Money for skews13


User avatar
Posted by skews13
16 Jan 2014, 5:24 pm

skews13      
User avatar
     

Posts: 2714
Annoyed Liberall » 16 Jan 2014 3:11 pm wrote:
NeoConvict » 16 Jan 2014 3:09 pm wrote:
He is probably not as miserable as his "victim". What was his repeated issue?


Battery and infidelity.


Nobody has a right to put their hands on you in a violent way AL. You were obviously in an abusive relationship, and it is a blessing that you got out of it. Each of us is responsible for our own happiness. You cannot depend on someone else for it. If you're a happy person, you are going to bring that happiness into the marriage. If you are an angry, or violent person, then you are going to bring that into the marriage. The marriage itself isn't going to change who you are. While you were emotionally invested in this person for a length of time, it is time to break that emotional bond, and give 100% to your new marriage. By wondering what he's doing, you are keeping that bond in tact, and it isn't fair to you, or your new husband. Especially you. Your a survivor. Pat yourself on the back and move on.
2

User avatar
Posted by skews13
16 Jan 2014, 8:46 pm

skews13      
User avatar
     

Posts: 2714
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/01/16/1270141/-Walmart-to-go-to-trial-over-warehouse-working-conditions-judge-rules




Image




Walmart is having a bad week on the labor law front. In addition to the National Labor Relations Board moving ahead with charges that Walmart illegally threatened and retaliatedagainst striking workers, a federal judge in California refused to dismiss a class-action lawsuit brought by warehouse workers against Walmart and Schneider Logistics, meaning they will have to go to trial.
Walmart contracts with Schneider Logistics to run warehouses, and has always said that the workers in the warehouses are Schneider employees with no real connection to Walmart.

In the current case, Schneider also claims not to be legally liable for minimum wage and overtime violations, because the workers are hired and employed through a staffing agency.

But federal district Judge Christina Snyder is saying "not so fast": She's reaffirmed an earlier decision that both Walmart and Schneider should go to trial to determine if they are in fact joint employers of these workers.
Tuesday’s ruling marks the first time a court has ruled there has been enough evidence of Walmart’s “joint employer” status to overcome summary judgment or a motion to dismiss, which requires Walmart to defend itself at trial, according to attorneys for the workers.
“The workers’ day-to-day reality is vindicated by this ruling,” said Theresa Traber of Traber & Voorhees, one of the attorneys representing the plaintiffs, through a statement. “They are subjected to the directions and pressures of Schneider managers as they enforce Walmart’s performance standards on a daily basis.”

That there were serious minimum wage and overtime violations in the Schneider-Walmart warehouse complex isn't in much doubt: a separate case involving workers employed directly by Schneider was already settled for $4.7 million. That's a big reason it's so important for Walmart to deny being the workers' employer at all.

Now they'll have to prove that in court—something that won't be easy, and will probably bring to light a lot of information about how its warehouses work that Walmart would probably prefer remain hidden.
1

User avatar
Posted by skews13
16 Jan 2014, 9:49 pm

skews13      
User avatar
     

Posts: 2714
nefarious101 » 16 Jan 2014 7:50 pm wrote:
Walmart should shut down the warehouse and re-open it somewhere else. It's awful to force people to work there against their will



Walmart is running out of road. Out of excuses. Out of any place to hide. Now they get to answer in court for their crimes, and i'm sure the attorneys representing the workers are going to slow roll this trial to put out a lot of dirt in the news cycles daily that is going to make the Walton inheritance, never worked a day in their lives, children squirm. And you better believe those arrogant bastards are squirming as we speak. You can also bet they are meeting with their lawyers right now to try and find anyway to shut this down. This is probably what pissed off the judge. The fact that these wastes of human existence were arrogant enough to think they are safe with their bribes to politicians that have managed to protect them up until now. There's a way out for them alright. Dig up the dough, and you can go. The main theme here being they are going to pay, and that's the worst thing you can do the Waltons. They would deem it a crushing defeat, and a humiliation. Looks like it's going to be bad year for arrogant billionaires.
1

