Datasets:

uproai

/

endex-700k-ns

like 0

What a travesty that _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ isn't included.

Good comment. I hope several other redditors respond with their own versions of the same comment, and then _get_ _upvoted_.

Unscheduled offworld activation!

Close the iris.

SNL Classic http://www.hulu.com/watch/4090/saturday-night-live-weekend-update-all-drug-olympics

I came here to post that, but I was too late. That skit is one of the best ever.

I don't think this is the emotion they were going for, but whenever I read one of these comics it makes me angry. They irritate the shit out of me.

So... why do you read them?

Talking about humans. Obviously. And you seem intent on either arguing with me, or trying to say/prove that monogamy is a non-societal construct/situation or somehow genetically/evolutionarily superior to other forms of copulation or cohabitation... no idea why. Yes, monogamy is one of multiple forms of human relations. But those things, women not as property, the masses of men having money, health care, no dowries, those are all the result of social situations. Pretty much all of humanity is social, we are social beings, we live in societies of one sort or another. My point is that "we" (and by "we" I'm referring to western civilization primarily) are monogamous due to religious teaching and other social factors, as you mentioned. And that the situation that "we" are in, is invariably not the situation everyone across the world is in. And I think that were monogamy not thought to be pretty much the only available option in western civilization, that you would find a surprising number of people engaging in "alternative" arrangements. You must also consider that very recently (50 years) the dynamic has changed, such that it is not exclusively that a man brings home food/money and woman cooks and squirts out babies. Women make money too. Such that having two women and one man really isn't a greatly increased burden upon the man, or requiring a man of great wealth to achieve. Thus if you get rid of the secular Cinderella fairy tale, the 'the one that's right for you' teachings of our current society; the religious 'one-man, one-woman' teachings; or you simply continue increasing the number of relationships that are never marriage, or that end divorce; everything becomes a lot more fluid and less rigidly defined. Meaning what was once polygamy and non-exclusive relationships (back in history, and in "less-developed" areas) and developed into life-long commitments of monogamy is progressing back to more open relationships. *Thus I think that monogamy is not really a natural state, exclusive of others, as is currently practiced in western civilization, as it is simply one option.* <- And I guess that's my point.

You misrepresent my argument. We both agree that monogamy and polygamy are options a species can take, and that many societies practice polygamy. In fact, the two options, as you say, are only two extremes, with much grey area between.I argue that the potential for monogamy existed long before modern social systems, as did polygamy. I think the two options are as old as humankind. The reason I desire monogamy for a society is that there are plenty of young males left out of the game in a polygamous society. They have historically gotten angry. In fact, it could be argued that the modern state is a consequence of poor young men wanting a piece of the pie, getting enough to afford to support a wife, and then allowing the powerful to have a few extra wives. If we want social cohesion, it's worked itself out in a perfectly natural and beneficial way. And since many people have the option to marry each other out of a state of mutual attraction, it means that people can go marry your sister, or marry six wives, or marry another woman, and no one misses out. _Thus I think that monogamy is one of several evolutionary stable strategies, and it is simply one option, but is an option that benefits everyone through marriage-by-attraction, and not through marriage-by-money._ <- And I guess that's my point.

Donald's kind of a dick.

up for the lack pants.

random_deletion

Errr. Not really. Mostly just jibes at theists. Paraphrase: I am stupid, irrational, and uneducated therefore God exists.

Every single argument that I read in the /r/atheism thread has been used seriously by Christians out to support God's existence. If we didn't see arguments like this in /r/Christianity, we wouldn't see them in "Devil's Advocate" threads in /r/atheism. Frankly, your complaints look less like you read the thread and more like you're desperate to smugly dismiss it. You may as well end your posts with "it takes more faith to be an atheist".

While the Night's Dawn trilogy was very enjoyable (if perhaps in need of a little editing) I found the Deus Ex Machina ending very disappointing.

agreed, seemed a mighty lazy way to tie everything up.

I agree with most of the advice on technique and ingredients but there are two points of objection. 1. Searing does NOT "seal in the juices" that's an old misconception from 19th century food science(see Good Eats episode EA1H22). The reason searing makes meat in particular so tasty is the Maillard reaction - and the abundance of flavor it brings about. The texture contrast of seared meat (between a crispy outside and moist inside) doesn't hurt either. By the Way; If your not deglazing your searing pan after you've seared your burger to perfection you've missed half the flavor and half the point of searing it in the first place. Just as much of the flavor molecules that result from the Maillard reaction get left in the pan as come out on the burger. Deglazing recovers that flavor in the form of a sauce and makes it much easier to clean the pan. 2. Patty size. The burger he cooked is simply not eatable, its far too big. If you cant reasonably get the burger in your mouth and get at all of the layers of texture and flavor you don't have a sandwich worth eating.

