No, you call b.s. or fake news whenever a true but unflattering fact comes up about Trump, which is all the time thanks to his bottomless pit of corruption belching up proof every day.

Don't you find it odd that EVERY ex employee is "disgruntled" and a never Trumper...His "best people"...and his administration is the most unstaffed ever, most departments headed by "acting heads" because he can't find anyone dumb enough to work for him but competent enough to pass confirmation.

You've rarely said anything truthful, even more rarely intentionally said anything truthful, but on those rare occasions I applauded you. The truth can't be squashed. My calling (nobody pays me) is to squash harmful lies, and Trump and the Trumplings have had me working double time 24/7/365 since before taking office (when Flynn committed subversion to make sweetheart deals with Russia contrary to Obama's official positions and sanctions against them)

Andy got it exactly right. Happiness is a gluttonous maw that will only close for a moment at a time to swallow whatever you've thrown into it. No matter how much goes into that bottomless pit, sooner or later it'll open again to demand more sacrifice. Happiness is is overrated. Happiness is the sarlacc pit of the soul.
Satisfaction is where it's at. Once you are content with your life, everything you have will be enough. It'll do and you will be fine.

You can't beat the imagery of everyone wanting fast food bad enough to follow each other down a bottomless pit of doom....wonder how they pitched that??

Perhaps my mind isn't the only one that conjured imagery of a bottomless fast-food hole?

I find her repugnant and not because she's a woman...

A bit more info on the case:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/09/speaker-australia-parliament-resign-text-message

Gillard has consistently used personal attacks (some of the certainly accurate) against Abbott to deflect attention away from her governments ongoing snafu's.

The slipper case is just the latest gigantic fuck up in a long line with Gillard's name all over it. This wonderfully outraged woman has steadfastly refused to fire the speaker knowing it would deprive her of another vote in an already slim minority government. The same guy that would say things like:

"Look at a bottle of mussel meat! Salty Cunts in brine!" he continued in his text message to former staffer James Ashby. "Been to thw (sic) fish shop yet to buy the bottle of shell less mussells (sic)?"

I'll be the first to admit that Abbott is neither a likeable person or good prime minister material, but with no viable third alternative, I'll take him and his misogyny over Roxon's 1984-esque data retention scheme and continual attempts to increase the states right at the expense of the citizens, Conroy's 'see no evil' compulsory internet filtering and the extension of the confounding NT 'intervention' scheme that continues to pump money in to a bottomless pit but doesn't actually result in better lives for the Australian Aboriginals it's supposed to help...

Gillard's character is plainly on display. She ignores the blatant sexism of the man she, and her AG Nicola Roxon, defended and refuse to hang out to dry, but when he is revealed to be exactly what she despises, she invokes her dead father and plays the "they're picking on me cos I'm a woman" card to try and divert attention from the trainwreck that is her government. She's not even a toenail clipping from Maggie Thatcher who took to the game of politics as if men had never owned it, never hiding behind the fact she was a woman.

>> ^Porksandwich:

I guess my issue with telling people they should try everything in life is that there is the potential for people do so with no other reason than because someone told them they should or they are "missing out". I agree it's their choice to do so, but it's going to happen in an irresponsible way when anything they try is illegal, unsafe, or socially unaccepted whether it be drug or activity.
In my opinion it's why we end up with a lot of adults who are unable to cope with life sober, they get into "something" in their teens and learn to function in society while going on their highs and lows along with all the stuff everyone else has to learn to cope with. They just simply never learn to balance themselves. Now if we tell people who've got a relatively stable life with the ability to put things in perspective, they COULD experiment with drugs or other activities.....presumably they would have people who could tell them they are fucking their life up over a powder, pill, or plant.
My experience so far with older adults who smoke weed and don't really hide it is that they can deal with it, they do it in the privacy of their own home and they don't spend their time trying to talk people into joining them or convincing others. However if their kids start using, they usually start early and in secret and I haven't met one yet that didn't constantly talk about smoking: when they last did, when they will next do it, how much, how you should join them, how one kind strain is better, etc, etc. They may not abuse it, but they sure sound like they would if they could keep enough money in their pockets to do so.
So.......as long as it's "for the experience of it" very infrequently and not because they never learned to function without it. Personally I don't drink, smoke, use drugs, etc....and I don't really care if other people do (well except for smoking, can't stand when people smoke near me or smell like an ashtray) but you never know when people are moderate and balanced in their usage of most things.
I mean honestly unless a kid has someone older showing them quantities and how to cope......it's basically like encouraging them to skydive when they can't afford the equipment and training to actually walk away unharmed. People are pretty fucking stupid when they want to "be cool" and fit in.

