All my endless banter in the body of this post to simply say, I am sorry if offended the skewed sensibilities of some of the more virulent from my sullied past.
Everyone is not as capable as others to simply "be" and accept folks for who they are. I wear my anal-orality on my sleeve to a fault, and would that the entire world do the kum-ba-ya someday, even those with sticks larger than my own implanted firmly in-anus.

The real point of this post being, I tire of news-sound-bites concerning current politics garnering most of the votes considering the stuff is designed to distract and confuse those who think they have a clue.

As well I feel that active members should invigorate the place creatively rather than trumpet the popular culture's demise with endless rhetoric, or flavors-of-the-week commentary. The fact is, a small core of regular users keep this place interesting not the passing fancies.

Those I have called out here have used their status and skills to promulgate agendas or espouse clap-trap in the past and their popularity and stellar rises means only to me that humanity is still the most gullible of mammals on the planet.

Wake up and live and point me in the direction of the shills so I can build a rail with which to run them outta town upon.

Peace to all, Merry Xmas, Happy Hanuka , and Salami Like-em with with sourdough bread and stone ground mustard.

And yet NZ speaks predominantly english and was the first to give women the vote. Granted, the personal pronoun in Te Reo (the Maori language) is gender neutral, but I don't think Maori language or culture was given much respect in 1893.

It's an interesting idea, but I'm skeptical.

My main issue is that the results will be skewed by english. English is a "futured" language and is the main language spoken in the US, UK, Australia, Canada and NZ (among others). All these countries have a common cultural root and tend to save less.

I would like to have seen more analysis broken down by culture and language. Ok, english speakers save less. got that. What about Germans or French (both "futured" languages)?

Addressed what seems the heart of the confusion to me as to how to respond, in that same thread that radx referenced; Basically and firstly, we can't know everything so how to expect reasonable conclusions drawn? WE ARE NEED TO KNOW as regular peeps, and we don't know shit about the real who-whats-whys-wheres-and-hows, considering how completely skewed the social-engineering-and-indoctrination media machine functions.

Otherwise a sane response seems to be to round-up all the human RoundUp™, kill whomever gave the launch-go for the shit, then find out who manufactured and sold the shit to them that have, and eliminate those people. Evryone complicit should pay with the rest or with all of their life(s) and never be allowed to sit at the big people table again...or eat without a tube.

Congrats Dan, on yer wife's priceless reaction-Memories made, marital bliss intact-

NOw that you've graduated, here's another prize-winner to try on unsuspecting diner patrons:

Crowded diner after 2 a.m. works, but best is Sunday after church, packed with families whilst you and your chums are having breaky..

Play with your fork while interacting with your pals by poking yourself with it, waving it about, scratching with it, etc. While you do this, folks will start to observe your slightly skewed table manners.
Get your friends attention with a "Hey guys, check THIS out.."(at this point an adjoining table will have at least one nosy woman watching you like a hawk)

Cupping a couple of maraschino cherries and a single-serving creamer in your hand, place fist up to eye and pretend to stick the fork into your eye at the same time puncturing then squeezing the creamer in your fist and sending bits of cream and maraschino cherries jetting-out (friend across from you is wearing white T-Shirt, as a backboard), all the while with no reaction from you or your friends...

You know you've done it right if at least 3 women of different parties from adjoining tables scream simultaneously and possibly piss their pants.

Works great as well for scaring the living shit outta little kids under the age of 7.

Déjà vu: An innate survival imprint colliding with a skewed perception. Déjà vu is your driver knowing better than the rider of what to do next, more chemical releases to follow...

This is a false or misleading statement. The reasons for some Canadians having to wait or not being able to have a doctor are different. Canada has had a terrible drain on it's medical system with doctors and nurses going down to the US, because they make more money there. This has lead to new programs to entice them to stay in Canada. It looks like they have been working, but it's a 10 year study and we need to see the numbers.

As a Canadian who has been though the healthcare system in Ontario, and had family members who've had been through health care in Quebec, Manitoba, Alberta, British Columbia, Halifax and Newfoundland.Labradour, I can tell you the parts that work and the parts that don't.

