Fair points. I still think it looks better than this atrocity, and it was definitely better than the complete and utter disaster that was Into Darkness....

- Kahn? No, that's not Kahn! Haha, it was Kahn all along!!
- Starships? Why bother? We can transport between systems now!
- Death? Oh yeah, Bones cured that.
- Oh yeah, and we're going to destroy the Enterprise after only 2 movies.

uggh, I feel stupider just thinking about it.

I'd disagree with, " Of course, cocaine, amphetamines, benzodiazepines, alcohol and opiates also "cure" depression. So it's pretty complicated in practice."

Tryptamines have been known to combat depression when used correctly for a long time. They are non-addictive, you can't overdose and the positive effects are long lasting - due to experiencing what some call experiencing the "divine"- where the positive changes take place.

The false judgements of society are to blame for the misinformed perception of these compounds - when used responsibly.

I believe there could be something to this. I've heard the same thing about other hallucinogens in previous studies (though that was years ago, and nothing came of it). It's interesting stuff, I'd guess sort of like a chemical electroshock therapy. From the detailed explanation I got from a very, very close friend who used hallucinogens in his younger years, there definitely did seem to be an effect sort of like throwing the reset switch in the brain that lasted for a good while after the trip itself was over.

Of course, cocaine, amphetamines, benzodiazepines, alcohol and opiates also "cure" depression. So it's pretty complicated in practice.

The GOP has had problems since at least 2008, and they keep building up and up on the same issues.

The problem is the party is sort of stuck, and the split that it desperately needs would hurt it. Fox and the right wing talk radio aren't really on the classic GOP (of the Reagan and prior eras) side. Fox and talk radio and the social media that surround their viewers/listeners has shifted very far to the right. So much so that Reagan would in no way win the nomination today. Today's far right Republican party sees governing, and negotiating with the other side of the isle as a weakness. They don't want a representative democracy, they want a theocratic dictatorship while calling it democracy.

A party split is needed though. They need to split the two elements of the party from one another. Let the Tea Party form on it's own and let Fox and talk radio follow it. They'll find that the mass media is still far more central and closer to them than what they've been led to believe via Fox and talk radio, who accuses it of being far liberal. The party would be hurt for a couple election cycles, but as people start to wise up, they'd come back to the GOP from the Tea Party and the Tea Party would eventually become a footnote. As it stands, leaving the Tea Party elements in it will destroy the party in full.

The GOP keeps trying too hard to appeal to the far right element of it self and abandoning the central core. They are appealing to the hate mongers and bigots rather than the compassionate conservatism that Reagan at least pretended to have (though didn't).

I still think that McCain made two major errors when he ran. First was stepping too far to the right of where his voting record was while running. Had he stuck to what his record showed, he would have stood a semi-decent chance of winning... had he not made a second major fatal error and that was putting a batshit crazy, way far to the right, person as his VP candidate. Even if she wasn't crazy, or had a brain, she was far too the right for most Americans. Now, even if he had stayed true to himself, and used a centrist VP candidate he may have lost as Obama tapped into something... and I don't think anybody saw that coming.

Then the GOP embraced the hatred of Obama too much. Obama could cure cancer and they'd decry it as a bad thing, he can do nothing right so far as they are concerned. They should have toned that down. They also messed up the messaging on Obamacare. They should have embraced it, noting that they invented it, and tried to pass the same thing into federal law 3 times prior, twice under Bush Sr and once under Clinton and each time it was the Democrats who wouldn't take it. Showing how the Democrats embraced your idea would have shown, "look, we were right the whole time. We could have had this ages ago but the Democrats said 'No' and now they realized we were right." Rather than take the high rode though, they rode the crazy train of hate, and pushed more and more to become obstructionist.

Now side note, obstructionism works. Many Republican and non-affiliated voters, blame Obama for the lack of progress, though none of his ideas really got to be tried since they were bound and determined to obstruct everything and have done everything they can to ruin the Nation so they can blame him for the state of affairs, knowing full well most Americans don't know Congress controls the purse and pretty much all things related to it.

Anyhow, then Romney too shifted far to the right of what his record as Governor showed, and again went with somebody who's too far to the right (who oddly enough is now seen as too establishment by the Tea Party element) as a VP candidate... though Obama's popularity, and the popularity of Obamacare would have made it hard to overcome... though again, if the GOP had handled Obamacare properly, as their invention, then Romney would have ridden that strongly as his state used the previous Republican led efforts to create the same program, to do so on the state level. He could have ridden the fact his state had it before anyone else... again they let hatred of Obama override the logical move.

The party in the end is too afraid to do what it needs to do. It's too afraid of the short term losses and doesn't realize that the far goal is obtainable.

Um... a panacea does actually cure a condition (actually, all conditions). Are you thinking of placebo? Opiate? Paxil? Panodil? Pandaxodil?

My 2 cents....

