Yeah, I do know who "those people" are, they're the fucking morons who voted for Trump.

See, here's the thing. I'm no longer interested in bringing them round or convincing them. Fuck 'em. We've had centuries of social progress from the abolition of slavery to women's suffrage to the civil rights movement to SSM. If they haven't got the message by now, I really don't give a shit.

But as a culture and a society we need to stop fucking pandering to these assholes. The idea that "everyone is entitled to an opinion" is a very important idea. But somewhere along the line that got mixed up with "everyone's opinion is equally valid".

I don't really have a solution for this. Part of me is actually considering what I would classify as extreme, abhorrent measures. Most of me just thinks that liberals or SJWs or whatever you want to call them, just need to stop being so fucking meek and apologising for being right.

Either way, we don't have time for this bullshit anymore.

This is what a fucking Trump presidency gets you.

At this stage, as utterly undemocratic as it is, I'm just hoping the Electoral College ignores the election (which it can totally do) and elects Hillary.

Yeah, she's a pretty poor candidate and she's in the pocket of business and blah, blah, fucking blah.

I don't care.

She's not an insane climate denying buffoon.

Blah. Not impressed. The trickery is in what he's not showing. The software is treating the entire audio clip as a smart object, and it's referring to that for waveforms that it can use or manipulate to be close. Notice how he didn't show us the entire audio clip. I guarantee, he says "Jordan" and "three times" later in the audio. It's merely referencing that index where it detected those words before (speech recognition, in itself, an ancient technology, so not all that impressive), and simply copying them into the new clip. You can't just type in anything willy-nilly and expect results this good. If he typed "motherfucker caterpillar penis", it would have been nothing like this example, if it worked at all.

Ohhhh, so you just reassert your point about Democrats never backing down, but Republicans do without any factual basis whatsoever! What a novel losing debate strategy!

Obamacare isn't perfect and needs to be fixed or replaced with something better. Not the Trumpian "something great" if it should be replaced, but something that is well thought out and addresses what Obamacare couldn't accomplish if the entire premise is systemically not going to work.

Did you see what I did there? I *gasp* recognize that sometimes things don't work! OMG! IT'S AMAZING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I also didn't say it's a "fucking disaster", because it isn't. If it were that, explain how the uninsured rate has dropped very significantly. It was never going to achieve 100% insurance rate. The only way that happens is with single payer.

Here's how stupid you are. You don't seem to understand that if Obamacare isn't the answer, you're just making single payer universal health care more likely to be enacted. The American people are not going to go back to being denied coverage because of a pre-existing condition. They're just not gonna. Obamacare is the least left policy you could possibly enact that would help control costs and decrease the number of people who are uninsured.

You can scream to the top of your lungs, but Obamacare was enacted to remedy real problems. I'm even sympathetic to the argument that those were real problems, but Obamacare isn't the answer, but if you're going to make that argument, you have to propose something that has historical precedent and rationale to solve those problems. And you simply don't have one.

So again, keep struggling in the quicksand until it swallows you whole, and single payer is enacted.

Your evidence about health insurance premiums is anecdotal, and quite frankly, you don't seem to understand that your numbers and description of what happened to her is absolutely ridiculous. You don't get on medicaid because your insurance premiums go up under Obamacare. You qualify for Medicaid because of a lack of income.

Secondly, the claim is absolutely ridiculous that her premiums went up that much. For data we have available, *unsubsidized* premiums for the lowest cost silver plans for data we have in the Obamacare exchanges was $257 a month for a single person.

http://kff.org/health-reform/issue-brief/analysis-of-2017-premium-changes-and-insurer-participation-in-the-affordable-care-acts-health-insurance-marke
tplaces/

If she qualifies for Medicaid, then surely she could go on a silver plan in the Obamacare exchanges and come out likely paying less. Oh, and, on top of that, she would EASILY qualify for federal subsidies if she qualified for medicaid.

Oh, and btw, without Obamacare, if health care companies decided to raise those premiums just to price gouge, what protection would she have? Not much. Obamacare insures that you can only take in so much that isn't spent on health care.

Your story is completely utterly full of crap on so many levels, it's clear you made it up.