I'm a type I diabetic and I've had cancer twice. I've had a sarcoma in my saliva gland and as a result of radiation therapy, I've had melanoma skin cancer crop up on my body as well. I've had four major surgeries on my body. Two of them were serious complicated nervous system surgeries or lymphatic resecctions. I've been through my fair share of Canadian health care.

First things first. It's not a national healthcare. Anyone saying national healthcare doesn't know what they're talking about. The provinces and territories have their own health care. Granted, the territories get a lot more help from the Federal Gov't, but the health needs of people in Ontario are different from those in Manitoba.

Let's get into the brass taxes. I've had the nerve surgery and radiation therapy that was done on my face evaluated at a hospital in West Virgina as part of a study to compare American HC vs. Canadian HC. For my first surgery, I got to choose my doctor, I was given a list. They recommended one doctor, who was an expert in North America for nerve surgery, but he was recovering from a surgery of his own. They suggested I wait for him to be ready, but if I wanted to proceed, I could wait if I wanted.

I waited and surprise, no facial paralysis. I then had to do 30 days of intense radiation therapy in my parotid bed, to make sure they got it all.

I paid a total of $300 dollars in parking. I also have private health insurance for diabetic supplies, which means any medication I had to get to deal with the after effects of radiation had an 85% payback.

Years later when the effects of radiation had settled and I had a tumour form from the radiation, I had gone to my family doctor, saw a specialist the next day and then within the week I had an excision done. It came back positive and within a week of that, I was given a sentinel node biopsy to see if it had spread.

It had.

Within a month of the first examination, I had a full lymphatic ressection of my left leg and groin done. This wasn't as complicated as the facial nerve surgery, so I got a list and a suggestion of who to do the surgery.

That came back clean, but I now deal with a lot of complications from that.

That surgery cost me nothing.

In West Virgina at a hospital (they didn't tell me which one they used.) The total for all the exams (CT, MRI, etc.) the surgery and the radiation therapy came out to $275,000. Give or take.

This is why it drives me nuts when I see people get things wrong about Canada. We have problems, oh yes we do. For example, don't be over the age of 65 in BC or Quebec. The diagnostics training in Nova Scotia or Newfoundland if pretty terrible. But, I got to choose my doctor, and I saw everyone really quick. Why? Because you don't fuck with melanoma.

So, I'm sorry Trancecoach, I saw that video you linked. The guy lost a lot of credibility at "Communist State of Canada." You're already skewing your message to say something. You are just plain wrong about health care in Canada, the way you talk about. I am living proof of how well it works.

I'm a self employed photographer and the most I've ever had to pay was for parking at the hospital. That was the $300 dollars. I paid my taxes and that paid for my health care. If I didn't, and if other Canadians didn't, I would not be here, as with many other Canadians.

Critique us for the things we do shitty, but I have yet to see anyone do that. I see talking points and misinformation from people just spreading false info.

Get your facts straight. I know how it works in Ontario the best. But, I also know for a vast majority of the other country. I can tell you Saskatchewan has had an exodus of nurses, but that's not bad health care system. That's a gov't system that can't keep nurses in the province. If we can keep doctors and nurses, the system works great.

The guy you linked to, most of his sources for data are absolute crap and he misleads a lot of his talking points. This stupid lottery doctor that happened was because it was an isolated town in the wilderness and there was only one doctor left after the other passed away. So yes, he had to do a lottery for people so he wouldn't get swamped, unless it was an emergency. It was a town, I believe about 10,000 people, but I'm not sure on that.

Oh by the way, all the citations in this Koch funded video are, from a Koch funded "think-tank" Why am I not surprised?

Also, I noticed that chart at 0:21 uses "average income per person" which is a highly misleading statistic. Using the median income per person is more reasonable, but that would fuckup their pretty pretty graphic.

Average income per person in the US is ~50k USD
Median income per person is ~26k USD

And yes, for the math impaired, for the average to be so much higher than the median means that the top end of income is incredible skewed.