>> ^dannym3141:
>> ^mxxcon:
i guess after smoking that shit every time they kept finding their windows broken and couldn't figure out how it happened so they decided to record their "Adventures"
On a serious note, they are fucking idiots for taking these drugs
and equally fucking idiots for posting it on the internet.
This is as good EIA as
any.

I'm sorry, but i have to take this up. You are not necessarily an idiot for trying a drug. It's all a matter of opinion, but mine is that you're pretty closeted if you don't ever try a drug - or rather if you pour scorn on someone and label them as an idiot for trying one. If you don't want to try them, fine. You've got say 85 years on this earth, give or take, and i recommend you try and find any kind of meaning, experience everything you can, try everything before you're asked to leave because what the hell is the point in being alive if you don't do anything? We didn't get to be the top of the food chain by not experimenting with stuff.
This guy approached a drug which plays with what you percieve as reality. He went about it in a stupid way. He is not stupid for trying the drug.
I ask only one thing of people in relation to their opinions on drugs - express your desire not to take them, express your reasons why you don't want to take them, but for goodness sake don't judge something you haven't tried.



But that's all good man - you expressed your desire not to try it, you've expressed why, but you didn't judge any drug which you haven't tried.

Counter to your experience, i knew a guy who started smoking weed at 14, 15 ish. His mum told him - fine, do it in the house where i can make sure you're ok. So he did with his close friends, and they had a great time, were grateful for the ability to do it in a warm comfortable place, and were delivered muffins and cakes from time to time because his mum was a great cook and gave her a chance to make sure everything was fine. They didn't talk about it all the time, they didn't overdo it, and he's a fireman now. Oh, and we eventually found out that his mum smoked it too. Their house was great, a proper home, proper family.

I suffered hard with depression in the past, and if i hadn't tried weed when i was 17, perhaps i might not be around today, you know? It took the horrible bottomless pit away from under me and showed me that perhaps life isn't all misery, it was no permanent cure but it showed me that i didn't always have to feel down. And that didn't lead to further use, because it was enough to feel good for the rest of the day, my one good day in a thousand bad ones.

I think we simply disagree philosophically, or something. I think people should - within the realms of reason - try things for the hell of it. I don't think drugs are irresponsible merely by dint of being illegal. I think people should question what the government tells us we can put in our bodies. Because i think if people did put some weed in their bodies regularly, they might just realise how supercilious we are when we take material wealth and work to be of utmost important to us. That might be dangerous for the government, because people might decide not to spend the majority if their lives doing something they despise, and actually start reaching out, trying for something better - taking a chance.

Remember, it's all very easy for someone to tell you the bad sides of things, because they're much publicised and fear mongering is a cinch. Governments want bad drug rumours to be spread, and they like bad emotional baggage to be attached to the word "drugs". Numerous propaganda attempts in the past surely show us that they've got some agenda. And it'd be very easy for people to say "LOL, if people stopped 'doing what they despise', the world would collapse and we'd have no food, no electricity, etc. etc!" But it ain't necessarily so. People do it already. There's alternatives, in my opinion better alternatives, but for a world like that we might all NEED to reach the higher level of relaxedness associated with weed

And finally - how's amsterdam doing? Because last i heard it's a fking great place to live. Better than where i live even if it's half as good as the last time i heard, and we prohibit drugs.

Hey, hey now, don't be messing with my sex robot fantasies.>> ^dag:

Uncanny bottomless pit, with no escape. Still cool though. promote.>> ^TheGenk:
That is so deep in uncanny-valley... and kinda terrible too, which i cant call
I give em props though for the pretty fluid motion

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I love robots. They're really coming- give it 10 years.

In reply to this comment by Hybrid:
Thanks for the promote Dag

In reply to this comment by dag:
Uncanny bottomless pit, with no escape. Still cool though. *promote.