The guy who sticks a slice of pineapple on a burger tells me I'm doing it all wrong. You aren't supposed to fry in smoking oil. Squeezing the patty is the only way to tell if it is cooked properly. I don't like any vegetables or spices on or mixed into my patty. He didn't bother to mention that the proper way to toast the bun is to make sure it is coated with a layer of melted butter or oil, and how important it is not to over-grill it. I'll keep doing it wrong Frenchie.

says he who trolls nsfw in his free time...

trolls or scours hard?

The Shining. Those little girls haunt me on a day-to-day basis.

I just watched that the other day, and honestly I think it's one of the most over-rated movies ever.

Western and Queens FTW.

I've heard that Western has the best girl to guy ratio. Waterloo is a disaster, except for the architecture program.

So we'll see ya for Christmas then?

It is a possibility. Where would you recommend moving to? I currently live in New England, so I'm certainly not that far...

reminds me of the hours I spent on Outcast

Was just about to come here to say how that game was a far better example of a voxel based world. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=gMePgitDers

Because the cracker is Jesus.

In what way?

CDs have plenty of quality. Besides, compressed crap on vinyl ain't any better than compressed crap on CD, and that's usually all you get in this day and age.

ty Winner. Sure

generic_replies

I've always hated the "explosions can't happen in space" argument. Sure, you can't light a bit of TNT with a match in space, but there's a whole bunch of air inside one of these starships (which tend to explode from the inside out), not to mention whatever futuristic materials that are used in ships systems which might not need oxygen for combustion. And no one is standing on the roof of the Enterprise with their ear pointed toward the doomed ship. Perhaps the viewscreen extrapolates auditory data for some reason. In summary: It's a tv show. Relax.

well, those rings explosions would make would never happen in space. i was always pretty irritated when the new star wars remakes took the original death star explosion and put an expanding ring into it. it was kind of like giving the middle finger to science for no particular reason, since most people don't find huge explosions with rings any less exciting than huge explosions without.

Making the resolution bigger might be sub-optimal for other tasks on the computer. Presumably foxyvixen wants to use her computer for more than reading Dilbert.

It's not necessarily sub-optimal because a lot of other text on a computer is about the same size.

I felt like I was watching Gilmore Girls.

Only 2 reasons why you would watch Gilmore Girls (maybe 3 but the third doesn't need mentioning, just use your imagination): 1) You're a teeny-bopper girl 2) You're a guy that thinks the Gilmore Girls are hot and would do one, the other, or both but tell your friends/family/gf/other that it's got a "good story line"

I'd have to say that the 18 years age requirement is fairly stupid. I think the worldwide age for consent should be established at 16 years old. 18 seems a bit too old. Many countries go younger than that, and many states in the US set the age at 16, not 18. JMO, of course.

There is a big difference between when a person is physically matured to the point where they are able to reproduce and desire sex, and the point where they grok all of the social implications of sex. a 16 year-old (and arguably even an 18 year-old) is unlikely to have seen enough of the world to understand how decisions like this can affect them later. An additional factor is that fact that at 16 someone is also very unlikely to be experienced enough to understand the implications of the contract involved (do people in porn get royalties for when their image is used? what about when images and videos are licensed to other sites? I'm 25 and I watch a lot of porn and I don't know, how is a 16 year-old going to know?) tl;dr: 16 is old enough to be experimenting with sex with peers in the same age-group, but too young to be in a mature sexual relationship. 16 year-olds don't understand contract law.

Try Linux.

i don't know how.

Or: government doesn't steal their money. Therefore, they have more money.

How much do you think people living below the poverty line pay in taxes? hint: It's usually negative.

can somebody screen-capture the meat?

Here you go. http://static.thehollywoodgossip.com/images/gallery/lady-gaga-hermaphrodite-picture.jpg http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/c/c5/Lady_GaGa_Dat_Ass_WTF.jpg http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/f/f5/Gagman2.jpg

Forgive me oh great one, I shall never dare to make a typo again. You obviously hear what you want. His implications are stated in my post and are bold!

Maher criticizes Obama nearly every episode, do you think Maher considers himself an uneducated racist?

I just want more videos of the Reddit T-Shirt wearing dog. He\she should have its own show.

IT could be a Conan O'Brian style chat show, with a band headed up by Keyboard Cat.

Nope. http://www.cuil.com/search?q=letmegooglethatforyou As expected, it found nothing!

You're doing it wrong: http://www.cuil.com/search?q=let+me+cuil+that+for+you

My GF refers to it as, "Leaving a snail trail". She's so classy some times ;)

You type wrong sometimes

The man has one bad year and everyone rages against him. So fickle.