I'm dismissing all your numbers are being unsubstantiated bullshit. Have premiums gone up? Sure have. Were they going up before Obamacare? Yep! There's a healthy debate about how much Obamacare is contributing to premium increases. Obamacare isn't perfect. I'm happy to discuss rationally what could be done to improve Obamacare, or another plausible alternative. But not with you, since you pull numbers out of your ass that easily are completely debunked.

BTW, FYI, Obamacare was not intended to lower premiums nor to completely eliminate the number of uninsured. It was to control costs in all forms and reduce the amount of uninsured, as well as reform the health care system to eliminate problems like being denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions, people having to declare bankruptcy due to medical bills, etc.

Some of its goals it succeeded in, and some not so much. That's a fair assessment at this point. Medical related bankruptcies have not declined. Being denied coverage due to a pre-existing condition has been eliminated. Premiums have gone up, but we simply don't have enough data to determine if they've slowed or accelerated since Obamacare was implemented. If you go by the immediate years after Obamacare was fully implemented, they slowed.

http://healthaffairs.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/Adler_Exhibit1.png

More recently, they've accelerated. It's important to note that health care costs are not solely determined by premiums alone. It's interesting you cherry picked premiums only to prove costs haven't been controlled because premiums are your best case to make that point. Copays, coinsurance, deductibles, prescription drugs, all those play a role. IE, if the average American pays more in premiums but less everywhere else, it's possible the net average is lower for total costs paid for health care.

These are complex topics that have no room for bringing in rose colored ideologically tinted lenses to force the outcome to be "a fucking disaster", where you'll bring in anecdotal evidence, some of which is completely utterly made up.

Just how far are you willing to make stuff up? Hillary Clinton, according to you, has never in the last 40 years done anything substantially positive.

REALLY?! Look, I understand not necessarily wanting her to be President. OK, fine. But that claim is absolutely ridiculous. Over $2 billion has been raised by the Clinton Foundation, and over 90% of that has gone to charitable work according to independent studies. Before you go down the path of "paid access", blah blah blah, even if that were true, the reality is $1.8 billion went to charitable works around the world through the Clinton Foundation Hillary Clinton helped to create and run.

That's not substantial?!?!

Dude, just stop. The only people who believe that BS are people within your bubble. You're not convincing anyone else who didn't already think Hillary Clinton personally killed Vince Foster. You're just making people like me think you're a complete loon.

I get it and i wouldn't do it as i assume it may be misinterpreted and people would read into "what i really mean". I don't have the want to defend myself if people don't take me at my word. Its a minefield something like this. It helps to know the person/people who make such a critique. Thats why i like the sift. i feel i know many well enough (from past experience) to see where they are coming from. If i didn't know you at all id have no clue what you might mean. Blah blah blah im not good at writing stuff but i think you can understand what im trying to say.

But they say they are and they are counted as being Christians. imo anyone who says they accept christ is a christian. I've known many Christians in my youth. None of them had the fanatical thinking of what you are talking about. I guess it comes to how you define them. I would say in general very few Christians(and im guessing Muslims also) are fanatical people who live/believe strictly by the book. Not that any of it matters really.

Anyway disusing religion...blah,blah,blah.

18 USC 922 :
- Is a danger to himself or others
- Lacks mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs
- Is found insane by a court in a criminal case
- Is found incompetent to stand trial, or not guilty by lack of mental responsibility pursuant to articles 50a [blah blah blah]

The second line item is what applies to persons assigned a fiduciary due to a failure to manage their financial affairs (which is often elderly people).
This is why gun rights groups are crying about new measures to link medicare to the background check system.

But generally, yes, you have to do something to demonstrate that you're mental, in order to be found mental.

Gun registration is not required to know who has guns. The background check tells LEO which dealer ran it and about who. They go to the dealer and acquire the sale forms (retained at dealer by law) regarding that person.

The purpose of registration is not to know who has guns - that part is already known. Registration makes it a legal requirement to demonstrate custody. If you can't present a registered firearm, you're a criminal. Hence you have no ability to hide a registered firearm, because the act of hiding it sends you to jail. A large subset of gun owners have firearms strictly for "SHTF" (shit hits the fan). They squirrel them away with some food, and have them 'just in case' the world goes tits up. That's the segment of gun owners that drive against gun registration. They don't want their emergency kit confiscated by the government during a disaster (like happened during Katrina), and they don't want to go to jail for hiding it either.

