LeVar was sat on Patty Stew's couch. You must be looking at/hearing Michael Dorn (Worf).

I was in a bit of a stew when I found out they cancelled this show

I'm gonna *beg for another look at this one. Kenyan kids! Sweding the '86 World Series! How did this possibly happen? Here's how:

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-big-league-stew/group-kenyan-orphans-scored-youtube-hit-recreating-game-191052583--mlb.html

They'll stop eulogizing about it when the people who hate them stop eulogizing against them and trying to convince society that they need to be treated as something less than human. Or more likely, when society as a whole recognizes their homophobic rants as the soulless and intellectually stunted ideas that they are and ignores them, without an audience they will lose any power they once had and can privately stew in their own hate as much as they like.

The rest is pretty good, but my favorite part was "Stewed Beef".

Also, way to game the viewers by selling your 20 seconds of NDT.

I am making ELK stew at the moment, though you might like this Crab Leg video. Summer will soon be here !@ I can make a fire outside and cook things on a flame. Huzzuh @

@Spacedog79

Indeed, this takes a different approach than a LFTR, I wasn't meaning to suggest this would solve a parallel set of problems. And I don't know if the complexity of it should be a deal breaker right away, look at combustion engines, Diesel is by far simpler than Gasoline engines, however both have their uses; complexity alone can't be the deciding factor.

Also, from my understanding...and let me point out again that I am no expert, but it seemed that while they are indeed firing protons, they are firing them at a heavy metal, and through the spallation effect, producing a beam of neutrons (or that is the plan, they currently are just beaming electrons I believe). Either way, it is a complex way to go about fission; but very much like Gas Vs Diesel with the lack of a perfectly sustained reactor (Uranium or Thorium) of perfect ability, research in this quasi-dieselesk solution might not be a terrible waste of time and money.

There is also a "problem" of using the fissile we have today, as far as I understand it. As they are mixed with many other undesirable fissile and non-fissile fission products in a chemical stew. So to use that, you would need a secure, safe, and practical way to go about reconditioning and reconstituting it in a form you could use. Once again, not a deal breaker for that to happen either, but you have to keep your mind and options open for good technologies that offer a different game plan. Ultimately, I think a critical reactor is the way you want to go if you can get the engineering and physics behind you, if not, or in certain situations, perhaps sub-critical will offer some unique solutions.

Thanks for the well wishes, apparently, one of the better nuclear schools is in my state...score! And one of the others is near my family...double score!

Congratulations!
Today is your day.
You're off to Great Places!
You're off and away!

You have brains in your head.
You have feet in your shoes
You can steer yourself
any direction you choose.
You're on your own. And you know what you know.
And YOU are the guy who'll decide where to go.

You'll look up and down streets. Look 'em over with care.
About some you will say, "I don't choose to go there."
With your head full of brains and your shoes full of feet,
you're too smart to go down any not-so-good street.

And you may not find any
you'll want to go down.
In that case, of course,
you'll head straight out of town.

It's opener there
in the wide open air.

Out there things can happen
and frequently do
to people as brainy
and footsy as you.

And when things start to happen,
don't worry. Don't stew.
Just go right along.
You'll start happening too.

OH!
THE PLACES YOU'LL GO!

You'll be on your way up!
You'll be seeing great sights!
You'll join the high fliers
who soar to high heights.

You won't lag behind, because you'll have the speed.
You'll pass the whole gang and you'll soon take the lead.
Wherever you fly, you'll be the best of the best.
Wherever you go, you will top all the rest.

Except when you don't
Because, sometimes, you won't.

I'm sorry to say so
but, sadly, it's true
and Hang-ups
can happen to you.

You can get all hung up
in a prickle-ly perch.
And your gang will fly on.
You'll be left in a Lurch.

You'll come down from the Lurch
with an unpleasant bump.
And the chances are, then,
that you'll be in a Slump.

And when you're in a Slump,
you're not in for much fun.
Un-slumping yourself
is not easily done.

You will come to a place where the streets are not marked.
Some windows are lighted. But mostly they're darked.
A place you could sprain both your elbow and chin!
Do you dare to stay out? Do you dare to go in?
How much can you lose? How much can you win?