Thanks for the promote Dag

In reply to this comment by dag:
Uncanny bottomless pit, with no escape. Still cool though. *promote.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Uncanny bottomless pit, with no escape. Still cool though. *promote.>> ^TheGenk:

That is so deep in uncanny-valley... and kinda terrible too, which i cant call
I give em props though for the pretty fluid motion

>> ^maeric2000:

If the universe is an accident then why should I, an accidental creation of chaos, seek purpose? How is my purpose anything more than an accidental coming together of molecules into a pattern that seems to indicate design but is argued to be mere science?


2 parts to my answer to your question.

First part - who told you that you should seek a purpose? If you feel you should have one or that you need one, you must ask that question of yourself; don't burden others with the responsibility to give you what you decide you need. Some people drive themselves to utter depression, despairing of the fact that there IS no purpose and no meaning, and let's hope there is a god to help you if you reach that conclusion because it's a terrible bottomless pit. Like douglas adams more or less said - the very last thing a human needs is a true universal sense of perspective.

Second part - i think you've answered your own question as to what a human's purpose is - and that is to question "why?" But never be satisfied by any answer, only keep on asking.

@GeeSussFreeK
Okay, that's much clearer...and I can get behind much of it (although it still seems to me that revamping the unemployment safety net makes more sense than getting rid of it altogether, good times or bad).

I certainly agree that we could save -huge- amounts by shutting down both wars, ASAP, I've never been a fan of bailing out Wall Street, and I'm still not happy with the health insurance plan (not because of the cost, so much as the lack of real cost controls). I'm pretty sure that compared with the wars and Wall Street, unemployment for everyone would only account for a tiny amounts. Hell, even the health insurance bill could be easily paid for by dumping those three bottomless pits...at least for now.

OK. Super awesome cool looking aircraft. If I make a sci-fi movie I definitely want to cast this vehicle as a central character.

But the concept seems all wrong. I thought the point of UAVs was small, lightweight and inexpensive. This seems like a defense contractor trying to sell a Cadillac to someone who needs a delivery scooter. We already have a UAV that delivers smart missiles. If you need to deliver 2000lb bombs then scale it up. If you need an air-superiority drone then take a gun, stick a jet engine on it and design as much wing and fuselage around it as you need for it to have the flight characteristics you want.

Creating an all-in-one vehicle that can be converted to manned control will result in an aircraft that performs none of those intended roles as well as a purpose built vehicle for each of those roles...and at ten times the cost to build and operate.

This smells like the military industrial complex trying desperately to create a new bottomless pit of revenue.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Government has no business interfering with or paying for personal medical decisions, either at home or abroad. That isn't government's job. I support the concept of allowing abortion to be a legal medical proceedure. I'm against any medical care being supported, advertised, promoted, and conducted with taxpayer money.
Essentially, I reject Clinton's spurious assertion that without the US government spending bazillions of dollars that the entire planet devolves into a mass of human misery. It isn't the US government's job to educate the world population about 'reproductive health'. If a citizen is concerned about the issue, they can personally volunteer time and resources to the cause. Supporting that cause with tax funds is wrong.
The well of human misery and need is a bottomless pit. The government can't and shouldn't even try to get involved in these kinds of issues. Encourage citizen volunteerism. Don't create government agencies, programs, and taxpayer pits to support causes 'du jour' in perpetuity.


What's your beef with socialized medicine? Tell us *why* taxpayer-funded medical care is wrong.

Canada, Norway, Sweden, France, Britain, and a bevy of other industrialized western countries have a taxpayer-funded system - and are healthier countries to boot.

Why do you hate healthy people? Why do you fight for a sicker America? Why do you hate puppies?

Government has no business interfering with or paying for personal medical decisions, either at home or abroad. That isn't government's job. I support the concept of allowing abortion to be a legal medical proceedure. I'm against any medical care being supported, advertised, promoted, and conducted with taxpayer money.

Essentially, I reject Clinton's spurious assertion that without the US government spending bazillions of dollars that the entire planet devolves into a mass of human misery. It isn't the US government's job to educate the world population about 'reproductive health'. If a citizen is concerned about the issue, they can personally volunteer time and resources to the cause. Supporting that cause with tax funds is wrong.

The well of human misery and need is a bottomless pit. The government can't and shouldn't even try to get involved in these kinds of issues. Encourage citizen volunteerism. Don't create government agencies, programs, and taxpayer pits to support causes 'du jour' in perpetuity.