1) Don't EVER get your science just from the internet. ALWAYS verify anything you think you've learned with published peer reviewed science publications/articles.
Veganism does NOT cure or inoculate against cancer (which I'm assuming is what you mean by the #1 killer in the western world). If it did, that would be headline news and easy to prove, since vegans would all be cancer free, they're not. That's some serious BS right there. It may be HELPFUL against heart disease, I'll grant you that much. If that's what you meant, ignore the above.
If the point is eating healthier, excluding processed foods is exponentially better than excluding meats, and should be the first step people take when changing their diet, long before excluding meats all together.

2)So now Vegans are just like anti-choice people who think their choice should be the only choice for everyone!? I hate to tell you, but that position will make your movement lose, no question. Your position leads to only one logical conclusion, attempting to force people to stop eating meat. You don't change minds by force. I suggest you try a seriously different tact, or I fear you're methods may destroy your movement.

3)There is NO "better" alternative to meat. There may be alternatives, but they are not "better" nutritionally. The energy humans gain from eating meat is why we have the brain that allows you to take those positions, plants simply don't offer than dense nutritional value. True enough, evolution is barely still in effect for humans, but that's no reason to stop feeding your body/brain.

Personally, I can see no rational reason to stop eating meat except for moral or health reasons, and if you eat meat raised properly and morally, those moral reasons no longer exist. As we've discussed before, meat from small, local farms rather than large factory farms is often raised with love and care, so there's no abuse, only a scheduled end to life. I have no moral objection to that (and have a hard time seeing how others might have a reasonable objection to it) so I'll continue to eat meat, but I do make an effort to eat only morally raised meats. When the odd occasion happens when I can't choose the meats I prefer, I do feel somewhat guilty, but not enough to go pure vegetarian, certainly not vegan. (which reminds me, all dairy is not produced immorally either. Some smaller farms still exist that treat their cattle with care, but they are sadly disappearing as people usually only buy factory farmed dairy as well, it's far cheaper).
For those who eat so much meat that it's a health issue (yes, I do agree that it causes many health issues if you eat too much), I'm right there with you saying they should eat way less, or none, until they get their health under control.

Trump lives matter.
Samantha Bee should go to a Trump event and get trumped by the fans.






Let’s dip into the rhetoric of a garden-variety Black Lives Matter march that I observed last November on Fifth Avenue in New York City. It featured “F**k the Police,” “Murderer Cops,” and “Racism Is the Disease, Revolution Is the Cure” T-shirts, “Stop Police Terror” signs, and “Hey Hey, Ho Ho, Racist Cops Have Got to Go” chants.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/432800/donald-trump-rhetoric-black-lives-matter-just-bad

it's probably worth noting that 'broken back' isn't a medical diagnosis. There are a whole range of injuries that could potentially fall into that category with damage to the spinal coord being the most serious. A fractured vertebra/pedicle or a popped disc can have complications including sciatica and variable paralysis of a nerve root which may fully resolve with time and or surgery.

In this case, you can see in the preview she is sitting on the side of the pool with her spine taking the whole weight of her torso/head - so i'm not sure what the 'reduces forces on her bones' means.
While this type of exercise offers fantastic rehabilitation I wouldn't want people to think that you could dump Christopher reeves in there and cure his ailments!

your stance about veganism is very similar to the climate deniers in that you choose to buy into myths and lies as opposed to looking into the facts youself. the documentary i posted considers the issues of local, and so called "small" farms also. they are no more humane or less cruel than so called "factory farming" and are every but as inefficient and environmentally devastating. "factory farming" is a mere symptom and the root cause is the commodification of sentient non-human animals, just as in the past humans used to commodify other human beings of certain races. for example here is an article on the myth of "humane" animal farming: http://freefromharm.org/animal-products-and-ethics/factory-farming-alternative-farming/

the fact that climate change is driven in large part but the raising of non-human animals for food is without question a well documented fact. the human population is without a doubt a major factor but above this issue is the fact that it requires MANY times the resources to produce on calorie of flesh, dairy or eggs than it does to produce one calorie of plant based food. are you aware that in the USA, around 80% of crops grown are fed to the 10 billion farmed animals who are murdered every year for food? it has been estimated that 800 million humans could be fed on the crops which are grown for farmed animals alone. these issues are also gone into detail in the documentary.

as far as "tugging on your heart strings" goes, how is having compassion and empathy for anyone who suffers a bad thing? no one would be questioning it if the victims were human children but since they are "only" cows, pigs chickens and fishes (all of whom feel pain just like you or i do, perhaps even more so), suddenly violence against them is considered a matter of personal choice. the bottom line is that if you would not wish to expeience something yourself, it is never moral or ethical to force others to experience it, especially not in the name of a momentary taste sensation.