User avatar
Posted by skews13
17 Jan 2014, 10:04 pm

Post 17 Jan 2014, 10:04 pm
skews13      
User avatar
     

Posts: 2714
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/01/16/1270212/-Ohio-tortures-a-man-to-death

Image


Mark of shame From the moment the ghoulish Ohio Assistant Attorney General Thomas Madden told convicted murderer Dennis McGuire that he wasn't "entitled to a pain-free execution," it was clear that the state and this nation were embracing a new modern nadir of barbarity. Inevitably:

A condemned man appeared to gasp several times and took an unusually long time to die — more than 20 minutes — in an execution carried out Thursday with a combination of drugs never before tried in the U.S.

Dennis McGuire's attorney Allen Bohnert called the convicted killer's death "a failed, agonizing experiment" and added: "The people of the state of Ohio should be appalled at what was done here today in their names."

McGuire's lawyers had attempted last week to block his execution, arguing that the untried method could lead to a medical phenomenon known as "air hunger" and cause him to suffer "agony and terror" while struggling to catch his breath.

Torture:

A reporter for the Associated Press, which sends a journalist to every execution in the US, wrote that McGuire “appeared to gasp several times during his prolonged execution ... McGuire made several loud snorting or snoring sounds during the more than 15 minutes it appeared to take him to die.

It was one of the longest executions since Ohio resumed capital punishment in 1999. McGuire's stomach rose and fell several times as he repeatedly opened and shut his mouth.”

Another eye-witness report from the Columbus Dispatch provided concurring evidence. Dispatch reporter Alan Johnson wrote that four minutes into the procedure, "McGuire started struggling and gasping loudly for air, making snorting and choking sounds which lasted for at least 10 minutes. His chest heaved and his left fist clinched as deep, snorting sounds emanated from his mouth."

McGuire's defence attorney, Allen Bohnert, said that according to reports he had been given from witnesses in the chamber, the prisoner was gasping for breath from about 10.30am to 10.44am. At some point, witnesses told Bohnert, McGuire tried to sit up, turned his head toward his family members who were witnessing, and spoke to them.

One witness described the scene as "ghastly".

As a nation, we are in gruesome company:

First, the numbers: Twenty-one countries carried out executions in 2012, the same as 2011. Those countries — of which China, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the U.S. are the biggest offenders — executed at least 682 people, or two more than in 2011.

No matter the offense, there is no justification. And Ohio just made it worse.
1

User avatar
Posted by skews13
19 Jan 2014, 12:00 pm

skews13      
User avatar
     

Posts: 2714
golfboy » 19 Jan 2014 10:44 am wrote:
Truthwarrior757 » 19 Jan 2014 10:40 am wrote:
Does lying to yourself make you feel better ? :LOL:

He must enjoy rejection because he repeatedly drops these steaming turds from politicus, and then has to run away and hide when his claims get the shit kicked out of them.


Apparently the last sentence of that post didn't get through to you. The only ones being rejected are people like you goofy, and unfortunately for your dwindling number of dweebs, as each election cycle passes, that rejection is growing worse by a generation of Americans 76 million strong, that is going to bury your world view of ignorance in just a few short years.

What are you turds going to do when their voting numbers becomes so overwhelming, that you cannot stop them from enabling new regulations on pollution that 99.999% of scientists agree is a contributing factor to this problem? I mean given the fact you apparently missed the fact in the article that only .0001% of scientists, agree with you. But hey look at the Bright side goofy. You will always have this board to whine and cry on as you swear at your television reporting these new regulations being enacted every year. Regulations you won't have the votes to stop. And you won't be able to find them in bubble world.
1

User avatar
Posted by skews13
19 Jan 2014, 4:53 pm

skews13      
User avatar
     

Posts: 2714
RichClem » 19 Jan 2014 10:40 am wrote:
Anyone remember liberals' demands for civility?

Just another dishonest club to use against conservatives.

They drop their standards like a hot rock when they attack our side.