Soriano is not a star baseball player. His fielding is average, worse than average in the outfield but his hitting is highly overrated. He gets the big numbers against pitchers that don't know about his weakness for sliders. Look at his number in the postseason. Pathetic. And its because in the big games, the pitchers throw sliders and curves away from him and Sori reaches for them every time. I guess no one bothered to tell him or, more likely, he didn't bother to listen.

Oh yeah, only white people know how to go through the correct procedure.

But why didn't they go through the correct procedure? I mean am i just meant to believe it's all racism?

"Only the original purchaser of this car may be allowed to own it in any and all regards. Any attempt to sell this car will be taken as an act of car piracy and will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The assumed ownership of this vehicle is assumed from the time of assembly to five years hence. Any attempt to use this car past the five year term limit without first purchasing a follow-up ownership contract for 30% of the original purchase price plus fees and insurance costs will be seen as an act of car piracy and will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Any attempt to have the car serviced or repaired in a non-standard facility will be seen as an act of vandalism and a violation of the car issuer's rights. Any attempt to sell any part of this vehicle by any non-licensed dealer will be seen as an act of car piracy and will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law." There's a sticker that says that... it's under the rear left bumper of every American car. ;)

This is a joke, right? Please? It must be, but it's done so well....

Did you use protection? If you didn't, you need to tell her so that you can both be tested over the next few months- you owe her that. (And you can't trust that the other girl is a virgin, or that she's never had her pants off with anyone else.) Things that "will never be found out" usually are, in the long run. You can take a chance on her never finding out, but it is a real chance. It sounds like there were other people in the house, and eventually someone will say something. Or get very drunk and emotional and it will just slip out.

Funny you're getting downvotes. This is the best advice on here. EDIT: Oh good. Now you've got upvotes.

Love, Actually.

I had a girlfriend quote me bits in Portugese from that movie, and send me screen caps of the poster things the guy holds up for Keira Knightley, including "To me, you are perfect." It was about that time I decided that she was way to freaking into me after dating for like a month.

Sometimes, when I watch a debate between an atheist and a theist, the theist says something like this: “Without God, there would be no morality.” The atheist tends to counter with one or more of the following: a) Religion has caused more harm than good, etc. b) Lots of people don’t believe in God, and they’re perfectly ‘moral’. c) People have moral instincts that are the result of evolution. Etc. The theist sometimes becomes frustrated and asserts that morality is either objective or meaningless, and that the atheist’s denial of the existence of God condemns his or her ‘morality’ to the latter category. The atheist tends to balk at this, and repeat the above arguments. When the theist says that “without God, there would be no morality,” he could mean one of several things: a) If people didn’t believe in God, then they would behave in conventionally ‘immoral’ and depraved ways, and the world would suck. Widespread religious belief is a necessary (but not a sufficient) condition for the world not sucking in this way. b) Conventionally ‘moral’ instincts in humans (such as an aversion to killing) could not be the product of evolution. Therefore, evolution is false. Therefore, God exists. c) Unlike religious people, atheists lack the conceptual preconditions for robust moral realism. For an atheist, the phrase “X is wrong” will only ever be an expression of a sensibility – akin to ‘X is fun to be around’ – and never a literal expression of a factual proposition about mind-independent features of the world that can be ‘true’ or ‘false’ in the same sense that “this table is made of wood” can be ‘true’ or ‘false.’ Point A is an empirical point, and I’m not sure whether I agree with it or not. I certainly wouldn’t consider it to be true of everyone, but – when a particularly frightening theist tells me that he or she would do whatever he or she wanted if he or she didn’t believe in God – I can’t help but be tempted to believe them. However, this is obviously a ridiculous argument for the *existence* of God. Point B can be responded to by giving the theist a crash course in group selection and the phylogenetic etiology of ‘altruistic’ traits. Unfortunately, Point C is rarely understood and addressed on its merits. Again, Point C is basically: “Reasonable atheists cannot be robust [moral realists](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_realism).” It’s true that there are atheists who also happen to be moral realists, but I wouldn’t consider their moral realism to be reasonable or justified. I think that the theist has a point here. I think that the appropriate response to this is: “For many if not most atheists, the discipline of ‘ethics’ basically represents a sincere attempt at describing presumably intuitive and commonly held moral sensibilities without sounding inconsistent, incoherent or stupid. We speak *as though* we are making a moral realist argument because, for whatever reason, this seems to be the most accessible and useful way to *articulate* and *apply* our moral sensibilities. In a sense, the whole of ‘ethics’ is a ‘moral fiction,’ if arguably a useful and intuitive one.” This won’t sound good to a hoard of knee-jerk believers, but it’s the intellectually honest and appropriate response to a sincerely conceived and reasonably compelling point. Our desire to speak of morals *as though* they were mind-independent properties is likely nothing more than an artifact of our cultural and sociobiological lineage. (The atheist should, however, be careful to assert that this does *not* mean that ‘the God hypothesis’ is a reasonable explanation for anything.)