In general, personally, I have nothing against training.
Ironically, AFAIK, LEO are the biggest offenders when it comes to accidental discharge (which makes sense, given that they point guns at people more often than regular folk, so their accidents are deadlier.).
(Police also commit [non-police-work-related] murder at a rate 8 x that of the general population.)
Training is an easy low hanging fruit to grab on to when looking for 'something to do [legislatively]', but in practice it isn't as significant as people would imagine. People that like to shoot will be well practiced, and are overall safe. Folks that bury their guns in a closet for emergencies won't be well practiced, but won't normally be in a position of opportunity to make mistakes.
Folks that legally concealed carry (hence are managing a firearm throughout the day) require a license that requires training in order to acquire. Granted, it's really not a hard test. It's driver's ed level proficiency. Just enough so you know which end to point where, you know what the controls do, and can hit a target inside of a required accuracy.
I honestly don't know the most common causes of accidental discharge - but I would assume that most are gonna be split between flubbing it with a holster (butter fingers), or forgetting to eject a chambered round after removing a magazine (derping out).

-scheherazade

Vid is blah.

Kitty furniture?

FRICKING AWESOME.

This hydrophobic stuff is great for experiments and wow factor but I am still confused at the actual application.

I know it wouldn't have come this far without application but its not like I hear...because of its hydrophobic coating...blah blah blah...pay me more money.

She seriously went all "blah blah blah" on national "news" in regards to important issues and details? Nice. I still had a glimmer of respect for TV news ...yada yada yada ...jump up their own ass.

Sheesh, I am pretty political I suppose - but listening to the idiot underlings that are a part of any campaign drive for either the republictards or the democraps is almost as terrible as going to fucking church.

I don't see it as much a reflection of Hillary (even though she is a scumfuck too) but a reflection of her campaign underlings hiring inexperienced workers with a tad of blab blab blab, blah blah blah and a ton of ignorance. But to me, this is a stone cold reflection of America as it really is. Look in the mirror America, now take two hits wait ten minutes and look long and hard once more. Like, like, like, like, like, like *BLAM*!!!!

@bobknight33
"socialism is not american"

i swear sometimes bob i dont know what the fuck you are talking about.

even when people put out,quite correctly i might add,that america has socialism in its economic structure.you respond like they didnt state anything.

it is like you live in this weird bubble and that any information that attempts to enter,that may possibly contradict your own personal understandings.

so when i say that you can have a socialist democracy,i am not just pulling that out of my ass:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_socialism

or that america already has socialist programs,and a majority of them YOU and your children enjoy:
https://mises.org/blog/bernie-sanders-right-us-already-socialist-country
(this is from the von mises institute.not exactly a bastion of liberal/progressive ideology.just in case you wanted to pull that tired and stupid response:well,they are a liberal website blah blah blah)

so if YOU think that socialism is SO bad and harmful and utterly un-american.let us revert to a pure capitalist society shall we?

here are the things that we will be saying goodbye to in your new capitalist america:
1.child labor laws.
thats right...your 8 yr old grandchild can now quit her fucking whining and get to fucking work.hmmmm...nothing like forced labor for the children working 14 hr shifts with no breaks,and 6 days a week.no work on sunday!
because:god.

2.minimum wage.
gone will be a basic minimum wage imposed by federal law.now we shall see the TRUE market place in action! of course,since there is surplus of available workers and there is no minimum.we can exploit the most desperate and vulnerable of our society and pay them 25 cents an hour!
take THAT china!

3.public schools.
education? only if your are part of the new american aristocracy! and what child will be going to school for an education? they are too busy working at the plant! pfffft..education.it is over-rated anyways.

4.fire and police.
now why would i spend my hard earned money in taxes, so my neighbor can be protected from fire damage and property damage? pay for your own protection fuckface! oh...you're too busy working 3 jobs,making .25 per hr? and your kids are working too? aww too bad loser.shoulda pulled yourself up by your bootstraps.

5.voting.(yep.you read that right)
i am a hard working american.who pays his taxes and owns property AND a business! and i JUST gave my employees a raise to .27 per hour! i have a RIGHT to vote! why should those non-property owning losers get a vote as well? i am obviously far more important than they are.whats next? women voting? the horror.