Top Kentucky Democrat Compares Beating McConnell in 2014 to Liberating Europe From Nazis
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-shepp ... ating-euro


Yeah, we remember cletis. We also remember there hasn't been in civility since the day the President was sworn into office. Nothing but obstruction, underhanded dirty tricks, racial slurs at every turn, and the revelations of a plan by the butt hurt right to use obstruction, and incivility purposely. You now get the bonus plan.
1

User avatar
Posted by skews13
19 Jan 2014, 4:45 pm

skews13      
User avatar
     

Posts: 2714
Huey » 19 Jan 2014 7:32 am wrote:
greatnpowerfuloz » 19 Jan 2014 6:50 am wrote:

Never happen because it's not the leftist extremists doing the tarring and feathering. It's Christie's own party rolling him up and dumping him over the side of the bridge. If his own party doesn't want him in the Oval Office, how do you figure he'll ever get there?


Oh,Mao if he was a dem they would be circling the wagons, defending him and claiming it was a faux scandal?


Except for the emails showing evidence to the contrary, the exposed lie there was no traffic study, staff members in the governors office being fired, subpoenaed witnesses looking for immunity to testify as to what they know, and mayors of cities claiming they were purposely being targeted, and the mayor of Hoboken saying today the Lt. Governor telling her personally she was being targeted by being stiffed on Sandy relief funds, you have a point there.
1

User avatar
Posted by skews13
20 Jan 2014, 7:19 pm

skews13      
User avatar
     

Posts: 2714
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/20/85-global-elites-as-wealthy-as-half-of-the-worlds-population-oxfam/


As World Economic Forum starts in Davos, development charity claims that growing inequality has been driven by a ‘power grab’ by wealthy elites

The world’s wealthiest people aren’t known for travelling by bus, but if they fancied a change of scene then the richest 85 people on the globe – who between them control as much wealth as the poorest half of the global population put together – could squeeze onto a single double-decker.
The extent to which so much global wealth has become corralled by a virtual handful of the so-called ‘global elite’ is exposed in a new report from Oxfam on Monday. It warned that those richest 85 people across the globe share a combined wealth of £1tn, as much as the poorest 3.5 billion of the world’s population.

The wealth of the 1% richest people in the world amounts to $110tn (£60.88tn), or 65 times as much as the poorest half of the world, added the development charity, which fears this concentration of economic resources is threatening political stability and driving up social tensions.
It’s a chilling reminder of the depths of wealth inequality as political leaders and top business people head to the snowy peaks of Davos for this week’s World Economic Forum. Few, if any, will be arriving on anything as common as a bus, with private jets and helicopters pressed into service as many of the world’s most powerful people convene to discuss the state of the global economy over four hectic days of meetings, seminars and parties in the exclusive ski resort.
Winnie Byanyima, the Oxfam executive director who will attend the Davos meetings, said: “It is staggering that in the 21st Century, half of the world’s population – that’s three and a half billion people – own no more than a tiny elite whose numbers could all fit comfortably on a double-decker bus.”
Oxfam also argues that this is no accident either, saying growing inequality has been driven by a “power grab” by wealthy elites, who have co-opted the political process to rig the rules of the economic system in their favour.
In the report, entitled Working For The Few (summary here), Oxfam warned that the fight against poverty cannot be won until wealth inequality has been tackled.
“Widening inequality is creating a vicious circle where wealth and power are increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few, leaving the rest of us to fight over crumbs from the top table,” Byanyima said.