Merde! Phillips

generic_replies

I'd give him the sack.

You're all getting a little testy.

And would you support a Canadian soldier choosing to completely ignore these procedures and just deserting? There *are* procedures in place for American soldiers to leave- they are just more stringent, but they do exist. I have heard from several ex American American soldiers who got out of the military with honourable discharges just by stating their moral objections and asking their superiors for a discharge. They had courage, said what they thought, and were rewarded. They also possibly made a difference. These soldiers signed up for the military, knowing what it would entail and reaping the benefits. Either they left because they didn't feel like living up to their obligations, or because they had moral objections (I think the former is the case more often, but that is just my read on the situation). I think it is important for you not to be able to leave the military just because you feel like it- that seriously hampers the effectiveness of the military, and puts the lives of other soldiers in danger. And if they have a legitimate moral objection to the war, then they are being cowards by running instead of staying and standing up for what they believe.

If the procedures existed and worked effectively then I would agree that soldiers should go through the proper channels to be released. In the case of the American army, these procedures are NOT effective. So I guess the answer is yes, if I Canadian soldier were in the same position as the Americans are in now, I would support them deserting and seeking asylum wherever they could find it. I am most familiar with the case of war resister Jeremy Hinzman, who tried on at least two separate occasions to be discharged with conscientious objector status. For following this procedure, he was mocked and his paperwork was purposefully "lost". He did not come to Canada because he "didn't feel like" fulfilling his contract; or rather, this "feeling" was rooted in a knowledge that if he continued to participate in what he considered immoral behaviour, he (and his young family) would be destroyed by it. Other resisters in Canada have similar stories. If what people are so worried about is the effectiveness of the military and the safety of other soldiers, then all the more reason to get these conscientous objector soliders OUT. They don't want to be there, are plagued with doubt about the morality of the situation and cannot possibly do their jobs effectively. Would you really want to be fighting beside somebody who could not, for ideological reasons, pull the trigger when "needed"? The American military is seriously doing itself a disservice by not letting these people go.

* Father alerted the U.S. embassy * Ticket was bought in cash * Didn’t check bags for month long trip * Visa was denied by the UK * Studied in Yemen * Name was on a watch list * Guy somehow isn't thought odd that is sitting and video taping every moment of the flight focusing only on this guy. Yeah, all coincidence of course.

Occam's Razor dude. What's more likely, that the shabby and ineffective U.S. government had some ornate plan that happened to go awry at the last moment, or that their incompetent asses just failed? You have way too much respect for the government..

There's a need for attacking anti-male bias. Don't confuse that with "attacking women".

they are distinct things, but both are necessary.

Even though he was born in Brazil, he spent most of his life in France. I'm not taking anything away from Brazil, but just stating the facts here.

He was born, raised, and died in Brazil. He spent many years in between in France. What fact are you stating exactly?

Writing a short essay for a study abroad semester which I no longer care about. So basically surfing the 'net with "Untitled 1" just kind of chilling in my task bar wondering what's going on.

That is a beautiful username, especially when taking your comment into consideration.

I think Toyota would like a word with you Jay.

Yeah, the Toyota Tundra is the best all-around pickup I've ever been in or driven. The Tacoma is also a very nice smaller truck. I'd like to know if Jay has driven a Toyota truck recently, because it beats the F-150 hands-down, objectively and subjectively. See what Honda and Toyota do SO well, other than build quality, is develop very nice cars and features in Lexus and Acura and then over time they move the really nice features of those cars 'down' to the Toyota Corollas and Honda Civics, so that they are pretty nice cars and are pretty loaded with features. The idea is that you hook into people when they are younger and can only afford maybe a used Civic and then when they can, they'll buy a new Civic and then when they can, they'll buy a new Accord and then when they can, they'll buy a new Acura. The Japanese car companies realize that people buy more than 1 car in their whole friggin lives, which is what GM, Ford and Chrysler don't seem to understand.

http://www.reddit.com/r/linguistics/

omg hax!

Personally I hope he wins. Fuck you Blizzard.

Why do people hate Blizzard so much? Curious, because I find their games to be pretty well made.

Newsflash: Play any music of the same tempo and you're going to be able to do this. With. Any. Song. Pick two completely different songs in, say, 4/4 time and 130bpm... bingo. It's how DJ mixing works, and it's how gimmicks like "Jive Bunny" and the "Hooked On..." series survive. Honestly, if you're just looking for an excuse to wail on Nickelback just say so, don't try this "hey, have you noticed... (that I haven't done my homework)" crap.

You miss the point. Both songs here have the same phrasing, key and melody. This is not beat matching, they are literally the same song repackaged slightly.