I don't disagree about the snooping since 2001. As far as the koch brothers and the Tea Party, you don't know what the fuck your talking about.

They just want the Constitution follow or at least print current laws back towards it.

Instead of watching biased Democratic sucking media, go to an actual event .

They are not raciest, or the desire to go back to slavery as the media puts forth. . That's Bullshit. B.W.Y. the slavery shit and the KKK was the Democrat south doing its thing, not Republicans. MLK was Republican.


Today the Republican party is nothing more than a cheap intimation of the Democrat party. They will never win fighting that way. The Tea Party is they way to go.


FYI a little history ... Since you had a public education and hence only learned skewed left leaning revised history...


http://www.humanevents.com/2006/08/16/why-martin-luther-king-was-republican/

"
It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism.

It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks. The Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860s, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s.

During the civil rights era of the 1960s, Dr. King was fighting the Democrats who stood in the school house doors, turned skin-burning fire hoses on blacks and let loose vicious dogs. It was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who pushed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools. President Eisenhower also appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court, which resulted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending school segregation. Much is made of Democrat President Harry Truman’s issuing an Executive Order in 1948 to desegregate the military. Not mentioned is the fact that it was Eisenhower who actually took action to effectively end segregation in the military.

Democrat President John F. Kennedy is lauded as a proponent of civil rights. However, Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil Rights Act... And after he became President, Kennedy was opposed to the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King that was organized by A. Phillip Randolph, who was a black Republican.

The Democrats were loosing the slavery battle and civil rights were breaking through and JFK/Johnson the

Given the circumstances of that era, it is understandable why Dr. King was a Republican. It was the Republicans who fought to free blacks from slavery and amended the Constitution to grant blacks freedom (13th Amendment), citizenship (14th Amendment) and the right to vote (15th Amendment). Republicans passed the civil rights laws of the 1860s, including the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Reconstruction Act of 1867 that was designed to establish a new government system in the Democrat-controlled South, one that was fair to blacks. Republicans also started the NAACP and affirmative action with Republican President Richard Nixon’s 1969 Philadelphia Plan (crafted by black Republican Art Fletcher) that set the nation’s fist goals and timetables. Although affirmative action now has been turned by the Democrats into an unfair quota system, affirmative action was begun by Nixon to counter the harm caused to blacks when Democrat President Woodrow Wilson in 1912 kicked all of the blacks out of federal government jobs.

Few black Americans know that it was Republicans who founded the Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Unknown also is the fact that Republican Sen. Everett Dirksen from Illinois was key to the passage of civil rights legislation in 1957, 1960, 1964 and 1965. Not mentioned in recent media stories about extension of the 1965 Voting Rights Act is the fact that Dirksen wrote the language for the bill. Dirksen also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing. President Lyndon Johnson could not have achieved passage of civil rights legislation without the support of Republicans."


Democrats are still in the slavery business. They just use the welfare system to keep the poor poor and use the shallow promise of If you vote Democrat we will keep giving you a little cheese.

The Democrat party has been the most destructive political party to date.

Well, only one down-vote:

IMO Carey just pissed on what's left of any real career-The producers of Kick-Ass 2 seem to agree that he's not thinking clearly, not unlike some of the peeps on this banal thread.

If you begin with the Kool-Aid being served with semantics like "assault rifle" and end up on a video blog with about 5 videos published with any meat having to do with the recent whack-job mass-shooting, the bulk of whose active users are east/west coast U.S. and outside of the C.U.S....IS IT SURPRISING, that you have a skewed representation of attitudes towards free will relative to firearms in the United States?

I do see these bills introduced in states and nationally the writing on the wall to an eventual fascist future for the entire fucking world, and those who don't, deserve that future.

Carrey's schtick never did it for me after age 16, he's so off in the realm of some EST whack-job in interviews, (like some motivational speaker from a closed-circuit kid's show in Ottawa on at 6 a.m.) and now with this, why the turd even dishonors the memory of Stringbean Akeman by taking a jab at Hee Haw and the fine people of Nashville.