Oxfam called on attendees at this week’s World Economic Forumto take a personal pledge to tackle the problem by refraining from dodging taxes or using their wealth to seek political favors.
As well as being morally dubious, economic inequality can also exacerbate other social problems such as gender inequality, Oxfam warned. Davos itself is also struggling in this area, with the number of female delegates actually dropping from 17% in 2013 to 15% this year.
How richest use their wealth to capture opportunities
Polling for Oxfam’s report found people in countries around the world – including two-thirds of those questioned in Britain – believe that the rich have too much influence over the direction their country is heading.
Byanyima explained:
“In developed and developing countries alike we are increasingly living in a world where the lowest tax rates, the best health and education and the opportunity to influence are being given not just to the rich but also to their children.
“Without a concerted effort to tackle inequality, the cascade of privilege and of disadvantage will continue down the generations. We will soon live in a world where equality of opportunity is just a dream. In too many countries economic growth already amounts to little more than a ‘winner takes all’ windfall for the richest.”
The Oxfam report found that over the past few decades, the rich have successfully wielded political influence to skew policies in their favour on issues ranging from financial deregulation, tax havens, anti-competitive business practices to lower tax rates on high incomes and cuts in public services for the majority. Since the late 1970s, tax rates for the richest have fallen in 29 out of 30 countries for which data are available, said the report.
This “capture of opportunities” by the rich at the expense of the poor and middle classes has led to a situation where 70% of the world’s population live in countries where inequality has increased since the 1980s and 1% of families own 46% of global wealth – almost £70tn.
Opinion polls in Spain, Brazil, India, South Africa, the US, UK and Netherlands found that a majority in each country believe that wealthy people exert too much influence. Concern was strongest in Spain, followed by Brazil and India and least marked in the Netherlands.
In the UK, some 67% agreed that “the rich have too much influence over where this country is headed” – 37% saying that they agreed “strongly” with the statement – against just 10% who disagreed, 2% of them strongly.
The WEF’s own Global Risks report recently identified widening income disparities as one of the biggest threats to the world community.
Oxfam is calling on those gathered at WEF to pledge: to support progressive taxation and not dodge their own taxes; refrain from using their wealth to seek political favours that undermine the democratic will of their fellow citizens; make public all investments in companies and trusts for which they are the ultimate beneficial owners; challenge governments to use tax revenue to provide universal healthcare, education and social protection; demand a living wage in all companies they own or control; and challenge other members of the economic elite to join them in these pledges.
-1

User avatar
Posted by skews13
21 Jan 2014, 4:42 pm

skews13      
User avatar
     

Posts: 2714
bludog » 21 Jan 2014 3:06 pm wrote:
skews13 » 21 Jan 2014 2:26 pm wrote:
http://www.politicususa.com/2014/01/21/obamas-diplomacy-wins-iran-thet.html

-snip-

One expects warmongering from Republicans serving Israel’s interests over their own country, but not from 16 Senate Democrats who are either pandering for the Jewish vote, hate the idea of diplomacy, or love the idea of America at war putting them in the same category as warmongering Republicans.


The biggest money in favor of war with Iran comes not from the "Jewish" lobby but the Military-Industrial Complex. A war with Iran could set off a conflagration in the Mid-East which would keep US war industries bankrolled for years.

//QUOTE//Big money behind war: the military-industrial complex
More than 50 years after President Eisenhower's warning, Americans find themselves in perpetual war.
Last updated: 11 Jan 2014 07:42
Image
Jonathan Turley
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and has testified before Congress on the dangerous expansion of presidential powers.

-snip-

Good for economy?

While few politicians are willing to admit it, we don't just endure wars we seem to need war - at least for some people. A study showed that roughly 75 percent of the fallen in these wars come from working class families. They do not need war. They pay the cost of the war. Eisenhower would likely be appalled by the size of the industrial and governmental workforce committed to war or counter-terrorism activities. Military and homeland budgets now support millions of people in an otherwise declining economy. Hundreds of billions of dollars flow each year from the public coffers to agencies and contractors who have an incentive to keep the country on a war-footing - and footing the bill for war.

-snip-

//UNQUOTE//
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinio ... 36533.html


It's certainly a legitimate concern. Keeping in mind that the military industrial complex is the biggest part of our annual subsidy to Israel. It allows R&D on weapons systems to be conducted there, out of sight of the American tax payer, that Congress knows it couldn't sell here. That's $30 billion in ten years. How could that money have helped US citizens during the recession they have faced in the last 5 years? Ironically enough it looks like it's Iran, and not Israel doing more to perpetuate middle east peace.
1

User avatar
Posted by skews13
22 Jan 2014, 9:21 pm

skews13      
User avatar
     

Posts: 2714
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/about-four-minute-aca-hack



Image



Just last week, the chief information security officer for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services was able to boast a bit to the House Oversight Committee. Healthcare.gov has been subjected to “end-to-end security testing and passed with flying colors.”



