer has a baseline.

On the other side, a bunch of people who used to know how the world worked back in 1970 probably thought propaganda was the best way to whip up some nationalistic pride and resentment toward the reds, but in 2017 the majority of young people don't trust a single word they say. So these 70 year old media mogul billionaires can't even tell a believable truth anymore - even if Putin's tanks were half way down my street i'd have to clap eyes on them before i could be sure.

Plus Russia's leadership is Putin himself, he's the spearhead, and he's very cunning. Our leadership is spread across a set of democratically elected people, half of which are both incompetent and self interested, while half of those remaining are merely one or the other. It's easier for one person to look competent and assured. Someone like Merkel has to share the associated incompetency of whatever the German equivalent of her 'cabinet' is.

The biker was an idiot and the car driver was either incompetent or an asshole (likely both).

It might have been that the truck driver was simply trying to get around the accident. Stopping is not always the safest course.

Either way, the truck driver contributed nothing to the cause of this accident. Saying that he even partially deserved to die is going a bit far IMO.

Oh, it's on! If you don't indent your code, you are like Hitler multiplied by Trump.

Anyway, to clear up any remaining confusion:

1. In theory, use whatever the code base is already using. Having a tabs vs spaces fight is a pointless waste of time. In practice, anyone who uses tabs should be fired immediately.

2. No-one actually types out 4 spaces. You press the tab key and it inserts spaces for you. Either that or you are so incompetent at using your tools that you should be fired immediately.

There you go. The complete and definitive guide to tabs (you're fired) vs spaces (correct).

Not that I'm biased.

You don't have to defend Trump to call yourself a conservative or a Republican. You can admit that Trump is an incompetent boob and a liar and still wear your stars and stripes tie.

No actually... he wasn't at the time. That was months ago and before a LOT of contact between people in his sphere came to light.

Its also worth pointing out that Comey wouldn't comment on it openly now... which is strange since he had not problem saying he wasn't under investigation back in February. What changed i wonder?...

@bobknight33

You have be feeling pretty good about your boy... BEST case scenario, his incompetence is completely debilitating. And that actually counts for a win with this clown.... SAD!

@harlequinn

Why should you re-read the bible? Because, like most Christians, you clearly demonstrated that you don't know what it actually says (which is the point of the video), and yet here you are telling @newtboy that he doesn't know anything about it except for hearsay. So... hypocrisy much?

But then you double-down and are now trying to argue with me that the Christian god is not actually considered omnipotent--despite me pointing out three places in the bible where it explicitly states "he" is. Although I'm not at all surprised that a religious person is arguing against facts, I actually agree with the sentiment. If a Christian god truly existed, one look at the state of the world would tell you that "incompetent" is a better descriptive adjective than "omnipotent."

Look man, I get it. You're invested in your religion. I was once too, and just like you argued with atheists about these kinds of arcane points (i.e. is the Christian god omnipotent?) before slowly realizing it is all bullshit and that humanity at this stage of development would be much better off without religion (and by religion I mean any philosophical way of life that uses "faith" as it's primary source for finding truth instead of rational thinking). I don't deny it served a purpose once as a unifying social force, but its day is done. One day you'll either come to the same conclusion or you'll ignore the mountains of problems it causes in the world because you feel it brings you some measure of peace or clarity or whatever. I hope it's the former for you.

Unfortunately, knowing a lot of religious people, I expect it will be the latter. In which case, I can only hope your religion brings you only happiness and you keep it from damaging others' lives as much as possible.

I guess for the same reason this was sifted, her stunning incompetence is a spectacle to behold.

You could say she doesn't belong on a news show, but there's always the chance she will say something incriminating or illegal. She could fail so hard that it's newsworthy.

I voted 3rd party (Stein, but Johnson would still have been a better option than Trump or Clinton in my opinion). I'm comfortable and happy with my decision.

Hillary would have gotten some good-on-the-surface stuff done, compared to Trump's bad-on-the-surface stuff. But I simply don't/didn't trust her to not do dangerous and terrible stuff on the sly. She's a corrupt weasel. Trump is an incompetent blowhard that has been and will continue to be under a massive amount of scrutiny. I think the long-term damage he can do will be limited.