*sigh* Perhaps you missed my comment above? My point is, if you are with the right woman and she is mature...and *truly into you* you will not be able to stop her from sucking your cock. Even he she swears she never enjoyed sucking cock before. If she's totally into you, she will get off on it more then you will. Gentlemen. This is a test. This is how you can tell if it's real. Not that she's willing to do something she doesn't like, but that she can't get enough suckin down your cock even when she says she's never been like that before. If you're with someone that thinks they love you but won't suck dick...sorry, she's just not that into you. And she may not be mature enough to acknowledge it.

How is this that you know everything about each and everyone's personal expressions of love? What utter nonsense. You got iron balls to be so presumptuous. Does he know? Or does he go down on you?

I've heard lots of good explanations as to why a (a lot of girls) really don't like it. I've yet to hear good explanations as to why so many guys do like it, even if its not my dick, I'm turned on by sticking a finger in there, and that confuses me (and no I'm not gay and yes I'm sure)

-It's naughty -different sensations than a vagina (tight around the shaft, loose at the head) -it can be a turn on to get off while causing someone else 'pain' -there's a little bit of gay in all of us -that feeling when it first goes in -telling a girl "I'm going to fuck your ass"

Seriously, except for the cashing in part, [he still has it all.](http://reddit.com/user/raldi)

That is the second-niftiest thing I've read all day.

this isn't nam, man. there are rules.

Like, Jack says don't trust Zed's lies, man...

please inform me how using a bottle of water to wipe one's ass has enough force to get the shit off (in the worst of shitty situations)? Because I dont see it happening. Serious water pressure would be needed. And you would have to dry your ass off afterwards. I've seen foreign restrooms that basically consisted of a hole in the floor & a medium-pressure hose/sprayer. Where one would just squat on their haunches & then spray their ass afterwards.... in that kind of situation.... you would be spraying fecal-infected waterdroplets everytwhere (including on your clothes).

You use the water in combination with your hand and the shit just slides off.. it's as easy as that, it's not just spraying the water and hoping for the best. Than you wash your hands of course.. I still don't get how wiping some shit off with tissue is cleaner than using water.

Please explain.

It's a British thing. A couple of very cool and funny TV shows are apparently going to have their characters interact, and we won't get to experience it firsthand because the BBC has its collective head in its collective puffy white ass and doesn't broadcast to the United States directly, opting instead to sell the show to *SyFy*, or whatever they're calling themselves this week, which then shows it a year after it aired in the UK, and then only spottily as *SceyeFeye* likes to move its shows around on a seemingly weekly basis just to keep viewers on their toes.

I am not impressed by his decision to intensify the use of the US Military to extend the US Empire, no matter how 'intelligent' he is thought to be.

I don't see how making a decision to try to hasten the U.S.'s extraction from an 8 year military quagmire constitutes extending the US Empire.

You miss 100% of the shots you don't take.

Paradoxically enough, 100% of those shots are always on target.

I'm a cur...I always say the same thing

Icon curry - always say the same thing!

Yeah. They're floppy on the inside, but surrounded by a semi-firm plastic case. Their main advantage over older, truly floppy disks is that you sometimes need paperclips to eject them.

The worst thing was when you didn't have a label and the two halves of the shell decided they wanted a divorce and separated enough to not come back out of the drive.

No chat thing =( Even though it's crap on the regular one that and inbox are the only things I use.

You can use [Digsby](http://www.digsby.com) for pretty much any chat protocol or social network, including Facebook chat. It is really well designed, so don't be fooled by the fact that it tries to install toolbars on startup, they are just trying to keep it free for everybody.

Maybe, maybe not... it was close... but the play isn't dead until the refs say it is dead. They didn't. So the TD should count.

Agreed. Gotta play to the whistle, not where you think the whistle should have been.

Rainy Day Women #12 & 35

To that I say better album, worse opener. Great song, but its composition and complexity are nothing compared to LARS and TUIB

With a hammer. The hammer is my penis.

Is that from Dr. Horrible or am I confusing things?

You are angry over nothing.

You're just mad that you've been schooled.

A right is a right to action. It's not a right to stuff other people have. That said the current system is a mess, and it does much to make healthcare unaffordable. We do need real reform, but what we're likely to get is more poison.

could you elaborate on how you feel a public option would be worse than the status quo?

Brave New World by Aldous Huxley.

STOP k

generic_replies

Because cultural signifiers are always indicitive of arrogance.

Well, [Jante Law](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jante_Law) is not against cultural signifiers, but it seems to be against them on some level. That said, as a man with a foreign name, i know exactly where the autor comes from. Most people i meet mispronounce my name. Thats why i usually tell people i go by a shortened version of my name, which is simpler to pronounce.

I for one welcome it. No I am not a muslim. Maybe we can get another viewpoint that doesn't have a Western/Is-Ra-El spin.