Not so fast, conservative media responded.

The Daily Caller, the Washington Times, Fox News, and others pointed to David Kennedy, the head of a head of computer security consulting firm, who reportedly claimed he could use a standard web browser to access 70,000 personal records belonging to consumers who enrolled through the ACA system – after just four minutes of effort.



Well, that certainly sounds alarming, doesn’t it? And it’s not as if conservative media has ever steered anyone wrong when it comes to “Obamacare,” right?



After all, here’s a computer security consulting expert, recently a star witness in a hearing organized by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), who exposed a critical flaw in healthcare.gov.

Except, that’s not quite what happened, and those reports from conservative media painted a deeply bogus picture.



The
Washington Post’s Brian Fung
discovered, “[I]t turned out the reports were nothing more than simple confusion.”

“We never accessed 70,000 records nor is it directly on the Healthcare.gov website,” wrote Kennedy in an update to an earlier blog post. “No dumping of data, malicious intent, hacking, or even viewing of the information was done.”



In short, Kennedy explained that he used basic Google tools to search the Web site, but he didn’t hack it.



Some media reports, however, latched onto this line in his original post: “The 70,000 mark of information disclosure being reported was through using a basic Google search terms and browsing through a web browser” and assumed Kennedy had been able to access 70,000 records.

OK, but if Kennedy didn’t access 70,000 personal records, as conservative media claimed, what did he access? There were 70,000 results of what, exactly? As best as I can tell, he hasn’t elaborated on this point, except to say, “We do not support the statements from the news organizations.”



In defense of the conservative media outlets that got this story very wrong, some of their confusion is understandable. Consider this exchange between Fox News’ Chris Wallace and David Kennedy over the weekend:

WALLACE: You say you did not hack the site and, yet, you say you could access 70,000 records of various people who have signed up for health care under – at the website within four minutes. How do you know that if you haven’t hacked the site?

KENNEDY: That’s a great question. There is a technique called – what we call passer reconnaissance, which allows us to queering look at how the website operates and performs. And these type of attacks that, you know, I’m mentioning here in the 70,000 that you’re referencing is very easy to do.

Hearing this, it’s easy to see how someone might get the impression that Kennedy was able to access 70,000 personal records, since that’s what Wallace asked and Kennedy didn’t correct him.



That said – and this is the point conservatives still struggle to understand – even if healthcare.gov were somehow hacked, the hackers couldn’t gain access to private medical records. Why not? Because there are no private medical records stored on healthcare.gov.

The threat doesn’t exist because the scenario is imaginary.

Something to keep in mind when your wacky uncle who watches Fox News all day emails you about the “Obamacare security threat” – the conservative media reports this week were wildly misleading and there is no real threat.
1

User avatar
Posted by skews13
22 Jan 2014, 8:44 pm

skews13      
User avatar
     

Posts: 2714
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/20/trickle-down-economics-broken-promise-richest-85


Image

The richest 85 people in the world have as much wealth as the poorest 3.5 billion – or half the world's entire population – put together. This is the stark headline of a report from Oxfam ahead of the World Economic Forum at Davos. Is there a reason why the world's powerful, gathering at the exclusive resort to sip cognac and eat blinis, should care? Well, yes.

If one subscribes to the charitable view that neoliberal philosophy was simply naive or misguided in thinking that "trickle down" would work infinitely, then evidence that it doesn't, should be cause for concern. It is a fundamental building block of supply-side economic theory – the tool of choice these past few decades for those in charge to make adjustments. The realisation that governments have been pulling at economic levers which, for some time, have been attached to nothing, should be a wake-up call to the deepest sleepers.

Even if one subscribes to the cynical view that the elite knew what they were doing all along, observing that the "rising tide" is lifting fewer and fewer boats and leaving more and more to rot in the sediment – both at a personal and national level – must make most wonder "am I in the right boat and is it big enough?" Concentration is rampant. Credit Suisse estimates that the world will have 11 trillionaires within two generations.

