Fairweather

Sorry, but Mr Science says TRs are for narcissists. Besides, he does stuff like this "every weekend."

I are on top of Ruth right now with my phone and my skis. Will talk to you libturds later.

What a strawload of shit, Oly. Trying to portray conservatives as "anti-science" is a tired old tard meme and it's sad to see you participating. Again, it's not science that conservatives and moderates view with disdain, rather, it's the people (mostly liberal dupes who wouldn't know a neutrino from an amoeba) who have turned science into a belief system exactly as you decry. Science is a cornerstone of modernity--but it's not a system under which societies ought to consciously organize. Unharnessed by outside forces (the market, for example) it tends to ignore really great things--like humanity and individualism. Things libtards claim to care about--but really don't. In short, my point was that science-types make shitty political commentators--Jim, TTK, on so on. Broadly speaking, they're too specialized to see much of the big picture, IMO. What's more, it's why generalists like Ivan are a whole lot more engaging.

Poor Ivan Reek I believe young Greyjoy suffered a fate worse than death.

Nothing that sinister, Oly. Don't know if it's still a program, but as recently as five years ago the UW offered several 200-300 level writing courses for hard science students. This program was, ostensibly at least, a section designed to help these geniuses translate their work such that it would become digestible in the public sphere. In reality, however, it was there to spare the university the growing embarrassment of graduating so many BS (and even MS) students who could not build a proper sentence--or correctly spell common usage words. In any event, I'm just suggesting that the libtard god of science is not a perfect being. Probably just as flawed as the gods of reason and religion.

Holy shite, are you him?

they're a classic case-study of conservative vs liberal mind-sets the liberal could give a shit about past convention and makes changes w/o thought - their - they're - why should such distinctions exist? the conservative though sees this variation as heresy needing to be paid heed to - "they're" by the grace of god! if you give in now to such vulgar conventions, the virgins will soon be raped and amerikkka confounded and if you recall, old boy, above my "ss" it says in far-larger letters "fah q" - thus, taken as a whole, the helmet must be a staunchly anti-national socialist meme If language lies at the heart of culture--as it does--then you have an excellent point. Still, I always find it amusing that the science cadre is made up, by and large, of narcissists and kids who can't spell good. Makes me wonder what other deficiencies are lurking in the ether. As for your helmuuut, well, I just looked at your famous photo once again--the one that almost got you a supertaco crowd beatdown--and I just don't see your explanation. Still, I like the way y'all give yourselves so many passes when it comes to the n-word and posing as nazis and shit. Some things just aren't funny.

they're

I know libtards have repeated that oft enough that they now believe it true. For a great sample of lib humor you need only go to cc.com's search feature and type in the "n" word. Lots of hits. Always in jest. Always a joke. Always a lib like you. Hi-larious! Libtard free pass. Only a joke! And Ivan, yes, that nazi SS emblem you have on the front of your climbing helmet? Now that's cutting-edge funny shit right there, yo. Libtards just aren't as funny as they think they are.

Weird, yes. This is the direction they tend to go when their worldview hits a cul-de-sac. Like little wind-up robots bumpin into one another n shit.

Then why is your libtard el presidente so pissed off about the delay? Obama is no liberal, he's a corporate fascist. He's to the right of Reagan. Then why did you vote for him, conspiratard? I mean, like, we can't all be as smart as 9/11 truth, eh?

Libtard mystery quote: "(I)t occurs to some of us that perhaps ever-continuing industrial and population growth is not the true road to human happiness, that simple gross quantitative increase of this kind creates only more pain, dislocation, confusion and misery. In which case it might be wise for us as American citizens to consider calling a halt to the mass influx of even more millions of hungry, ignorant, unskilled, and culturally-morally-generically impoverished people. At least until we have brought our own affairs into order. Especially when these uninvited millions bring with them an alien mode of life which—let us be honest about this—is not appealing to the majority of Americans. Why not? Because we prefer democratic government, for one thing; because we still hope for an open, spacious, uncrowded, and beautiful—yes, beautiful!—society, for another. The alternative, in the squalor, cruelty, and corruption of Latin America, is plain for all to see."

Then why is your libtard el presidente so pissed off about the delay?

Rand Paul is right. http://blogs.rollcall.com/wgdb/senate-usa-freedom-act-patriot-act-rand-paul/

It's a long list: Hands off our..... ...and a list of Democrats: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f4c_1254342072

Fixed it. Fry him if he's guilty.

As usual, Jim, you're just making shit up and tailoring it to fit your worldview. The (ridiculous) $10,000 cash fed notification originates from the RICO Act of 1970, and money laundering statutes passed in the mid-1980s. Both KK and I know this, of course, because we are one-percenters who regularly carry fat stacks around in our leather satchels.

Jim, misquoting is poor form. Of course, it's not much worse than your fabrication of personal anecdotes. Carry on.

The ownership of private property is a cornerstone of modernism. If a growth-addicted bureaucracy can, for all intents and purposes, charge you rent to live on your own land--then take it away or even put you in prison if you don't pay--well, do you really own it at all? Similarly, the right to sell one's skills and labor to the highest bidder represents economic freedom. No, Gene, respectfully, there is a distinct difference. Again, this is all part of the divide that American liberals are creating. A so-called "progressive" movement that wants to take us all backward to feudalistic or neo-Confucianistic place circa 1400.

you may have a point when it comes to hidden taxes like gas tax. But our biggest state tax source (sales and property) may not be as big as one thinks. sales tax is around 8% but only on things you buy in state and non groceries. sales tax is also tax deductible so one can lop off about 20% from the 8% tax rate due to federal tax refund. I didn't keep track of everything spent but there is a estimator in the fed tax code. don't remember the exact numbers but I recollect that the amount spent on sales tax was not that great, maybe around $1,000. And of course I got back 1/5th of that so I gave about $800 to sales tax. property tax was around $4000 but once again I got back 1/5th of that so I paid about $3,200 to property tax total is about $4000 to the state for those two sources of revenue. (after fed tax deductions accounted for) this is about 3% tax on income. not that much but I live outside of the city so my property tax is much lower than some. maybe you should move? I don't want to move. And neither do a lot of older people who have not realized one penny of capital gain from the home they've lived in for decades--and yet are paying oppressive property taxes. My mother pays close to $12,000 annually on a fixed income. She doesn't want to just move. This is outrageous. And this rather flippant liberal attitude of "just move," as it related to property taxes, really epitomizes the larger sectionalism that is developing between two visions of America. It reveals differing attitudes about the very notion of private property as well, IMO. I have no problem with the concept of taxing income--wages, profits, rents--at reasonable, limited rates. But taxing property and/or "wealth" is bullshit. As for capital gains on securities, etc., well even Obama understands that raising to 20% on top earners--as he and the 111th Congress did--was not about providing revenue. His own words, it was about "fairness." Finally, KK hits on a great point re the AMT. It is beginning to creep well into the middle income brackets. Needs to be addressed. [video:youtube]gJimLZRC9N8

Here's the problem: http://www.seattle.gov/personnel/employment/default_neogov.asp

Capital gains? In any event, I don;t hear too many folks complain about federal taxes. State and local, however, are a joke.

??