6.social security and medicaid.
now why would we waste time and resources providing a safety net for those losers again?how is it MY responsibility that they couldnt plan for their sunset years? i did give them a raise didnt i? fucking crybabies.and so what if they actually PAID into those programs.i feel better creating my own reality by calling those programs "entitlements",because it makes me feel morally superior to them.

7.public libraries.
there is that pesky "education" again.why should i be responsible for someone else family and their access to literature and information?what do you think i live in? a society? with neighbors? communities?this is just more government intrusion upon MY life and MY freedoms!

look man,i know i am being a cheeky shit in this comment,and i am not anti-capitalist..at all.
capitalism has brought great things for society as a whole..BUT..there is a difference between capitalism and unfettered capitalism,and what we have now is NOT capitalism.

it is socialism for the rich:
see: the bank bailout
see: corporate subsidies (welfare)
see:corporate tax breaks (welfare)
see:our current political system which has been totally over-run by corporate money.a corporate coup de'tat.
which we are all fed the bullshit line of how wonderful captialism is,but the only beneficiaries are corporations,wall street and the dept of defense.

the only people that get to engage in capitalism are the poor and middle class,because actually having to compete is for suckers and losers.

Far different from what I would rank as Top 10 of 2015....

Especially the Top movie pick. As much as I think I quay myself a SW fan (too many expensive SW collectibles, ringtone's set to the Imperial March since my first smartphone... blah blah) this one is a minor disappointment. There are lots and lots of superior choice even for a SW fan.... if you're even slightly unbiased.

On Drachen_Jager's points: pretty much what I thought after seeing the movie. My thought is SW:TFA is right in the "middle of the road" movie, whether you look at it from a fan/non-fan perspective. It's not as good as any of the OT, but better than the prequels. And as a stand alone Sci-Fantasy Action movie.... it's a turn-off-your-brain-then-it's-good kind of movie. Too many media/fan's buying into the hype-machine to rate it that high.

Still, it's a commendable direction the new sequels is taking the franchise in the future. I'm giving it the benefit of the doubt on all the stupid fights/plotholes in this movie just so it can move further pass the OT characters so as no further sully the fond memories of these OT characters by seeing them on screens as tools rather than heroes.

Sweet... I don't want to be cold hearted but I will. This might be killing two birds with one stone. 1) being -private luxury crack smoking room. That's what's gonna happen... Maybe some showering... Doesn't matter to me though, the bums stink, the BART stinks, the whole downtown area of SF smells like a huge crack alcohol shit storm for being such an "affluent" city. I think this was well intended but I don't trust the "non-profits" around here especially in this "app" bubble. "Give me a huge grant because I have like the most astonishingly brilliant idea blah blah blah (pockets 25% of grant for outrageous rent costs)."

A trailer consisting almost solely of scenes from the last seasons? Blah.

Yeah he embarrasses her with his stupidity, as he embarrasses me. So fake news picks a naive college student to debate, and when she starts putting her thoughts together to make a point he interrupts her like the condescending asshole that he is.

I'm sorry, but you wouldn't need the top 1% to pay nowhere near 90% in taxes to cover education. Just a made up number to make her look stupid as she didn't know how to answer it.

With a higher percent of more educated people, they as a whole would be making more money to contribute to the tax fund, increasing revenue.

And really Neil, rich people would leave the honey hole because we taxed them more? How about we start taxing and putting tariffs on companies that go into these third world countries for cheap labor to export products back here. Fuck em if they want to leave, they will no longer be "hoarding" the money and it would allow other companies to fill the void and thrive.

And her point that was so rudely interrupted was spot on, "There is a population that is doing nothing to contribute to the progression of society"

And lastly, these are all moot points if we just quit dumping all our money into the military, and it's not even going to benefit our veterans, but to the select few who own these government contracts. Why do they NEVER Talk about that? Why do we have to continuously be engaged in some kind of war? Oh, that's right to convince people we need a bigger military budget, more spying...blah blah blah...unpatriotic if you don't agree...blah blah...scare people into some kind of threat..

I'm sorry this particular girl wasn't ready for this debate, she probably had a speech prepared they told her she could give.