It is not so much that the supply-side principle "if you build it, they will come" is no longer true. It is more that we appear to have passed a tipping point, where so much wealth has been concentrated at the top, they no longer need bother to "build" anything. In short, it has become more economically efficient to buy countries' economic policy than to create value in order to sell it on. If one can control government to favour the richest, while raising barriers for new entrants, thus increasing their share of the pie exponentially, what is the incentive to grow the pie?

This applies to both companies and individuals. Small business gets clobbered by taxes and business rates, while big business turns around and says to the state: "This is how much tax I fancy paying this year, take it or leave it". The rich no longer create jobs, through a process of consolidation, takeover and merger, they actually destroy them. Zero-hours contracts are the way of the future; in a society that is hungry, desperate and devoid of political engagement or unionism, why would anyone offer terms and conditions that give individual workers any standing?

And yet, the realisation must dawn soon – one hopes – that this model is unsustainable because its effects are uncontrollable. The more unequal we become as a society, the faster the top's earnings diverge from the bottom's. "When so much of the purchasing power, so much of the economic gain, goes to the very top," Bill Clinton's former labour secretary Robert Reich explains in the film Inequality For All. "There's simply not enough purchasing power in the rest of the economy." At the same time, there is far too much loose cash sloshing around at the top, leading to unwise risks and toxic investments. Wealth inequality in the US was at its highest levels, historically, in 1928 and 2007, one year before its two biggest financial crises, notes Reich. The base of the pyramid atrophies and begins to crumble.

Then why are most governments continuing to fiddle with supply-side levers in order to revive the economy, when it is abundantly clear it does not work? The simple answer is in two parts. First part: habit. The second was perfectly expressed by the creator of The Wire, David Simon: "That may be the ultimate tragedy of capitalism in our time, that it has achieved its dominance without regard to a social compact, without being connected to any other metric for human progress."

We have come to measure, to an increasing extent, individuals' success by their wealth, spending power and other assorted trappings. We do the same with the economic success of governments; measure it by an aggregated data set that fails to take into account wealth distribution, educational achievement, innovation, or even the welfare and health of the population they claim to represent. We must shift this perspective. It will be the hardest, simplest thing we have ever had to do as a species.
1

User avatar
Posted by skews13
24 Jan 2014, 9:18 pm

skews13      
User avatar
     

Posts: 2714
onlyaladd » 24 Jan 2014 3:40 pm wrote:
I'm glad people bring this up. The boom bust bubble economics are unsustainable and will always end in a crash. We need to focus on creating and manufacturing things instead of just manipulating financial markets.



Crashes always occur at the height of maximum investing. When you move away from the mechanisms of what creates a viable middleclass such as manufacturing, and create what amounts to an investment class society, you end up with a few haves, and many have nots. That's what's not sustainable. Wall St. speculation is the biggest enemy of the middleclass. This why a tax levied on all trades must be enacted soon. The revenues obtained from that tax must go directly to infrastructure spending that creates jobs, and shores up the middleclass. Of course investors can obtain relief from the tax by getting credits for the amount of jobs they create.
2

User avatar
Posted by skews13
24 Jan 2014, 6:09 pm

skews13      
User avatar
     

Posts: 2714
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/01/24/1272249/-You-can-t-have-American-flags-on-sticks-in-the-Virginia-capitol-but-you-can-have-a-gun





Image
The ThinkProgress title sums this one up nicely.
Virginia State Legislature Bans American Flags On Sticks, But Lets Guns In


And no, it isn't a joke. You can bring your loaded AR-15 to the Virginia capitol, but you can't bring a flag stapled to a 12-inch dowel because that would be far, far too dangerous.
According to Virginia Capitol Police, the groups were informed beforehand of the restriction barring sticks at permitted rallies, because they can be used as weapons.


Other things that can be used as weapons: actual weapons.
While the moms tore out the dowels of their flags, capitol grounds visitors with firearms were ushered through the entrance. That day, Virginia Citizens Defense League and other gun rights groups organized a “Guns Save Lives” day. The Richmond Times-Dispatch reported that about half of the crowd was armed, packing weapons that ranged from handguns to assault rifles.


