EL-DUDERINO

[quote]My ignorance of US history is showing - I never knew that. I always figured the founding fathers wanted to (eventually) centralise and slowly limit the role of the state legislatures - why else would they have a tripartite federal structure? (Congress could have served as a supreme court, neatly making supreme court cases much rarer due to legislative laziness).[/quote] This is really what the civil war was about. Sure slavery was an issue but the major reason that the ci

[quote]Really and truly...this skeptic asks,,,,,Have we gotten the truth? Should we accept that carte blanche? Should we buy that without any further investigation?[/quote] The big issue here is that it is in Obama's best interest to be completely candid as to his, or members of his team's, involvement in any discussions with Blagojevich. The Prosecutor has wire taps of the phone and if any of Obama staff (or Obama himself) happen to be on those tapes either making a deal with B

[quote]True - but then that is not the feds. Maryland squanders their money instead of addressing their infrastructure (and they are not alone), and the feds suck off the money they could use after they squander it so there is none left.[/quote] Don't get me wrong I completely understand that infrastructure issues are the states responsibility I was merely agreeing with LW that our infrastructure is a mess, some states are definitely worse than others but the infrastructure as a whole

[quote who="little-whip" reply="4" id="1990298"] Case and point happened in Bethesda, MD just this morning. See my article "What's the Messiah Going to Do About This?' http://little-whip.joeuser.com/article/334159/So_Whats_the_Messiah_Going_to_Do_About_This [/quote] Excellent article. My state (WV) has some serious problems with infrastructure. Every winter there are countless water main breaks due to the cold weather and the extremely

[quote]we have cities all over this nation that have no idea what lies under their streets, how old it is, and what sort of damage it can do if and when it fails. Our nation has screwed up priorities, so screwed that I doubt we'll ever recover from them.[/quote] Case and point happened in Bethesda, MD just this morning. Apparently a 66 inch water main burst and caused a 4-5 foot wall of water to gush out over one of the major commuter roadways. It stranded some

[quote]I never vote for a candidate that is unopposed - even if I agree with them.[/quote] That is usually my policy, although this year I felt it was my duty to specifically vote against all incumbents so I did a lot of write-in votes. Although I got the feeling that the write-in votes were ignored for the most part because as far as I'm aware they are still reporting that all unopposed candidates received 100% of the votes, which is simply impossible (assuming anyone counted m

[quote who="kingbee" reply="15" id="1988331"] Apparently he has not, or it would not still be a question. there are questions and questions. 1. did the us really land on the moon? 2. did the bush administration stage 911 using robot-controlled planes? [/quote] There is a big difference between conspiracy theories and asking a guy to produce a birth certificate to prove that he fulfills the minimum requirements for a job. Hel

[quote]Unfortunatly, the only thing we can do is vote against these congresscritters when we can . . and hope at some point things change.[/quote] If only that were possible. I tried to do that this year, unfortunately too many of the candidates running for re-election were doing so unopposed. I put in a lot of write-in votes on my ballot but it didn't do any good. I just have to hope that next time around more people will hear my plea to vote out all the incumbents.

[quote]Funny how they keep this information on the DL. Must have been one of those late night, squeeze it it when nobody's looking deals. Well at least they can agree and pass one thing with little problem.[/quote] There are few things that the members of congress can all mostly agree on no matter what letter follows their name. One of those things is that they always deserve a pay raise every single year, the other is that they should constantly redistrict their home states so

[quote]They just voted themselves a $4,700 pay raise! [/quote] They haven't "voted" for their pay raise in some time. They passed legilslation a few years ago that makes the pay raise automatic unless someone actually proposes legislation to stop it. Their reasoning was that it took time away from doing other business to debate on their annual pay raise. I still maintain that their pay raise ought to be put on a ballot every election year where you rate your repres

[quote]Just because a few crackpots make a few claims does not mean there is debate. Take the weather channel guy, he gets fired not because hes a brave voice of opposition but because the idea is laughable within the weather predicting community. [/quote] Wrong just plain wrong. The guy was fired simply because he didn't buy the whole man-made global warming argument, and he was fired when even less was known about global warming. He was fired because his views didn

[quote]At one time UAW fought an oppressive management...guess they gazed into the abyss too long...and became the thing they fought against.[/quote] So much so that they actually asked for ownership stake in GM as well as a position on the board in exchange for some concessions on the UAW contract. I don't know if that deal actually went through or not but it just screamed conflict of interest. Had I been a due paying UAW member when that deal was announced I would have b