Wow. We might actually get a middle east point of view and some footage, something western media seems to sweep under the carpet. As a non-Muslim, I welcome AJE.

This is your problem right there then. An agnostic is not "a person who claims humans cannot know if there is a god or not". This is simply not the definition of agnosticism. Look, I can copy paste [my whole post](http://dbzer0.com/blog/definition-of-agnosticism) here or you can read it on site and then we can discuss it.

You sure? [agnostic: a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/agnostic) YOUR "definition" - conjecture, that is - isn't the one I'm interested in. The real one above is.

3.) In addition to the glaring anti-Narwhal bias of the liberal media, we have also noticed a disgusting lack of captioned pictures of cats that are in our stuff, doing things. Please rectify this injustice.

4) *find pollen* *bring pollen back to queen* *find pollen* *bring pollen back to queen* *find pollen* *bring pollen back to queen* *find pollen* *bring pollen back to queen*

What the dickens? I think expectations are great!

Oh what larks!

I'm 100% against screwing over those that already paid in. So I'd suggest doing a few things to raise the money... 1. A government fire sale of assets. Particularly federal lands. 2. Drastically scale back the military empire we run. This means immediately ending both wars and also bringing back troops from the 130 different countries where we have them. 3. Allow young people to opt out (and gradually phase it out) or just give those over a certain arbitrarily set age roughly the amount they put it. 4. If anyone grumbles about it, they can take it or have what remains the in the "Social Security fund." (There's nothing)

I am Social Security as long as its voluntary. Its you want to into Its government and very secure. you don't, it should be as easy as setting your W4 not take taxes from your paycheck. There are plenty of private based plans. However, this requires that there accounts for those who of the but not all. also means that isn't a uniform payout these basically social no the program it was. One issue: How do politics stays the same? If libs take control and start up a to remove social what happens libs lose control lets say 12 years all the opt that didn't in 12 years get benefits

random_deletion

As a Jew, who happens to agree with Ron Paul's foreign policy, I couldn't agree with you more. And when people overplay the "anti-Semite" card, it dilutes the impact of those who are legitimate victims of prejudice.

Like the Palestinians?

What exactly you don't like about his financial update? Please list points as opposed to screaming.

I'm hardly screaming, but perhaps that is how you view everyone with different opinions. He wanted to cut funding to political parties. A move which was clearly aimed at bankrupting the liberal party. No matter how you may disagree with them, Canadian democracy is better if their views are represented in parliament. But Harper simply wants to win, with little regard for democracy. On top of that, this move would have clearly harmed the Bloc and NDP, as well as removing any incentive to vote for Green if they won't win for sure in your county. Basically, he attempted to use his party's reliance on private donations to weaken every other political party, a move that is as undemocratic as it gets. His justification that it was to save money is ludicrous, he spends more on bodyguards every year. He also was going to make it illegal for government workers to go on strikes. I may not be a fan of unions, but they are a part of our system, and rendering them powerless can hardly be good news for the workers. On top of that, he wanted to make it illegal to use tribunals to solve issues of salary equity. How is that not an attack on the right of women to have equal pay? Continuing down the line of bad things from this update, he had no intention of investing in our manufacturing sector (which could be interpreted as a big fuck you to Ontario). In fact, he was ready to sell government assets and reduce spending in a time of economic crisis, which is precisely the opposite of what you should be doing in this case, a fact that everyone with any background whatsoever in economics can recognize easily. It would honestly be easier to look for things that are good in this financial update, although I have yet to make a conservative supporter admit that there is anything wrong with it, which leads me to believe that these people must be voting conservative because of Harper's sweater.

I don't think this game was broadcast on TV. Even if it was, that doesn't mean tapes exist. I may be wrong, but I think I remember reading that there is no known footage of the game. We are spoiled (or maybe cursed) these days where every moment of every event is recorded, but it hasn't always been that way. For now, [this](http://www.nomas-nyc.com/lsdnono/) is the best we get.

Wow, that was incredible, on a few levels.

Rocky III and IV. Hulk Hogan, Mr. T and Ivan Drago!

OK, I'm going to man up and say that I have a man crush on Dolph Lundgren. The guy is an actor/director, won the European karate championship twice, studied four or five other martial arts, is fluent in at least five languages, has a masters in chemical engineering, a fullbright scholarship from MIT, a genius IQ (above 160), and a hot wife. My favorite part, which I just pulled from [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolph_Lundgren) though: In January 2009, Lundgren's home was reportedly broken into by three masked burglars who tied up and threatened Qviberg [his wife], but fled when they spotted a family photo and realized that the house was owned by Lundgren. The dude is badass, he's like the modern day Renaissance man.

Watch what happens when government is deciding what health care is covered.

Yeah, like lower cost and higher life expectancy. There's a graph out there that I can't easily link to cause I'm on my phone, but it essentially shows per capita expense and corresponding life expectancy. We, the US, suck. All those evil socialist medecine countries? Much better.