And IF you go in, should you turn left or right...
or right-and-three-quarters? Or, maybe, not quite?
Or go around back and sneak in from behind?
Simple it's not, I'm afraid you will find,
for a mind-maker-upper to make up his mind.

You can get so confused
that you'll start in to race
down long wiggled roads at a break-necking pace
and grind on for miles across weirdish wild space,
headed, I fear, toward a most useless place.
The Waiting Place...

...for people just waiting.
Waiting for a train to go
or a bus to come, or a plane to go
or the mail to come, or the rain to go
or the phone to ring, or the snow to snow
or waiting around for a Yes or a No
or waiting for their hair to grow.
Everyone is just waiting.

Waiting for the fish to bite
or waiting for wind to fly a kite
or waiting around for Friday night
or waiting, perhaps, for their Uncle Jake
or a pot to boil, or a Better Break
or a string of pearls, or a pair of pants
or a wig with curls, or Another Chance.
Everyone is just waiting.

NO!
That's not for you!

Somehow you'll escape
all that waiting and staying.
You'll find the bright places
where Boom Bands are playing.

With banner flip-flapping,
once more you'll ride high!
Ready for anything under the sky.
Ready because you're that kind of a guy!

Oh, the places you'll go! There is fun to be done!
There are points to be scored. there are games to be won.
And the magical things you can do with that ball
will make you the winning-est winner of all.
Fame! You'll be famous as famous can be,
with the whole wide world watching you win on TV.

Except when they don't.
Because, sometimes, they won't.

I'm afraid that some times
you'll play lonely games too.
Games you can't win
'cause you'll play against you.

All Alone!
Whether you like it or not,
Alone will be something
you'll be quite a lot.

And when you're alone, there's a very good chance
you'll meet things that scare you right out of your pants.
There are some, down the road between hither and yon,
that can scare you so much you won't want to go on.

But on you will go
though the weather be foul
On you will go
though your enemies prowl
On you will go
though the Hakken-Kraks howl
Onward up many
a frightening creek,
though your arms may get sore
and your sneakers may leak.

On and on you will hike
and I know you'll hike far
and face up to your problems
whatever they are.

You'll get mixed up, of course,
as you already know.
You'll get mixed up
with many strange birds as you go.
So be sure when you step.
Step with care and great tact
and remember that Life's
a Great Balancing Act.
Just never forget to be dexterous and deft.
And never mix up your right foot with your left.

And will you succeed?
Yes! You will, indeed!
(98 and 3/4 percent guaranteed.)

KID, YOU'LL MOVE MOUNTAINS!

So...
be your name Buxbaum or Bixby or Bray
or Mordecai Ali Van Allen O'Shea,
you're off to Great Places!
Today is your day!
Your mountain is waiting.
So...get on your way!

>> ^chilaxe:

@Porksandwich "Socialism works in other countries, and works quite well."

Does this apply to socialist countries outside of northern Europe?
Socialism works in Scandinavia because it's full of Scandinavians. Scandinavians in the US - regardless of whether their family has been here 100 years or 1 year - are like East Asians and Jews in the US... they contribute to society at a rate far above other cultural groups.
If the US was full of Scandinavians it would rank similarly to Scandinavia, regardless of the differences in economic systems. US outcomes in general are driven by cultural groups.


It would be a lie to say you knew every aspect of every country without living in those countries to judge whether it "works" or not. You'd have to live at every income level and in various locations within each country to really KNOW for yourself. For example the US works quite well if you are a billionaire, but not so much if you make minimum wage. Your opportunity chance is going to be a magnitude higher as a billionaire, and if you fail you won't be destitute...versus the minimum wage worker.

With that said, there is a general theme in the US that if they don't believe they came up with the idea, plan of execution and implementation without basing any of it on "other" countries then we don't want it.

The common argument during the universal healthcare debate was that while other countries offer it, it wouldn't work in the US. And that's where the explanation usually ended, they would always follow up with the US needs to come up with it's own solution. And then inevitably it would be slight changes to the current system that already doesn't work for many. Then we would ignore that something like 30-35% of the US population is already receiving Medicare/Medicaid coverage that would typically be considered a universal healthcare program if it included everyone else.