The lesson of all of this is that we really are that insane.


You are not allowed to carry anything in certain portions of the public square that someone might suspect could be used as a weapon, but the almighty gun is sacrosanct, and trumps all other public safety laws.

It is not a weapon, so say we all, it is shiny metal Freedom.

The reason that the 2nd amendment does not allow axes to be carried into the capitol is solely because axe manufacturers have not paid great gobs of money into political coffers in order to make it happen. There is no National Pointed Stick Association, no glossy magazines suggesting you cannot possibly defend your family unless you own a custom-designed pointed stick, and so they too are left out.

The amount of public assaults involving 12-inch dowels is, I would wager, a very small number, but every true Patriot needs to be able to carry around their own little arsenal of guns just in case someone tries to sneak a 12-inch dowel into the building.
There's no possible defense here. It's just fetishism.
-1

User avatar
Posted by skews13
25 Jan 2014, 6:51 pm

skews13      
User avatar
     

Posts: 2714
contracoup » 25 Jan 2014 5:26 pm wrote:
Here's a link to a nice article about the people who submit post after post that contribute nothing to the discussion.

Does this appear to be directed at some of you on the right?

Damn!

I wonder how that happened...

...I fear we are witnessing the “death of expertise”: a Google-fueled, Wikipedia-based, blog-sodden collapse of any division between professionals and laymen, students and teachers, knowers and wonderers – in other words, between those of any achievement in an area and those with none at all. By this, I do not mean the death of actual expertise, the knowledge of specific things that sets some people apart from others in various areas. There will always be doctors, lawyers, engineers, and other specialists in various fields. Rather, what I fear has died is any acknowledgement of expertise as anything that should alter our thoughts or change the way we live.

This is a very bad thing. Yes, it’s true that experts can make mistakes, as disasters from thalidomide to the Challenger explosion tragically remind us. But mostly, experts have a pretty good batting average compared to laymen: doctors, whatever their errors, seem to do better with most illnesses than faith healers or your Aunt Ginny and her special chicken gut poultice. To reject the notion of expertise, and to replace it with a sanctimonious insistence that every person has a right to his or her own opinion, is silly.

Worse, it’s dangerous. The death of expertise is a rejection not only of knowledge, but of the ways in which we gain knowledge and learn about things. Fundamentally, it’s a rejection of science and rationality, which are the foundations of Western civilization itself. Yes, I said “Western civilization”: that paternalistic, racist, ethnocentric approach to knowledge that created the nuclear bomb, the Edsel, and New Coke, but which also keeps diabetics alive, lands mammoth airliners in the dark, and writes documents like the Charter of the United Nations.

This isn’t just about politics, which would be bad enough. No, it’s worse than that: the perverse effect of the death of expertise is that without real experts, everyone is an expert on everything. To take but one horrifying example, we live today in an advanced post-industrial country that is now fighting a resurgence of whooping cough — a scourge nearly eliminated a century ago — merely because otherwise intelligent people have been second-guessing their doctors and refusing to vaccinate their kids after reading stuff written by people who know exactly zip about medicine. (Yes, I mean people like Jenny McCarthy.

In politics, too, the problem has reached ridiculous proportions. People in political debates no longer distinguish the phrase “you’re wrong” from the phrase “you’re stupid.” To disagree is to insult. To correct another is to be a hater. And to refuse to acknowledge alternative views, no matter how fantastic or inane, is to be closed-minded...


From http://thefederalist.com/2014/01/17/the ... expertise/

cc


You do understand that this will have to be thoroughly vetted by an expert on the internet first right?
3

User avatar
Posted by skews13
25 Jan 2014, 6:28 pm

skews13      
User avatar
     

Posts: 2714
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/01/24/judge-remove-dead-pregnant-mom-life-support/



Image



On Friday, State District Judge R.H. Wallace ordered John Peter Smith Hospital, in Ft. Worth, Texas, to remove a dead woman from ‘life support’ by 5:00 P.M. Monday. The woman, Marlise Munoz, has been brain-dead since November 28th, but was kept on life-sustaining equipment because she was 14 weeks pregnant. Her husband found her on the kitchen floor, not breathing and with no pulse. How long her brain was without oxygen is unknown.