Fuck Jim Carrey, BIG BROTHER say's he's doubleplus unfunny

Honestly, it's not that all news is bullshit, it's that most (all?) news outlets commit the same fallacious and detrimental information practices as always will happen in any system when experience is posited as "truth".

In the business world we are almost always working to change our perspective on how data flows and how best to store and distribute info; setting our educational bias aside when need be. One particular failed practice that does NOT get enough high level analyzing due to the nature of the bias in which the problem itself creates: Information siloing.

In this case, we have the American people silo'd (and if we don't have them silo'd, we actively seek to silo these "undecided" minds) as either liberal D or conservative R. Once you're silo'd, you now have the ability to be fed limited information, based upon limited experience, as the Truth. This is called a hook. A hook is exactly what you think it means and is not bad of itself, because hooks exist in all systems for better or for worse. Otherwise birds of a feather would not flock together. (They flock together because of hooks in their code and the world aka science around them which helps facilitate that hook.)

Now that the hook is in, we have separate news organizations that cater to the data bias you signed up for. You're a human with a blank slate, so don't you dare argue that your opinion is anything but inconsistent, even after education; because you assume that the patterns of existence taught as theoretical and scientifically posited "truth" scale in a reality based upon butterfly flaps of causation. Just accept it: You are fallible and the defects are inherent at every step of our civilization. (Algorithms of usefulness to engineers are only useful if they lessen the load on the user, otherwise we'd all be typing 1s and 0s; so the logic of simplicity suggests our systems are fucked and holding to them is an anarchy unto itself, where ultimate complexity becomes entropy -- LESSEN THE COMPLEXITY. That should be a rule for all government and economy.)

Liberals claim they cater to all sides and conservatives complain that if it wasn't for Fox, there would be no objectivity in the news. This further complicates the matter, but is itself a red herring because it's an argument that essentially says "YOU MUST GET YOUR NEWS FROM A MAJOR NETWORK." If you actually believe that these media giants are the end all be all to gaining information from the "truest" perspective possible, you are a dummy and you need to WAKE UP.

If you never made a thought pattern along these lines, you also need to wake up but I'm not mad at you. Information that deviates from a human's factory defaults (early family and life experiences in the form of fear induced bias) is difficult to objectively analyze. I fault you not, but your call to awaken is noted and will be remembered at the end of all (if you believe in any sort of karmic ending, Christians included). If you don't believe this, then your inability to rule the boundaries of your mind in the present is damning enough. Fuck you. And fuck your offspring. Subjective fear consume thee as your desperate and once nurturing stride for survival is abstracted into selfish, power seeking nihilism.

Information siloing creates tribal knowledge (which is information held by a select group, and then touted as negative patterns like nationalism and corporate thuggery), and tribal knowledge creates boundaries based upon a skewed perception of what the truth is; which in turn, creates subjective and often intangible competition within a system that should be making strides to improve its process via iteration.

MUD SLING AWAY. Or join me in narrowing the argument to its lowest common denominators and then objectively analyzing the system, starting at a generic starting point and building up to a truer understanding.

Telepathy, knowing the future, skewing random events to one direction or another. Those are part of everyday life. Maybe we are more sensitive to quantum effects than some think or?

@00Scud00 if businesses collude to keep prices high, their enemy are other businesses not profiting from that collusion. Getting into the fold cuts into their profits.

Big businesses use government to regulate the market and skew costs in their favor, raising barriers of entry to competitors.

If government is removed from the picture, yes, it's one less person to bribe. It also removes all those barriers, and all unfair advantages big businesses currently enjoy.

With free markets, as with most freedoms, it's not all unicorns and rainbows, quite the opposite. There will be plenty of abuse and unfairness to go around. However, being free from a mountain of laws and bureaucracy, without anyone to come crying to, begging authority to right all wrongs, society will be more flexible, creative, responsible, and inclined to solve problems on its own. People are better at solving problems than bureaucrats, and they'll more likely do so if they have to do it themselves.

It's like the internet. I believe most problems on the internet today can be solved technologically. Is that magical thinking? I don't think so.

