HeyYou

So, the political pundits making statements that basically say the repubbies should be more like the dems should be taken as gospel? Just because someone gets paid to do a job, does not necessarily imply that they actually know what they are doing, or that their opinion is any better than some homeless guy on the street. Rush Limbaugh gets paid serious bucks, should I take him seriously? What about Bill O'Reily? Or Howard Stern? Glenn Beck?

Terribly sorry, but, that doesn't even address the deficit at all. That just shows government spending growth is slowing. Has nothing at all to do with the fed spending more than it takes in. (the definition of deficit spending.....) Have a look here for a better picture of where we are at, and where we are heading. The picture isn't good.

And here I always thought it wasn't ANY stations job to promote one side over the other..... You know, that whole "unbiased" thing.... so much for that thought, eh?

Low pressure tube, cars held off track by blast of air from skis..... Why does that seem counter-productive? Only 800 MPH though, so, hard vacuum isn't required.

Ted Cruz is running? I do believe, the constitution REQUIRES a candidate to actually be born here in the states, not merely be a citizen. Otherwise, any naturalized citizen could run. Not sure how Ted plans to work around that one. I seem to recall that in his book, Obama stated he was born in Kenya. That said, didnt he actually PRODUCE his birth certificate? Thought I remember reading something about that?

Erm, the deficit isn't even a real problem? Really? You don't think spending damn near a trillion dollars more than we take in EVERY YEAR isn't a problem? Seriously?

LOLOLOLOLOLOL. Now THAT is funny. he is just as dishonest, if not even more so... than EVERY other politician in washington. He wouldn't know the truth if it was wearing a sign, and jumped out and bit him. In case you hadn't noticed, my opinion is somewhat different than yours..... Just out of idle curiosity, do you see signing 'free trade' agreements with three more third world nations as "in the best interests of americans"? Or, in the best interest of corporations? (and please don't try and convince me they are the same, cause that just ain't the case.)

Rename the file, and try again. If it still doesn't work, PM a mod, or admin, and ask where to post the issue.

Given the vastness of the universe, and the number of stars/galaxies I can see just stepping out my back door, I would have a hard time convincing myself that we are alone in the universe. Now, has anyone visited us from "out there"? I doubt it. There wouldn't be any real point to it. Not like we have anything to offer a species that can already travel interstellar distances.

So let me get this straight if a Republican is "ever" elected again to the presidency, you would be then voting a straight Democratic ticket in the next election cycle? Some how I don't see this being very sincere political logic. If you ask me I think you are in a bit of political denial where you try to make up reasoning to justify your support of your party. Frankly I would feel a bit embarrassed too if the political party I supported was doing and demanding such ridiculous things like threatening to cut television networks from primary debates over what they broadcast to threatening to shutdown the government over a healthcare law that would most likely go into effect regardless if the shutdown was successful. I would think the most effective use of your vote would be to vote for people regardless of political affiliation who would do good for the country as a whole. At this point I personally wouldn't have a problem of either party having total control of all government branches as long as they are not trying to run the country into the ground. If you look at what the republicans in power are currently doing you only need to ask what has been accomplished through legislation, basically nothing good. If even remotely half of the nation felt the way you do about how politics should be it would seem America will be in a perpetual state of political grid lock till one party becomes too extreme for anyone to handle. For the record the republican party seems to be heading in this direction at a fast pace as the years go by. I really don't see the republican party lasting very long if they keep insisting their party to keep moving further to the right of the political spectrum that only seems to be appealing to a base that has a stunted demographic growth. Show me a politician that has the best interests of THIS country at heart. Good luck finding one. Even those that I HAVE seen (but, not any recently) that talked a good game, soon fell into the same ruts as the rest of the bozos in washington. They said a lot of things about 'reform', and 'changing the system', etc, but, once elected, nothing changes, and they become just like everyone else in DC. I do not support EITHER political party. Nor am I am member of either party. Neither side gives a flying banana about me, or the issues I face. None of them really care about anyone here in the US, unless they have the ability to write fat checks to get them reelected. I don't expect anything good for the country to come out of DC. The only legislation that passes has the stamp of approval of the big money lobbyists. Either that, or it promises to put more money in the pockets of politicians. Washington is broken. Has been for a while now. Given the current political climate, and the divisions we see in the population, I don't see that changing any time soon. My vote isn't going to fix it. Too many people are of the firm belief that THEIR party has all the answers, and the other guys are delusional. Or, they are so fanatically dedicated to their party, that even when they do something TRULY stupid, that is quite obviously directly opposed to their core beliefs, they still vote their straight ticket. So, I work with the system that is in place. If I can vote for various folks, to try and prevent one party or the other from gaining the 'upper hand', (control of both houses, and the presidency) that is the tack I will take. Politics today very much resembles kindergarten on the playground. More emotional than intellectual. And it is only getting worse. Should be fun to see what happens in '14. Will the repubbies get spanked? or will they pick up some seats? Stay tuned!