‘Treatment’ of the dead woman was something the family, including her husband Erick Munoz and her parents, did not want. They asked the hospital to remove her from the equipment. Marlise, who along with her husband was a paramedic, previously expressed the wish that her life would never be artificially sustained.

A dead person cannot be a patient.

The hospital refused the family’s request, citing a Texas law that makes it a crime to withdraw life support from a pregnant patient. Legal experts, including some who helped write the law, have said that it does not apply to someone who is dead, since a dead person cannot reasonably be defined as a patient.

In a court filing on Thursday, the hospital essentially agreed with the major points made in a lawsuit filed by Erick Munoz. The lawsuit was asking the court to put an end to the medical charade. The agreed-upon facts are that, first, Marlise has “met the clinical criteria for brain death since November 28″. Second, “the fetus gestating inside Mrs. Munoz is not viable.”

According to CNN, Erick Munoz broke down in tears when the judge announced his order. He left the courtroom without speaking to reporters. In an affidavit, also filed on Thursday, Erick said that Marlise is virtually unrecognizable now. Her bones crack when her limbs are moved and her scent has been replaced with “the smell of death”.

He also claimed that the hospital’s actions were “nothing more than the cruel and obscene mutilation of a deceased body against the expressed will of the deceased and her family.”

When pregnant women die, ‘their fetus dies with them.’

After the hearing, family lawyer Jessica King, said, “Pregnant women die every day. They die in car accidents, of heart attacks and other injuries. And when they die, their fetus dies with them. It’s the way it’s always been and the way it should be.”

Marlise’s mother, Lynne Machado, has described what they’ve been going through as “a living hell.” She hopes to go before the Texas legislature and argue against the law being applied to cases like her daughter’s, so that other families can be spared the prolonged heartache.

In the meantime, the family’s ‘hell’ is hopefully about to end. The hospital does have other options, however. They could appeal the ruling. Alternatively, they could disconnect life support before the Monday deadline. Hopefully, common sense and decency will prevail and everything but the grieving will be finished come Monday.
-1

User avatar
Posted by skews13
26 Jan 2014, 3:16 pm

skews13      
User avatar
     

Posts: 2714
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/01/22/1271593/-The-two-charts-that-objectively-prove-Democrats-aren-t-even-slightly-hurt-by-becoming-more-liberal




Image
Democrats are becoming more liberal, and it isn't hurting them at all. This is objectively true, and I have two charts to prove it.
First, as shown in the chart at the top of this post, long-term polling trends from Gallup clearly show that an increasing percentage of Americans who self-identify as Democrats also self-identify as liberals.
In 2002—the year Daily Kos was founded—there were almost as many conservative Democrats as liberal Democrats, and moderate Democrats far outnumbered either liberals or conservatives. Now, there are actually more liberal Democrats than moderate Democrats, and conservative Democrats have become a small minority.
What's more, as Democrats have become more liberal, they have not lost any ground to Republicans, as this next chart from Gallup shows:

Image
Over the past decade as Democrats have become more liberal, if anything they have improved their position relative to Republicans. They certainly have not lost ground.
The polls used in this chart have enormous numbers of participants, making even small, one percent changes statistically significant.
So there you have it. Objective proof that becoming more liberal doesn't hurt Democrats, not even a little bit.
1

User avatar
Posted by skews13
25 Jan 2014, 9:47 pm

skews13      
User avatar
     

Posts: 2714
Cedarswamp » 25 Jan 2014 8:18 pm wrote:
skews13 » 25 Jan 2014 7:48 pm wrote:

You confused him.


Skews is an expert on everything....he knows how to copy/paste......oh wait a minute......the OP too?


Not everything. Just the safe and proper installation of electrical systems. What I don't know, I can use this computer to find out, and share it with others. That is the bane of every dumbass with an agenda to push. I would just post links to the articles I read, but from experience I've learned that most know nothings don't bother to click on them because that is to much like work. So I do your trifling asses a favor and do the work for you.
2