Sure, there's a role for a few legal rules, but they should always be kept to a minimum. Let people figure things out creatively, without resorting to violence. Add too many laws to the internet, and it'll be bogged down. People will try less to come up with creative solutions, and resort more to petitioning their representatives.

I resent the insinuation that I use free market as a mantra. I'm trying to clear its name. It currently enjoys a terrible and undeserved reputation.

LooiXIV , LOOOIE!


Lemme address all yer whack points from free-associative angles:

The reality of some increased level of moral or ethical degradation of a society or a segment of her constituents shouldn't frighten you away from availing yourself of tools needed for the job. Sadly, the U.S. is full of developmental disability but please tell me it's not going to be people whose process is so skewed who will take us all into a kindler and gentler future?? What do we do, reeducate?? Sensitize and sanitize the environment we share? A fantasy.

Biden clips, Biden clips, ok, BIdens' first of all, a fucking idiot on camera, off, and an ineffectual sack of meat as a Vice President. His interview with the slug from Parent's magazine was embarrassing and worthy of scorn. What he has to say on the issue parrots on a 3rd-grade-level the horseshit dialog coming from Feinstein and her ilk so simply using what he had to say as a talking point screams moral weakness and a lack of will.

One may expect a confrontation in life to whatever degree, DAILY! The last thing I would do in a situation where someone was either in my home or attempting to break in would be hide somewhere until they were gone. If I saw that they had a weapon, it's my house-I know where 20 objects are in my personal space with which to disable or disarm someone better than the burglar....He's fucked.

Paranoia. How do people like yourself function with such skewed inability to see a forest for her individual, constituent parts.

Yet another reason to do WHAT with WHAT vote and for WHOM??! Explain the reasoning underlying that conclusion or please.....DON'T!!.....It's glaringly obvious there's a mote the size of fucking Denver protruding from both eyes.

How do THESE people function with their eyes taped-shut?

Maybe it's just me, but a lot of people REALLY do not know the faintest concepts that they're claiming to be against or for.

Socialism IS NOT the same as Democracy. Where the hell did you ever get this idea? "If government = entire society to you, congratulations, you're a socialist. I'm not."

Socialism is the idea that the means of PRODUCTION is owned by the people, as opposed to Communism, where the means of production is owned by the State. The ideas developed by Marx, and can be seen widely today in protests, activism, and the Occupy Movement, is that once the Rich have become too rich, the Poor will revolt. You're seeing exactly what Marx feared would happen starting to happen today.

Government is not the entity that simply collects taxes and offers services. No wonder you have such a misconstrued idea of what things are. Government is a natural process in which communities help reduce the threats of of Nature and other states. Without them, well, history will show you very nicely what happens to those without strong governments. But then again, the fact that you don't know, is probably why you have such a skewed belief on what socialism, democracy, communism, free-market etc are.

If you have an issue with the efficacy of government, maybe you should follow the money, not the reason why government exists. Better yet, maybe you should take a look at why the founders wanted most of government to be slow and lumbering. Which again, this would be what Marx was warning against as well. The elimination of the Worker and the Producer cohabiting in the same environment.

You complain that most programs can be "disposable" (although, unless you really meant the wrong word) is actually a long drawn out response from the defunding and forced failure of programs so that those with deep pockets can clamor for "privatization". And yet, almost every case of a public service being privatized ends in either total failure, or a lucrative money making machine with no benefit to the people. For instance, the prisons that jail high school kids, extends their sentences for years, all over a minor truancy case. Why? It's easier to keep a A student in jail and have them behave than psychotic murderers. And since you get paid the same, why would you go through the expense of keeping a difficult and violent person when you can keep the cheaper to maintain one? It's all about the bottom line . . .

Anyway, I'm already at a wall of text here. Simply put, the majority of the people bitching on here are obviously oblivious to reality and are complete dumbasses spewing the same nonsensical rhetoric with their 5th grade education. So long as the majority fails to read at a 10th grade level and continue to worship violence and abhor the educated, they will continue to be sucked dry by the rich.