66? I'm 76. So I may be more than reasonably confident, boyo.
66? I'm 76. So I may be more than reasonably confident, boyo.
absolute dud
Tell me what you think an absolute dud is. I addressed Hilarious Balloon Girl, Bidumb, and Kammalala. All three never held an executive position in the private sector. All of them only had minimal experience in the private sector at all. Only one of them actually was the Chief Executive, and that in name only, since Oba'a had his hand thrust up the wooden puppet's blowhole to move his mouth.
Isolationist
How am I an isolationist when, at 18, I was a volunteer for the Bobby Kennedy action campaign in L.A., was a precinct chair in SFO and in my current precinct, once chaired a citizen's committee organized by the mayor, a personal friend, to investigate city protocol to encourage more business development, and was on the Planning Commission?
Have you ever voted for a democratic presidential candidate?
Yes, I have. Several times, and it would have been one more, Bobby Kennedy, but I was present when he was assassinated. Is that isolationist? No, dammit. But, Democrat, then, was a logical organization.
I've said you don't know me. Stop making asinine guesses, because you don't know. You assume. You should know what assumption does.
AI, not being a living human entity, cannot be merely "trained" to develop morality, objective or otherwise. Therefore, it cannot deal with the very objective reality of how fragile human life is, because other animals have no concept of objective morality, either; neither the Budweiser horse, nor the eagle, nor dolphins or dogs. Just humans.
The problem with your proposal is that we do not pay taxes in percentage points, but in dollars. Your last suggestion, eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse ought to be #1 suggestion, and not just with healthcare. Then, see what tax adjustments ought to be made. And what's wrong with suggesting people educate themselves to earn higher paying jobs? It is known that the top 10 percenters already pay, in dollars, 70% of taxes paid annaully, and that the lowest 50% pay zero.
Thanks.
But, when Jesus Christ returns [he will], he would count as an ET. Eventhough born here, he lives elsewhere now, and owns the reference as an extra-terrestrial, given the time he's been away.
We do have a level of agreement. I've never said Trump was the best ever, and I don't believe it. He's okay, even pretty good, but others rate higher. But, few exceptions, I'd like someone older than Rubio and Vance for '28, both of whom I'd consider in a later round, but. I don't see a Dem leader right now that I'd vote for. There are some in Congress I'd like to consider, but they're too young to run in '28. I've come to like Fetterman as a Senator, but he's not presidential and I don't think ever will be. I liked Sherrod Brown, Dem Senator from Ohio until 2025, but he's running for Senate again this fall, and could be a candidate I'd vote for in 2032, assuming I'm still around.
That you didn't vote for Trump
Wrong again. You don't know me like you think you do. I voted for Trump in 2016, 2020, and 2024, all three times because his Demo opponents [Hillaryous Balloon Girl, Bidumb, Kamamala] were absolute duds. In all three cases, lesser qualified. Maybe not constitutionally, but I elect at a higher qualification - I want exec experience. None have been an exec anything, whereas Trump is an executive star with a 99% - plus success rate [over 530 successful businesses against 4 bankruptcies - none personal. That's according to Forbes, not a personal call.
Yes. and that is self-defeating warfare, because if the US is supposed to be anything, since it is 1/2 the name of the country, is "united," and the depth of understanding that among many Democrats, and even some Republicans is sun-setting. Words mean things, but the woke just re-define and call that sufficient.
You have me totally wrong, Sarge, even in jest. kammycacklecakes is whacko [and I've dealt with her since she was DA in SFO], not because she is black, or green, or whatever, but because somebody must have dropped her on her head when a baby and that incident messed with both head and mouth, because neither work well to describe what she senses, if she has senses. Sure doesn't make any. Neither did Bidumb, nor Oba'a, nor does An Occasional Cortex, Weekend Bernie, Shoofly, or Nanny Pelostomy; I suspect all for the same reason. Oh, let's include MCcancan, Mitchell, TrickyDick, Mitt-nit-wit 41, 43...