[quote]1) the test says "he has cancer" while he has not. That is a false positive - an type I error. (if you take the environment instead it would be "test says there is manmade warming while in reality there is not") 2) the test says "he doesn't have cancer" while in reality he has. That is a false negative - an type II error. (if you take the environment instead it would be "test says there is no man-made warming while in reality there is") You surely agree that in th

[quote]Global warming isnt about the destruction of man. its about the seas rising and causing total chaos in nations around the globe causing war famine and desease. [/quote] You just contradicted yourself. If this is about the seas rising, causing total chaos in nations which cause war, famine and disease then it is about the destruction of man and NOT the destruction of the planet. I guarantee you the earth will survive whatever we throw at it, even a nuclear holocaust,

[quote]If you're going to argue against someone, at least make sure you read to the end of their or you end up embarrasing yourself, seeing as I already addressed that in the very next sentance.[/quote] I read your entire response before I made that comment and I still stand by it. While you are correct that we don't need 100% proof that man has an impact on global warming we do need a proponderance of evidence to suggest that we are having an impact and that this isn't just a n

[quote who="Adventure-Dude" reply="1" id="1982316"]Wasn't an Ice Age declared in the 80's? [/quote] Not to my recollection, but then I was extremely young in the 80s. I am fairly sure that in the 70s they were talking about global cooling instead of global warming though.

[quote]there is no thing as a proof in sciences (except for formal sciences like mathematics and logic), you can only proof that something is wrong, but never that something is right.[/quote] While I will agree that this is applicable in some areas of science, like the theory of evolution, gravity, theoretical physics, etc. You can prove things in science, what you can't do is prove a negative which is why the burden of proof is on the person making the affirmative claim (ie glo

[quote]That's conspiracy. It's already covered without hate crime laws.[/quote] I'm no lawyer but I don't think this is covered under conspiracy. For a conspiracy you need to have two or more people involved in the planning of an action. If a person is acting along out of hate for a group that isn't conspiracy. [quote who="taltamir" reply="5" id="1981413"]PPS... practical example: 1. Joe rapes judie because he is a sadist, he planned it, ambushed her, be

[quote]Hence you have to work with what you're given. Better to have a very rough idea than no idea at all. [/quote] Very, very wrong. First the global warming alarmists need to prove that man has a significant enough impact on global warming. They have yet to satisfy the burden of proof (which lies on them). As I pointed out there is not enough data from which to pull to truly get a sense of whether this warming trend is abnormal or not so it is nearly impossible fo

[quote who="taltamir" reply="24" id="1980409"]On the one hand, what is NOT a hate crime? when was the last time a person bashed someone's head with a bat because they loved them? The whole thing seemed rediculous. On the other hand, it seems rediculous because it is ill explained... Look at a criminal as a potential danger to society. A person who murders someone not because of a personal reason, but merely his group association, is comitting to murder every last member of that gro

[quote]The man is still dead. WOuld he be less dead if it was dispassionately?[/quote] True that man is dead no matter what but the hate comes in that it was essentailly a threat or warning to a group of people not just one individual thus making the crime more than just the murder. Also hate crimes involve more than just physical assaults, think of burning crosses on someone's lawn. That is more than just vandalism it is a threat on members of a particular group.

[quote]Not very comforting.[/quote] I wasn't trying to be comforting. I was just refuting what a lot of global warming alarmists like to claim: "We are killing the planet" or CNN's series "Planet in Peril." The earth will survive until the sun expands and swallows it up in a couple billion years. [quote]Tell it to the polar bears.[/quote] Animals were going extinct long before man came along. Now may be the polar bears turn if they are unable to adapt

[quote]Why? If I beat a guy to death with a bat, how does my reason for doing it make it any more or less brutal? Any more or less a crime? [/quote] In a way yes because your crime wasn't just on the individual victim(s) of your crime but on the group that they belong to. Take the KKK when they were lynching people left and right, the victim of those crimes weren't just the people that were lynched but all black people because the KKK were trying to send a message. The sam

I doubt I have a bigger brain than you do but I will attempt to answer your questions based on the numerous articles that I have read on the subject. [quote]Did Congress approve more than was the minimum needed? [/quote] If you ask Congress they approved more than the minimum needed to avert the crisis. The bailout is to be paid in two installments, $350 Billion that Paulson has been distributing and early next year if he (or his successor) needs more (and I'm sure he (o

[quote]I take it you have never been in SF when the Hari Krishnas are out and about. [/quote] Nope. I have spent most of my life on the east coast. I visited an Aunt in Washington State once and I was in New Mexico for about 2 weeks one summer but those were my only trips out west. [quote]I am sure there are cases of that. In this particular case, however, the student (class president I think) decided on his own to say a prayer to open the game. No one was forced,