Handing me something, and calling it a rose, does NOT make it a rose. If it stinks... it stinks. FORCING me to purchase a product from a private company is NOT something I want the government to have the ability to do. Given the reasoning they used for that little bit of a huge bill, they could easily extend that to "forcing" folks to buy a car, or a house, or oranges.... all in the name of "helping the economy"..... Maybe its a stretch, but, the precedent has been set. I would have MUCH preferred that the government address the REAL problem, instead of merely treating a symptom of a larger ill. But then, government isn't in the business of actually solving problems. They get more mileage out of poking at the edges. Can milk more air time out of it that way. I have said it frequently, but, I will say it again. Most of the current issues this country faces relate DIRECTLY to JOBS. Get our good manufacturing jobs back. Put america back to work. Rebuild the middle class. All the rest will fall into line.

Well I don't know if the American people is stupid, but in response to the Republicans threatening to shut down the government because they aren't getting their way in a straight up-or-down vote on an unrelated issue, the American people said this: So... there's that. Let me explain my reasoning here a bit.... I don't want the dems to have complete control. I don't want the repubbies to have complete control. Given that the republican party is so fractured right now, they don't know their head from a hole in the ground, I foresee the dems picking up some seats in both the house, and the senate, and very possibly the presidency in '16 as well. That is a situation I would just as soon avoid. So, instead of voting for some third-party candidate, that likely has zero chance of winning, I will vote for the opposition that just might have some small chance of offsetting the dems. I see it as the most effective use of my vote, to make sure that NEITHER party gets control across the board. It isn't the ideal situation, but, when it comes to politics in america, ya work with what ya got.

At this point, I don't think it really matters over-much which party is in control in washington. Neither one of them have any clue how to get america back on track, and heading in the right direction. Currently, we ARE a Utopia. If you are rich, or a corporate executive.... the rest of us apparently don't matter. What I wouldn't give for just ONE voice of reason in DC. Someone that would tell it exactly like it is, without putting some spin on it, to make themselves look good, or the 'other guys' look bad. But, expecting truth from a politician has been a lost cause for quite some time. Quite frankly, I don't want EITHER party to have complete control. We need some flavor of balance in DC. If the dems took over, we could wave goodbye to the second amendment.... and we would become the 'ultra-welfare' state that Greece was, and then we would suffer the same fate. Economic collapse. Of course, I expect the economic collapse anyway......

Washington has degenerated beyond the point of kindergarten playground foolishness. Why anyone votes for ANY of the bozos in DC is beyond me. And that goes for BOTH parties. Are the american people really so stupid as to continue putting the same idiots back in office, campaigning on the same promises that they failed to deliver on in the last elections? Unfortunately, I think the answer to that question is: "Yes, we really ARE that stupid."

The jury is still out on whether Obamacare is going to have any significant impact or not. I would also point out, that the government isn't 'giving' ANYTHING away. They may subsidize some folks, but, that still hasn't been completely worked out, or made public knowledge yet either. And I HAVE been writing to my representatives on a regular basis. To me, a jobs bill would include: Revoking the tax breaks for 'creating jobs in developing nations'. Which translated quite literally to MOVING jobs to developing nations. Revoke ALL "Free Trade" agreements. Giving corporate america multiple places where folks are willing to work for pennies per hour, and NO pesky environmental laws at all..... to produce products which were once made right here in america is just plain stupid. The corporations make huge profits, product prices actually go up, and the folks that used to have jobs can no longer afford to purchase the products.... Take gasonline (at least) off the commodities market. No more speculators driving up the price. Implement FAIR Trade. We tax imports at the same rate as our exports to the country of origin for similar products. People get the same penalties for purchasing foreign made goods, that the people in the country of origin are subject to. (take a close look at S. Korea, and cars. Sure, the imported cars aren't taxed, but, the folks that buy them end up paying penalities in other fashions.) Get americans back to work in all those good manufacturing jobs that went to China, Malaysia, India, et. al, and they will HAVE insurance, making Obamacare unnecessary. Do I expect any of that to happen? Nope. The corporate lobbyists are far to powerful, and too much money is changing hands for congress to even remotely consider biting the hand that feeds them. None of it will ever make it out of committee.

Americans without health care is a side effect of a MUCH bigger problem. Americans without jobs. Our government is whining that Social Security is running out of money. Medicare is becoming hideously expensive. Entitlement programs taking the biggest bite of the federal budget. (yes, even more than the military....) ALL of these issues have one COMMON cause. Un/Under-Employment. It is also why we now see McDonalds workers demanding 15 bucks an hour........ No one can live on the minimum wage jobs that are being created of late. Our government wants us to think that everything is hunky-dory, that jobs are being created, that unemployment is going down, that america is getting back to work..... And while technically, unemployment HAS gone down.... what they neglect to mention is that one of the main reasons is many folks have LEFT the workforce. (by the government definition.....) They tell us this nice tale, about sunshine and butterflys, when in reality, our economy is still in the toilet, and doing a few more swirls before it finally goes down the pipe. MANDATING the folks buy some product or other, no matter what it is, is indeed unconstitutional. Commerce clause or not. Calling it a 'tax' is simply another lie our government is passing off on us. I wish the republicans the best of luck getting Obamacare repealed. (and I will be voting straight republican ticket in '14)