UFO is an acronym
Did I mention "UFO, airborne, or unidentified?" Nope. Are you really thinking I did not know? My post #1 is satyr, my friend, and nothing else. Yes, pointed at Trump. you continue to believe I am tie-dyed MAGA. Nope. I can laugh at him as much as at anyone else. I just also recognize good work when anyone exhibits. Some don't, butTrump isn't one of that ilk.
I don't need to wonder whether the US has any alien evidence at all. I already believe alien life is out there, just as diverse as we exhibit, and fills the universe. And I think they represent a wide range of cultures and behaviors, just as we do on Earth, peaceful and otherwise, all filling what they perceive as their full measure of creation. They may be green, blue, pin-striped, polka-dotted, camo... whatever.
Guessed what? Why is guessing necessary? Clearly, my avatar and my user name is attached to whichever commentary I post to which you reply. One may mask that which is thought by someone to be objectionable, but not anyone user4 detail.
Yes, .........
No, not so clever as you think. "Yes" implies you agreee with what I said, but then the following commentary is in complete disagreement. Religion is neither clever nor stupid, but is really your opinion of the people who embrace it as embracing every aspect of life. Just say you disagree and stop thinking you're clever. We see right through that.
As we approach the U.S. 250th anniversary, I thought it would be fun to see what tech was developed in the 18th century that is still in use today, essentially unchanged from when invented;
Addendum:
Sen. Mark Warner [D-VA] rears his Jackass Democrat head to declare the decision of the VA Supreme Court, which ruled 4-3 against the Dem effort to re-district VA by gerrymander, by taking the issue to the voters, and he claimsthe voters have been duped by the Court. Ironic, by the way, that the swing vote was apparently applied by a Justice Warner nominated when he was Governor of VA. What he missed is that voters may not be intimately familiar with the State Constitution, whereas, Warner, a former Governor of VA, surely is familiar, and knew their attempt was unconstitutinal, but went for it, anyway. No one to blame but his bloody self, along with the current Gov. Spanberger, and the spineless D-half of the state legislature.
Did Trump watch a marathon release of "X-Files" with David Duchovny & Gillian Anderson? You decide.
Does ebuc have a formula for us to calculate it?
AOC has demonstrated one fact that is prevalent in the Democrat Party: it does not have a single political platform plank that does not have its opposing plank. How can any political platform succeed when every point is argued by another conflicting point? That's what cancel culture means, defined by the very group which invented the term.
A review of Forum activity [the Forum home page] demonstrates that the general topic of religion has the highest commentary of any topic within Forum [with > 4,700 comments], and the second-highest number of
topics [148 - where no other topic other than Politics exceeds 100]. Politics has the highest number of posts, at > 200.
Curiously, religion has a higher number of Supreme Court cases dedicated to a subject than any other subject, signaling that this topic is of greater interest to people than any other subject under the Sun.
Yes, that is an option, but it is rarely a fair assessment of personal performance. No one in existence is going to fool God.
Agreed. At my last two companies where I filled the role of Process Control Manager, I taught my employees how to calculate their own worth to the company by their percentage of contribution to the bottom line achieved by gross revenue to the company. That way, they clearly saw their personal worth, and, at review time, they could tell me what they calculated their raise should be. I witnessed something remarkable. Being given that opportunity, they often undervalued themselves, but over time, learn3ed how to calculate more carefully. I had already made the calculations myself, and made offers of a raise higher than their calc. It also had the benefit of their improvement on the job, since the realized they would be recognized for their personal contribution. That made my argument to my manager to award the raises we calculated because it was obvious their work ethic was increasing.
Once I first heard An Occasional Cortex, I was convinced the woman had many loose screws holding her head inadequately together. Now, she makes this insane claim: "You cannot earn a billion dollars." She has, allegedly, an Econ degree, but I've always thought she earned it laying on her corner bar doing the horizontal mamba with her profs. I don't know what excuse Oba'a has, because he said much the same thing back in his day: "There comes a time when you have made enough money."
Socialism insists "The creation of personal wealth is undesirable."
Free market capitalism says "Ambition, planning, and execution creates personal wealth."
Put those two philosophies in opposition in the ring; you tell me which has the more likely knock-out punch.
