“re: "small business owners are seeing a spike in their insurance premiums."
Small business owners have been seeing that almost every year, regardless of Obamacare. (And it's been happening due to the spiraling heath care costs that Obamacare is trying to bring under control.)”
“Liked the front page headline to this one, "Disturbing Details Emerge About Aurora Shooter" -- What, we were expecting reassuring details? (Though "trivial details" may have been a bit more accurate.)”
“I wasn't trying to show that God couldn't exist. Only that the "clocks require clockmakers" argument doesn't prove that he does. Since applying the same argument to God himself shows the logic to be inherently flawed, it's a pretty lame argument. But not an uncommon one.”
If hypothetical God can exist without having sprung from a creator, then so can other things. Simple logic.”
mynamesyow on Oct 23, 2013 at 14:21:24
“and if a spontaneous Universe with Intelligent beings could spring forth out of nothing, a universe with an Intelligence un-see-able (not in the tiny spectrum of the EM humans can currently perceive) could not?
“re: "Conservative columnist Jennifer Rubin argued that most of Karl's reporting was accurate, saying, 'It was an important piece of reporting that was in front of the story. What he did is exactly right -- you've made one mistake within the context of good reporting, you apologize for that.'"
“I wonder whether they made any allowance for whether the breeds they showed pictures of were or were not breeds that the test dogs had ever seen in "real life." If they had ever come across a real one, they could have a memory of a scent that is associated with the look. Maybe unlikely, but not impossible.”
“Difference in TJ versions may not be a matter of "rejects" as implied in some of the descriptions. There is a sign in the TJ store near me that says that many of their products are variants of the name brand version specifically manufactured for them without artificial flavors or colors, so that could also explain the slight differences in color or flavor on products that are otherwise extremely close.”
“Contrary to the front page headline link to this article, gerrymandering isn't cheating. It may be undemocratic, it may be something that should be abolished, but it is legitimate based on current laws. You have to expect each party to use every legal means possible to swing things to their advantage. (And unfortunately, sometimes, some illegal things as well... but this isn't among them.)”
Blowing Back on Jan 21, 2013 at 15:42:42
“The 6th and 12th districts in Pennsylvania would be good examples of Republicans disenfranchising Democratic voters. The "Supine Seahorse" which connects two Republican suburbs with a democratic Philly neighborhood (by a thin line that goes 120 miles down the middle of a highway) has been criticized rightly by such liberal luminaries as William Kristol. Though found constitutional by a partisan Supreme Court in 2011, is it really? Would a district like this have been found legal by any other Supreme Court than the current one? Doubtful.
Does that make it legal? Technically. But is it morally defensible?
The "upside-down dragon" is another painful result of immoral redistricting that sets-out to disenfranchise voters.
These comical districts would be funny if they weren't so ugly. This is one-sided. One side has the votes. The other side has the legal maneuvers and tricks ...
US citizens tend to not like cheaters. That is what Scarborough is saying. If the Republican party wants to stay relevant past the next few elections, they will focus more on their message and less on gerrymandering or tampering with the electoral college.
The Constitution guarantees equal protection of votes. Gerrymandering harms that principle.
Scarborough knows that losing the national Congressional vote by millions and still retaining the majority of the House is cheating. Technically legal, maybe, but still cheating. Americans don't like cheaters and if the Republicans want to be relevant nationally, they will stop cheating.”
SpeakupNation on Jan 21, 2013 at 15:24:59
“There is the spirit of the law, and there is the letter. This is contrary to the spirit of our system of government. And both sides have NOT done this to the same extent.”
jnratliff on Jan 21, 2013 at 15:24:20
“Just because it is legal does not mean its not cheating!”
xoogman on Jan 21, 2013 at 15:21:42
“There is the letter of the law and the spirit of the law .
There is literalist interpretation of words in usage - and then there is "find-the-intended-meaning" interpretation of words in usage .
Lteralists, like absolutists, enjoy balck and white thinking and impose it whenever they can .
So - literally speaking - your point is well taken . But the general meaning is clear .
By calling gerrymandering a form of cheating - attention is drawn to the undemocratic aspect of it -- and the hypocritical apect of the democracy lovers who would use it ruthlessly .
The effect of word usage is probably the most important area to judge . I think we all know
gerrymandering is legal . But not all of us would characterize it as cheating . But I would .
For the effect .”
“I am anti-gun, but I don't think it helps to over-state the case. "Give kids toy guns to play with and they will think it is ok to play with real guns" is not true. In my generation, almost every boy had toy cap guns, played "cowboys and indians" and such. The vast majority of us have never "played" with real guns and certainly never shot anyone.”