It was a really disingenuous argument when you consider that they are trying to keep corporations involved in healthcare and never considered that maybe they should throw them out of the decision making process until they've come up with a plan. Then figure out how they could allow them in that wouldn't be detrimental.

I just think they never looked at other countries implementations to see what they could use for a framework in the US and see what would be required to implement it corporations or not.

But the point of all this is that, despite the evidence that things work in other countries. The US fosters the idea that borrowing ideas from other countries and suiting them to ourselves makes us inferior, and we'd rather stew in the mess we've created until we can come up with something wholly uninfluenced by things outside the country rather than try to fix it sooner by looking abroad. This would be a fine mentality if we didn't cut funding on things that were designed to give us the edge when it comes to discoveries of new things and ideas throughout various fields. There was a time when we were openly giving many of those findings to other countries to do what they will with them, but now we in turn are too good to look at them and consider what we could gain from their methods.

Our government is there to serve and protect it's people, but it doesn't protect them from corporations through regulations or limitations of the powers they have over us. SOPA and John Doe piracy lawsuits are good examples. Mortgage crisis is better. None of those serve the people or the society the people make up. And corporations are not people, so they are part of the society but they do not create the society. Corporations should exist as long as they are beneficial to society, not a minute longer.

It may be cultural group driven, but it seems the younger people are willing to abandon cultural beliefs to attempt something else so they have a chance at a future. We as a nation are unwilling to undo what we have done...we look at our past and despite there being evidence of marching down a slowly declining path that is becoming steeper and steeper.....we continue downward. Now we have to wonder if it's so dark we can't see the huge spiked pit with the very narrow walkway for the well off to tread upon. While the rest of us walk blindly into the pit.

Wool over our eyes, blinders, cart on a lead. Tracks to the cliffs edge. Whatever analogy you want to use.

Edited for clarity and thinking ahead and using the wrong word in a couple places.

Reread what you wrote. You said: I'd say 'let them be dumb', not: I'd be willing to take action against Arizona.

Sincerely, I guess I am assuming you are white (which you admit you are) because I don't know why any American minority who is really subject to discrimination by private businesses would support repeal of laws that protect from said discrimination. It would seem to profoundly go against your self interest. From my experience, white Americans are less sensitive and less aware of such discrimination.

So, are you saying you have experienced overt discrimination by a private business based on your perceived race/ethnicity? If so, can you explain why you would support Ron Paul's position that would repeal laws that outlaw private businesses from discriminating against racial, ethnic, religious and other protected groups?

>> ^wax66:

>> ^longde:

You're willing to let Arizona stew in their mess because it doesn't affect you. If you were a latino in Arizona, you'd feel differently.

Again, you're ass-uming. I never said I'd be willing to let Arizona stew in its own mess. In fact, I'd be willing to take action against Arizona, especially if I was a resident. If I was a Latino in Arizona, I'd feel no differently, I'd STILL be willing to take action against the law. The beauty of America is that we CAN do that. In addition, if you re-read what I said, I said we don't need to ('let them be dumb'), which MEANS that we fight against it. If it's against federal law, the law will get invalidated!

Not to mention the fact that I not only grew up in a predominantly Latino area (there was a small handful of Caucasians at my school), but I LOOK Latino myself, and have been mistaken for one many times.
But go ahead and keep ass-uming.

>> ^longde:


You're willing to let Arizona stew in their mess because it doesn't affect you. If you were a latino in Arizona, you'd feel differently.

Again, you're ass-uming. I never said I'd be willing to let Arizona stew in its own mess. In fact, I'd be willing to take action against Arizona, especially if I was a resident. If I was a Latino in Arizona, I'd feel no differently, I'd STILL be willing to take action against the law. The beauty of America is that we CAN do that. In addition, if you re-read what I said, I said we don't need to ('let them be dumb'), which MEANS that we fight against it. If it's against federal law, the law will get invalidated!


Not to mention the fact that I not only grew up in a predominantly Latino area (there was a small handful of Caucasians at my school), but I LOOK Latino myself, and have been mistaken for one many times.

But go ahead and keep ass-uming.