Hint: Not a single socialist government has lasted longer than 100 years; the average is 40. Meanwhile, the US, as a constitutional, free market democratic republic, has endured 250 years, but if one counts the fact that it began as free market colonies of Great Britain, it has endured over 400 years.
There is no way to not feel guilt for doing something wrong. One either firmly believes there is no wrong doing, thus ignores the natural behavior that does feel guilt, or they accept the natural behavior that is guilt for wrong doing. There is wrong doing that has minor effect on ourselves and others, and there is wrong doing that has massive consequence to ourselves, but worse, to others, who thus innocently suffer for the wrong doing of others.
Rules mean things. Rules, like State Constitutions, let alone the U.S. Constitution, or Rules created at the behest of those Constitutions. Rules of procedure, for example. So, new VA Governor, Abigail Spanberger, who once said during her gubernatorial campaign that VA re-districting was not going to be necessary, looked at the political reality and changed her mind. Should have first read her State Constitution, just like Hakeem Jefries should read his US Constitution. You know, the one he swore to uphold and defend. The one to which Nancy Pelosi, his predecessor, swore to uphold, then ignored her House Rules to impeach Donald Trump. Yep, rules mean things, even when Supreme Courts do read those documents, and try to legitimately uphold them, because they, too, swear to do so. Some people are just better at respecting the oaths they take than others.
Regarding DEI at State Universities, the only institutions which fall under jurisdiction of State government, and, therefore, subject to Title VII, only employees of the university can sue the university for discrimination violating Title VII. However, applying students to the university who are denied entry by the appearance of applied DEI in favor of another student who meets DEI "qualification" do have legal recourse:
or both simultaneously.
Asked and answered. Review the transcript, Counselor.
Why does God allow scammers?
Might as well ask why God allows just about anything. The answer is because he did not withdraw from Adam and Eve [therefore, us, as well - all of us born on Earth] but, rather, gave to us dominion of the Earth. Of course, He gave instruction to A&E on the basic principles of proper dominion, just so they could 1. learn how to do it with good consequences, 2. Ensure natural resources were not wasted, 3. Ensure their descendants would be taught these lessons, and abide by them. We have failed in many respects to uphold these suggestions, and we will be, eventually, properly dealt with for our disobedience.
Stop. last warning.
All three examples you gave were, and I disallowed such argument, examples of former, disallowed actions by the States to impose restrictions and added qualifications for voting and other activities, For example: the Voting Rights Act of 1965 you cited contained the following: "SEC. 2. No voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any State or political subdivision to deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color." This simple injunction was violated by many states by their gerrymandering efforts when. the practice of drawing district borders expressly for racial parity is forbidden by the 1965 VRA, Sec. 2. The VA law just passed, and shot down by VA District Court, was on violation of the VRA. The VRA clearly tightened the Civil Rights Act of 1964, to further restrict efforts of Jim Crow, and demonstrates an example of former Jim Crow being abolished, and not current.
College admission is not statutory law, so does not fit the paradigm I've stated, either, even for college tuiton, which is not federal or state law or policy, either, but college institutions. When DEI is fully eradicated, and it should be, because it is not statutory law, anyway, this issue will be gone.
Your third example is also DEI, which is not statutory law, as stated.
So, you are drawing examples of peoples' interpretation of statutory law and policy, but not the law of policy itself.
Very well said.
You're not a child. Stop acting like one.
We have plenty of protesting of Jim Crow law; some of it violent, and some just waving flags with that anthem written on it: "No Jim Crow laws." Something like that other anthem, "No Kings." Sometimes, the writing can actually be read, but this is not a complaint about literacy.
These protests reactive now, as if there were Jim Crow laws still on the books. The complaint used to be "Systemic racism." "Systemic" means racism is evident in current statutory law. OK, show me. point to to just one, current, Jim Crow law. Don't show me what used to be, I know they used to exist, but they do not, now!
All Jim Crow has been removed from law and policy. It no longer exists.
If I am wrong, show me. Cite the law. Cite the policy. Go.
I know you cannot.
Don't show me attitude; that's an individual thing, not systemic. Show me systemic. I know there is individual Jim Crow attitude, and I object to that, too. I am with you, there. Please try to understand the difference.