Good job by Tim Horton's to respond so quickly. It's a good thing too - because I'm not sure we could honestly boycott them.

I'll boycott homosexuals if they get between me and my Timmies.

Newegg was once Eggs. (at least that was the stock symbol) I switched from Tiger Direct mail order catalog. E-Trade was a biggie - next best thing. Also Barnes and Noble was a better site than Amazon at first.

NewEgg was once Egghead Software (brick & mortar retail store)

[deleted]

I think in at least some of those pictures the animal didn't really know that it was humping the wrong type of animal. Humans would have to not realize they are having sex with an animal for it to be like what we see in these pictures.

If I'm terminally ill during a natural disaster, please kill me. Not only do I want to be spared the horror of not being able to escape, I would rather the rescue helicopter save someone with a shot at a decent life.

Write a living will- granted they can't *kill* you, but they can move on to the next person.

Yep...stay in school, or you'll wind up working in a union that screws its junior members like I did for a short while. I was lucky that it was only a temporary stay while I looked for an IT job.

I wonder what you think needs correcting in this young woman. She's 16, is learning about labour, which immediately gets her involved in local politics. She is writing to and getting published in a newspaper. She has done some research, apparently, on civic policies. Yes, she is totally failing in comparison to plenty of 16 year olds. She should abandon this whole enterprise and prepare herself for the maximal acquisition of currency at some later date.

I was trying to allude to another type of vibrating motor which could be used to make the vibrobot move - such as those found in devices used in the simulation of the female anatomy... The name "Vibrobot", to me anyway (and it is a very slow day in the office), is just asking for the comparison... But they are really cool robots never the less...

Oh, okay.

i just read that in the professors voice. Damn you!

I get it!

We don't have to speculate. The research has been done. There is no genetic basis for our "races". The reason is that the human population has never been genetically isolated into races. There is actually a fair amount of literature about this. Race is a purely cultural construct.

You're taking it a bit far. To say that race is a *purely* cultural construct is false. There are a lot of genetic differences between these different groups of humans. Genes are what make a Scottish guy look different from a Russian, and a man from sub-Saharan Africa a hugely increased chance of having sickle cell anemia. Having one allele of the trait makes them immune to Malaria (unfortunately if you end up with two, you get sickle cell anemia.) The real separation of races, if we were to culture-blind and color-and-face-features-blind, and only base it on shared traits would have new borders and be very very noisy. And to say that we've never been genetically isolated makes no sense. We've been separated by land and distance for a very long time. Long enough to evolve skin that doesn't get cancer from the sun in Africa, and the "ability" to easily get hugely obese up in the ice world where people would freeze.

...WHY are we paying for this? We pay for our hydro. If we're innefficient, we have to pay for it. Not only that, but I'm in favor of most green projects, but forcing people to pay out of pocket for a government initiative is ridiculous. If this is limited to only when a house is being sold, I'm still questioning why it is mandatory.

Remember you do get a $150 rebate for the cost of the energy audit. For me to get an energy audit in the KW region it's actually less than $300 (costs $240+GST with a $120+GST Rebate). Do we really think that this is such a terrible thing to saddle homeowners with? Having an the audit and following some of the recommendations may end up saving much more than $300 a year on a continuing basis. It would help lower the homeowners monthly bills, provide economic benefit to the community, improve property value, and help the environment. It also has the added side effect of lowering the overall electricity demand of the province, which isn't a bad thing.

the shit never ends :(

You can't stop my riches...

i saw it tonight, it was great fun. I dont know when it all of a sudden became passe to enjoy a summer blockbuster, but people need to pull the sticks out of their asses.

Ebert likes the occasionally schlocky blockbuster, the problem is that lately they've given up even token attempts at writing, humour or character development and the end result is so much more souless than it used to be (compare say Transformers to one of the old Arnie action films).

Among historians this is a (small) minority view. Historical consensus is certainly that the Jesus figure existed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus Since the accepted view among believers and non-believers is this chap existed, the burden of proof rests with the deniers. It is more likely the myth had a basis in real events, than that the entire edifice was constructed even to the point of inventing the man. That would be a conspiracy theory to dwarf all conspiracy theories. If you were setting out to create a lie (wittingly or unwittingly) wouldn't you start from a basis of truth? It's more likely to be believed.

So you are saying just because a lot of people believe something to be true, then it should be so? Isn't this kind of thought the antithesis of rationality and the scientific method. Why is it so hard to invent a mere man, after all, the realm of heaven and hell as well as gods have, arguably, been invented? Even you admit the magical attributes of this Jesus are probably phoney.