...Except for the Supreme Court. If there's one "lesser of two evils" argument that gives me pause in favor of Hillary, that's it. But even including that, I'm still comfortable with the way I cast my vote.

Basically, things have to get worse before they get better. Revolution, upheaval, something's gotta give. Trump has the "advantage" of making that more obvious, more quickly than Hillary would have. So, uh ... yay Trump?

It still is, and always will be, nowhere near clear who was the "lesser evil". The one thing I held to was that Trump was so incompetent that he really couldn't do a tremendous amount of damage in the long run. And he's certainly stirring up a huge resistance to everything he's tried. Admittedly, I didn't expect him to move so fast on so many fronts, but it's still not clear how much of his impact will remain in 5-6 years.

Clinton, on the other hand, would have faced resistance primarily from the GOP. And when it came dollars to donuts, money is what both she and the GOP worship...they could have passed a lot of legislation behind the public scenes. And very little of that legislation would have benefited anyone outside the 1%.

I'll stand by my refusal to vote for a corporate candidate.

This is insane! He obviously had a concussion the way he was stumbling around and repeating himself.

So much incompetence - starting with the person that hired the guy who thought it was OK to assault a passenger.

How did the all of the other staff just standby and watch this happen?

My mind is blown.

I hope this poor gentlemen is compensated very well.

Wow. Aren't you embarrassed that someone as incompetent as Spicer is representing your side? He's so clearly out of his depth, and he has engendered a catastrophically adversarial relationship with the media. Politics aside, Spicer is just someone who doesn't seem to be very good at his job, and he is a major contributor to what makes the Trump administration look so haphazard and bullish. He's a liability to your team.

TL;DR - he is bad and you should feel bad.

I think Sam Harris is awesome, so there was a lot of interesting stuff in there even though it came from before the election.

I agree with everything he said about who Trump is; his motivations (or lack thereof), narcissism, potential psychological issues, etc. Yet I disagree with his threat analysis. I still think that Trump's "balloon flying around randomly" presidency seems like it could easily be better than a Clinton presidency.

Trump will cause some incidental damage with his chaotic randomness. But basically, it will be 4 years (please) of loud noises and flashing lights that mostly goes nowhere. Hillary, with all the baggage and rumors etc. that may not true, is still in general the kind of person that people like Hitchens said she was. She's savvy, subtle, and frankly dangerous. And she's extremely well connected. When Trump randomly bungles his way into some big screw-up, we're going to hear about it. If Hillary weaseled into some dirty back-door stuff that could cause real long-term problems, there's a good chance we'd never find out about it.

Then he mentioned the "Trump vs random US citizen" argument. Jesus, I'd have taken random US citizen in a heartbeat over Trump or Clinton. Hell, I think that would be a fantastic way to call a mulligan and replace every last member of our corrupt, incompetent, and entrenched congress...

Where to start? You're provably wrong on every single point you made.

It's actually been made clear he mistook a political anti-immigrant interviewee and clips from their movie (already debunked, btw) he watched on Fox for a news report on crime in Sweden.

2016 Swedish crime surveys showed a stable crime rate over the last decade, no marked rise. This was just one of the falsehoods in the movie/interview, and a good example of why getting his "information" from Breitbart and Fox and discarding the intelligence community as political opponents is treason level incompetence.

The vast majority of voters don't, and didn't support him. He lost the election, bigly, he only won the electoral college.

There are so many reasons he's a disaster to talk about that we need every mouth available on the job. ;-)

This hypothesis seems more and more correct daily. It should be front and center in any argument against him, because it's a requirement for leadership and scars his hyper inflated ego. If he can't or won't read, we are at the mercy of Bannon and his other advisors, all of whom have been proven to be bold faced liars, and completely at the mercy of other leaders who can get him to sign anything by just lying about what he's signing.

I need to see him take a long form reading and comprehension test on unedited non-stop video, and pass it at a minimum high school level. Until then, I'll continue to think he's an illiterate, incompetent, treasonous, illegitimate president who is involved in a bloodless coup under the directions of Russia.

*promote