winsor

Yep, the same place that produced the leaders of the Manhattan Project. The ones who let us pay for the project, and then gave the results to the Soviets for free? Mighty white of them. How many of the spies were from Berkeley? Didn't the Soviets require credit from Berkeley to spy for them? Maybe one or two got a pass on that requirement. The CIA is, of course, a Yale shop.

Yep, the same place that produced the leaders of the Manhattan Project. The ones who let us pay for the project, and then gave the results to the Soviets for free? Mighty white of them.

It is easy to mistake revulsion with 'political correctness' for approval of him. His lack of redeeming qualities is a given. He is, however, about 2% less repellent than his likely opponent. Choosing between a Mussolini wannabe and Gilbert Gottfried in drag is tough.

They don't tolerate rapists in Mexico. They send them to the USA, since it's cheaper than locking them up.

You forgot to mention that there is an endless supply of the stuff. That's the part that I like.

That's cold.

Dude, it's all a big mystery. It's all for the better, and it is beyond the comprehension of mere humans. Remember, He knows when you've been naughty or nice, and, if you're naughty, he, in his infinite wisdom and mercy, will send you to hell. Forever. So don't question these things, since He is very insecure and easily angered.

Aargh, that be right, matey.

I have a hard time seeing the Catholic Church as a cult. Scientology I can see, but not sure the Catholic Church is in that same realm. Lobbying in your own best interest is nothing new. They handling of any type of sex scandal has obviously been deplorable, atrocious, despicable and downright evil. The Cult of the Magic Jewish Zombie is alive and well. The Messianic Judaism movement that was prevalent in Judea in the 1st Century - to include the followers of whatshisname - bears precious little resemblance to that which morphed into the 'Christianity' with which we are all familiar. The Wholly Roman Church was established by committee on European principles, and has deeper roots in Pagan infrastructure than in any of the Middle Eastern traditions upon which it is ostensibly dependent. A cult on steroids, but a cult nonetheless.

Wrong. There is a big difference between calling bullshit and 'believing' something. If one evaluates the odds of something as being so infinitesimal as to be effectively nonexistent, that possibility may conveniently be dismissed. "That which is submitted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence." Hitchens

Growth rates are a far more meaningful metric for comparison. Only if those growth rates are sustainable, and it has been demonstrated that they are not. Okay, let's ignore the whole climate change thing or, better yet, assume that burning fossil fuels will result in the climate being just the way we like it. It keeps my air conditioner and heater going, ant any rate. The problem is that these resources are finite. I know they appear limitless to the uninitiated, but they are not. For the past couple of centuries we have become better and better at chasing down deposits of these fossil fuels, and doing all sorts of marvelous things with them ("Plastics!"), but the reality is that we are using them up. There will always be some fossil fuels, simply because the last vestiges of oil, gas and coal will be beyond economical recovery, but even rising prices making more and more reserves economically accessible does not change the fact that we are running out. We are with energy like a junkie sitting on top of a large quantity of narcotics, who is thus convinced that he is set for life (such as it is). Telling him that his continued chemical bliss involves planting poppies and going through the process of extracting opium, extracting base morphine and so forth does not sit well with our junkie friend, and our continued energy bliss is similarly dependent on looking at supplanting our large but finite energy stash. The reality is that whatever energy sources prevail in the foreseeable future, they will not be identical to the energy sources upon which we have relied so far. Then again, what do I know - I am but a lowly Thermodynamicist. BSBD, Winsor

'Belief' is anathema to atheism.

So long, and thanks for all the fish.

You are correct, and that is largely how I feel. I only use those terms to describe possibilities. They don't represent my beliefs. "I don't know" is actually what I believe. All the rest is just speculation. Why do I call it "God"? Because in every religion God is the creator, and that is my definition of God. Nothing more and nothing less. Look, it's pretty obvious that everything we see around us could not just have happened, without any reason, all by itself. Clearly, the Universe was created intentionally by an omnipotent force. -That is orders of magnitude more complex and extensive than anything we can detect. -That provides no trace of its existence. -That for no particular reason just kind of did all this. I hope that answers any questions that might remain.

In a lot of ways, this country has improved greatly. None of this is new - you are simply more likely to hear about it now. Needless to say, we have a long way to go.

Look, we need F-35s. Anything that expensive is, by default, fantastic. Anyone who suggests that it is simply a boondoggle with the singular purpose of lining the pockets of politically connected military industrial complex is clearly wrong. Probably a Democrat - but even some of are aware of the wisdom of the F-35 program. Only fools would waste money on renewable energy, since there is a limitless supply of fossil fuels. If we spend the money on F-35s, our future is bright.

One of the ironic twists of Clinton dallying with the intern was his attempt to use the Uniform Code of Military Justice to thwart civilian legal action. Had he been subject to the UCMJ as the CIC, he would have been disappointed to discover that actions that result in Article 15 action for a PFC routinely have Flag Officers summarily cashiered, and would likely have resulted in a General Court Martial for him. If, OTOH, he had admitted that she simply made good on her claim to being a virtuoso fellatrix, he would have avoided perjuring himself. Similarly, if he had said that sure, he had tried to get Paula Jones to blow him, but, when she did not, he focused his energies on other women who did, her suit would have gone away. Her claim was that he persecuted her for her reluctance. A defense along the lines that he was too busy with the women that were accommodating to worry about the ones who weren't would have put him in the clear. It would not have been acceptable politically, but that's another issue.

Yes, yes, I'm sure all of them have missed it and only you have the clarity to see the issue correctly. Then again, what do you think the odds are on that? Given the pushback? Better than average.

LOL Now YOU are a lawyer You don't have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows. Both relevant statutes and case law pertaining to this issue are available outside the legal profession. I do not agree with Mr. Hayes on all points, but he is correct here.

No, thank you, to the PM part, but please accept my apology otherwise.

I'd ask the same thing I just did, which is if you're still determined to avoid discussing the subject, at least do so with some new jokes. The second question would be if you don't want to talk about it, and you can't think of any other clever retorts, why are you replying at all? Somewhat strange behaviour, no? What's to discuss? You have made observations of stupidity and dishonesty, so there is no conceivable basis for discussion. Are you suggesting that my treating you as having a three digit IQ is a joke? You are too humble, sir.

If there was a Nobel Prize for being wonderful and brilliant, I'm sure you would be nominated. If you're going to keep avoiding the issue with jokes can you at least find a new joke? It was ok the first time round but repeating it every post doesn't make it funnier. Again, any chance you might either defend your statement or admit how stupid it was, or talk about it at all? I simply cannot conceive of someone with your overwhelming intelligence having the slightest interest in actual dialogue with someone of my stature. I have already conceded that you are so brilliant that anything you say must be right. Having achieved such a total intellectual victory, for what more could you ask?

If there was a Nobel Prize for being wonderful and brilliant, I'm sure you would be nominated.

You salute the rank, not the man.

Indifference? No, I think it's pretty clear this isn't a subject you're indifferent about. It's the dishonesty that's the problem. Why all this dancing around to avoid addressing what you originally said? Either stand behind it or admit it was stupid. All this other handwaving and distractions is just silly. How can I ever live up to your standards of honesty, integrity and intellectual acuity? I am awestruck.