Imagine someone who publicly proclaims that he doesn't believe in unicorns. His neighbor does the same thing, but even more vocally. In fact, the second guy actually goes so far as to launch a barrage of personal insults at people who believe in unicorns. The first guy then accuses his neighbor of taking the whole anti-unicorn evangelism thing too far. How does all this talk of anti-unicornism unite the other 99.9% of humanity, who also disbelieves in unicorns, into any kind of "camp?"

If the non-believers in unicorns form usenet groups, build websites, go to meetings, and march together in the streets to protest against unicorn-believers I think it's entirely fair to refer to them as an ideological/philosophical "camp". Also you might want to read your own propaganda re "strong" versus "weak" varieties of atheism. And check out "agnosticism" while you're there. Not believing in something is quite a different thing to disbelieving something.

I think the patent system, though it has flaws, is the best compromise we can have between protecting innovation and having to resort to secrecy. I think the root of the problem with software patents are the duration of them. It's understandable that medical patents should last 15 years if it normally takes at least 5 years to bring a patented drug to market. It can take months, or less, to innovate and months to bring software to market, and technologies can change drastically over a few years. If software patents would only be for, say, 2 years then it would make much more sense.

The root cause of the problem is that you're trying to set up a system of laws so that you can treat "ideas" like real property. They aren't the same, and shouldn't be treated the same.

Dark City... came out before the matrix and plenty of ppl think the matrix ripped it off. Shooter - rambo w/ a sniper rifle. anything by guy ritchie. The Descent - one of the few movies where women are not unbelievably stupid as shit. Brotherhood of the Wolf - one of the most incredible FUCK YEAH movies ever. a numerous rewatcher the Monster Squad... classic 80's cult hit w/ all the 80's glory Mr. Brooks The Rundown V for Vendetta Four Feathers The Rewinder is a fun movie if you can find it. The Princess Bride and Shakespeare in Love are Fuck yeahs of a more playful nature. many of my other favorites have already been listed. boondock saints, predator, alien, lock, stock, and two smoking barrels, snatch etc...

Hello, my name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die. FUCK YEAH!

I don't think anything is more tragic than having your guitarist shot while performing on stage.. wtf

Uh, did you see #4?

You are aware that you don't need to have that level of enrichment to cause radiation poisoning, right?

You are aware that the ship is a [*chemical carrier*](http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSL8166636) right? And actually, I am completely unaware of how it would be possible for unranium enriched up to five percent to cause the type of symptoms over the time periods this article is describing. Weapons grade, yes ( but I don't know if it would kill them that quickly),light enrichment, no. Additionally, if they had inhaled particulates, as some have suggested here - then illness is a result of kindney toxicity, not radiation poisoning.

And why are we feeding grains and crops to animals instead of humans. We've heard starving humans but no hungry animals. Why feed a cow for 4 years just to have it's meat, when corn, soy, and grains are ready for our consumption. http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/71230

So you want to stop feeding cows? What next, pigs? Then no bacon?

And it helps you breathe.

Pure oxygen? No, it just gets you high. Anyways, I'm wracking my mind and I can't think of one time a jet-liner has landed on water instead of simply crashing and killing everyone on board.

That was the longest setup for a mediocre punchline since I heard the Purple Joke in fifth grade.

The purple joke?

belt tuck.

I call it Goosenecking.

I really hate hypocrisy. Reddit appears, superficially to be the most liberal, intelligent, and progressive media source, but underlying it all is a religious intolerance rivaled only possibly by the intolerance of Jewish folk in Nazi Germany. Fuck Hypocrisy. Besides that, I know of a couple of people with downs syndrome who would resent that statement. Fuck hypocrisy, fuck intolerance, fuck discrimination, fuck dogma. Fuck you.

I completely agree with what you said, Tom.

plastic isn't an oxygen barrier - gots to jar your dro

Since shaping when is plastic not an oxygen barrier?

random_insertion

[deleted]

Bitching about being downvoted isn't going to help anything. Why not just explain why you didn't like it?

Ya be dibi dibi diddle... I'm sorry, it all escapes me. What do the words translate as?

The youtube link has the full translation (in the video info) - http://www.reddit.com/r/humor/comments/75jcg/why_do_some_people_not_have_brains/c05qnqu

Christian, non denominational. The title of your post hurt my brain.

Yeah, sorry about that, my original title was "So what's everybody's denominations?" but i decided to change it for some reason and accidentally created the monstrously poor grammar that you see before you. :(

If every atom in the universe was constructed into a single enormous hard drive, it would not be big enough to hold Graham's Number if it was digitized; nor could it hold the number of digits in Graham's Number, or the number of digits in the number representing the number of digits in Graham's Number...

Ok but what if we .zip the number?

People can choose their own life. You may have opened the door but she chose to walk through it. It's not your 'fault'.

She was 9! How could she have made any mature decision?

ITAM PLZ T_T

^.^