Obama-care, coloquially kown as "health care reform", was an end-run trying to fix a problem that didn't really exist. It is treating a minor symptom of a much larger ill. Most of those 30 million plus folks that don't currently have insurance, don't have it because they are un/under-employed. Passing a law REQUIRING folks to purchase a product from a private company is the exaxt WRONG thing to do. The only people that are going to benefit from this, are the insurance companies. Obama/Congress would have been MUCH more effective had they concentrated on getting america back to WORK. You know, employed? Where most folks got their insurance from in the past? But no. That made far too much sense. Of course, government treating a symptom, and ignoring the actual PROBLEM, is nothing new either. Typical behavior for politicians.

Here in the states, owners are held responsible for the actions of their pets. Your dog/cat/coon/whathaveyou harms someone, YOU are on the hook for it. (or, your insurance company, as the case may be.) If my dog killed a couple kids, I would fully expect to be sued, and my dog put down. As it should be. Now, if said kids were tormenting my dog, and it attacked them...... My thoughts are, it's THEIR fault.. however, the law doesn't see it that way, and I can still be sued, and my dog will still be put down. Nice huh?

We have folks burning down various places they don't like NOW. What makes you think passing some law is going to stop, or even slightly reduce it? Make ANY statement regarding sex, religion, government, or political ideals, and I can pretty much assure you someone is going to find it offensive.

This constant interference and nannying is leading to the infantilization of large numbers of people, this is happening at an alarming rate in the UK where people are actually calling the police if someone is rude to them on Twitter, comically a law from the 1980s compels police to investigate that complaint no matter how trivial, you actually get police knocking on a persons door because they called someone "ugly". @MajKrAzAm These special interest groups are part of the problem, they set out to ensure people don't get along, they have a vested interest in keeping the hate going, if people suddenly started getting along they'd be out of a job. Look at the language used when they talk about minorities, they always paint them as the victim, weak and unable to defend themselves. If you want to keep a people down the best way do to it is to make them feel weak and powerless, these special interest groups do exactly that and then portray themselves as the protectors and saviours of these minorities. Hate speech crimes plays into this because they antagonise the majority, this is exactly what these special interest groups want, it keeps the hate going and thus themselves relevant. Kids from an early age should be taught tolerance, you don't need to promote race relations or homosexulaity because if people of an early age are taught to be tolerant and accepting of others then the rest will follow. The problem is this will never happen with "Progressives" running the show, it won't happen because "Progressives" are the least tolerant of all involved, they'll preach it to others but rarely practice it themselves. Progressives are the problem? Hhhmmm....... Here in the states, it is the religious right that is the problem. (at least, when it comes to alternative lifestyles....) Whom are mostly republican.... Honestly, I think the politicians are the problem...... they feel this crying need to give the appearance of 'doing something'.... so, they do, even when they know it won't make one whit of difference, and in reality, will probably make things WORSE. But, they have something to point at, and claim "See, I DO care about you."

Discrimination is never going to leave the party. Not until some distant time in the future, when the human race is pretty much all the same, due to interbreeding of the various races. (not considering religion here..... that is another problem that will never be solved.) In this day and age, discrimination is still quite alive, and well. If a crime ocurs, and the folks involved are NOT of the same race, you can bet your bottom dollar that one side or the other is going to be screaming "HATE CRIME!!!". Seems to be the fashion of late. Personally, I think our society is going down the toilet BECAUSE OF government intervention in personal interactions. (be it social, economic, or work related.) You simply cannot legislate away behaviors.

There is always going to be those folks that "hate" other groups because of their race, religion, lifestyle, whathaveyou. There is no getting rid of it. I think giving those folks their platform to expound their beliefs would be the best thing for them. And others would then be free to point out the fallacies in their arguments in a public forum. Of course, there will also always be those that resort to violence to express their views...... or their disagreement with someone else's views..... Can't say that I am really surprised that various governments haven't yet discovered that you can NOT legislate away behavior. Just doesn't work that way.

This. I wholeheartedly concur. A crime is a crime, WHY someone committed it isn't really relevant.

A rail gun is designed to impart extremely high velocities to small objects in a terribly short period of time though. The 'rail gun' that would be used to accelerate the pods wouldn't be any more complex than an electric motor, and consume about the same amount of energy that the typical diesel/electric locomotive does. (granted, it will be higher, as it will be accelerating at a higher rate, but still, nowhere NEAR the scale of a rail gun.) I will agree that a tube a couple meters in diameter, and thousands of kilometers long, is going to be a positive NIGHTMARE to maintain if it needs to be kept at near vacuum. :D

A Skyline for a couple hundred?? Holy smokes. Those things are rarer than hens teeth here in the states. (considering they didn't start importing them until recently, shouldn't come as a big surprise though...) Congrats on the new toy. :) Pics??