finally, here is a quote which i think best summarizes the situation:
“Aren’t humans amazing? They kill wildlife – birds, deer, all kinds of cats, coyotes, beavers, groundhogs, mice and foxes by the million in order to protect their domestic animals and their feed. Then they kill domestic animals by the billion and eat them. This in turn kills people by the million, because eating all those animals leads to degenerative – and fatal – health conditions like heart disease, stroke, kidney disease, and cancer. So then humans spend billions of dollars torturing and killing millions more animals to look for cures for these diseases. Elsewhere, millions of other human beings are being killed by hunger and malnutrition because food they could eat is being used to fatten domestic animals. Meanwhile, few people recognize the absurdity of humans, who kill so easily and violently, and once a year send out cards praying for “Peace on Earth.”~ David Coates

ugh...watching that was painful.
reminds me of my time running a metaphysical shop with my girlfriend at the time.

she had got it in her head that she wanted to take the shop in a new direction which was in the form of similar "miracle" cures such as this.

the arguments we had were epic!

i just didnt see a need nor a reason.we already had massage therapy,aroma therapy and reiki.we made our own lotions and soaps and had a massive line of candles.why would she want to delve into supplements? that were unproven and possibly dangerous?

well,i lost that argument and after a few months i understood her reasoning=money.
good lord our customers would spend a fortune on these supplements,which made all kinds of claims (all with zippo research to back those claims up),and all unregulated.

and our customers SWORE that these bullshit remedies worked and that they felt better,more energetic and clear-minded.placebo effect on steroids.

of course my girlfriend would never actually admit that profit was her motive.that would go against her own professed morality,but that is what it was:greed.

that was the beginning of the end for our relationship.i was sincerely attempting to help people and her behavior was a disillusionment that my moral compass just could not assimilate.

i am a man of faith,and every aspect of my life is directed by that faith,from politics to personal interactions,and i had lost faith in her.

i find it reprehensible and disgusting to profit off of people when they are the most fragile and vulnerable,and i refuse to engage in that form of vile practice.

*promote the grifting!

@ChaosEngine

So yeah, there's a lot of common ground. Of course there is: values can overlap ideologies; something that, let's say, 'the kind of feminism I dislike' refuses to allow. Everything that says women should be treated reasonably is feminism, which gives us the credibility to declare that anyone who opposes any aspect of feminist doctrine hates women.

I think the concept you're talking about is a part of the makeup of any rational person's mind, and indeed advocacy on its behalf is still necessary. I don't think the particular movement that grew around that advocacy in the latter half of the 20th century is still useful, and I say that it was flawed from the first, even as those flaws were mitigated in the short term by what it accomplished.

It's important to maintain that distinction, and I would strongly prefer that this basic concept wasn't referred to as 'feminism'. Dictionaries describe usage rather than determining reality, and in this case as in so many others I think the majority have got it horribly wrong.

edit: Something of an academic and unnecessary addendum, but I've heard Hitchens say that a few times and I always winced when he did. It's a little trite. The kind of cure he's talking about, birth control, could just as easily be effected by forcibly sterilising women after their first or second child. What he might have said, somewhat less snappily, was, "The empowerment of women, an excellent goal in itself, also handily has the effect of countering explosive population growth and adding more skilled workers to the economy."

That said, I will concede that feminism is both a concept and a movement in support of that concept.

And we still desperately need both, and not just for women.
Even Hitchens said:

"We already know the cure to poverty...it's quite simply, the empowerment of women."

@newtboy

so i finally got my point across?
thank god!
it only took me a novella.
jesus christ,you would think me being a poet would equate to a more economical verbiage.

man do i fail.

so yeah,we are arguing two separate points.
you are arguing this specific turdnugget and i am arguing the broader implications of abuse in the future.

i still stand by my stance that i do not think this turdnugget should have lost his job.i think there could have been a much better way to have handled this situation,but as you stated (and i agree) the company was within their rights to fire him.

if i was his boss,i would have used this situation to educate,because lets be honest..this man is pretty fucking ignorant.

he even admits to not knowing any black people and had only been exposed to 9,in his entire life,and then he proceeds to vomit the most repugnant,racial shit.

ignorance is curable.
stupid is not.

but it is not the companies job to cure this neanderthal of his ignorance,but i suspect losing his job will only exacerbate an already instilled racism.

so lost opportunity and ultimately:fail.

i also think we are becoming far to comfortable and complicit in our ever-increasingly surveilled,data mined and personal data collected state.

which i am just repeating my main point,but it does concern me.

Kind of glossed over some things. Yes, in many cases vitamin supplements are only needed if you have a poor diet or other condition interfering with your required levels. Yes, Vitamin C is not going to cure a cold.

But, there are still studies being done that show it 'might' have a long term effect on cancer if you get your minimum daily requirement. There are also studies being done on other vitamin usage for long term disease factors.

So, while you really don't want or need to overdose yourself with vitamin supplements, it doesn't hurt to make sure you are getting the proper amount daily either by eating healthy or taking a supplement to fill in what you do need.

Then again, it is the tagline that he ruins stuff, so I can see why he would leave it a bit vague for comedy.