"But in this argument, I actually agree with Paul, and I think Matthews is playing a cheap gotcha-game with him."
"Ultimately Matthews is just trying to get RP to slip him a negative soundbite that they can turn around and splash non-contextually throughout the media."

Matthews is not playing a gotcha game here. He is asking direct questions or posing clear hypotheticals to Paul. The reason they seem like gotcha questions is because truthful answers to those questions would polarize Paul's voting base. And would be totally abhorrent to voters like me who are otherwise receptive to Paul's message.

"So you're saying the US government is going to specially treat certain groups poorly because Ron Paul would be in office?"

No, I'm saying that Ron Paul would push to abolish laws like the 64 Civil Rights Act if he were president or begin to lean government in that direction. Am I wrong here?

"Again, we're talking about government legislation. Silly laws get passed all the time. In this case it has surely hurt Arizona already, and will continue to hurt them. I'd say 'let them be dumb', but in this case we don't really need to, as I doubt their law is constitutional."

You're willing to let Arizona stew in their mess because it doesn't affect you. If you were a latino in Arizona, you'd feel differently.

I like teh music and teh Goat.

I ate goat last week in a stew and it was fantastic, I highly recommend goat meat.

I usually look at the steak, drool a little, then buy a big hunk of really cheap meat and make a stew or soup.

@NetRunner It would be over simplistic for me to say what "the real problem" is, I was pointing out "a" problem I see with certain mindsets. But surely, the people you mention do exist, and to that I mean people who want a certain degree of leeway in those they help. A person who spends a good deal of his time taking care of his body may find it slightly repulsive to pay for the care of someone whom has not taken care of himself, and perhaps rightly so. The shoe exists on the other foot as well, I am not blind to those who very little personal action was taken but very much social/economic/political benefit was reaped. Often have I toyed around with different ways of managing property rights and such to eliminate or make more difficult the position of the freeloading, powerful man.

I don't deny the need of government, nor would I suggest its eradication. My objection was more in line with "how" people are solving the problem of a non-functional government. Forgive me, but having been to several protests now, I find them moronic. It plays out like children jumping on a bed in a stew of anger. Some of Cobert's recent shows on OWS, and before it, the Tea Party stuff made me laugh to tears as I so greatly identified with is complaints. The overall event of a rally is a dogmatic, simplistic, and mostly naive portrayal of the problems, and to rant about even more dogmatic, arbitrary and simplistic solutions. To be forthright, I am an introvert. Large groups of people will, in time, always annoy me, and as such, I admit that perhaps there is something different about a rally that I don't understand. Some kind of comradery in spouting babbling cheers, sitting a public place for no real objective, and making a ruckus. It would seem that most of a rally is about being seen, and I would rather not be. Instead, I would rather be unseen, but actually affecting. It seems more beneficial as a rally only can indirectly change something, where as any other course of direct action has a real effect. For instance, if I were mad about jobs, the last thing I would do is OWS, I would instead seek to create a job fair.

And that was my main point, rallying seems to be the battle cry for those whom want solutions to be created by someone else. Why waste your time and money supporting a rally instead of the cause itself? I used to not have this world view. But, I hold now that spending your energies directly addressing the problem is more beneficial, in large, than trying to bring "awareness" to it. Perhaps I am wrong, though, and some level of awareness is needed just to enact the more hidden, direct changes, hard to say.

The reason I mentioned any of this was because of the position Mr. Moore took up on Obama. He talked about how it was young people that got him elected, that he didn't do the job he was elected to do exactly the way he laid it out, so they became disenfranchised. That was my main concern, and it would seem that those who fall victim to this are the same that think rallying will do anything other than have a rally. As a libertarian minded person, the last thing I am looking to do is give people less of a voice, my aim is almost always entirely the opposite. My objection was that outsourcing your voice to something that is only going to indirectly help you might not be the best course of action. Mad about wall street, fine, but do you still have a 401k? Often times, we are, esoterically, part of the problem and it is that kind of conversation you won't find at a rally. We are always in the right, and we were always wronged by some evil third party...a great children's story, but more often than not, not exactly true.

Sorry for the long rant. More poor command of the egrish usually means I babble on.