champu

They were valid past when they still issued them, but they're not valid now. So you just have a carpool cheating asshole in a prius....hardly the only one of those! I presume they're just relying on the lower enforcement rate - I don't imagine the CHP is cutting them any slack. Okay, I get it now... I'm seeing plug-in hybid versions of the Prius with green stickers (saw one parked on the street yesterday when I was riding home.) I re-assert my desire that smug Prius drivers that use car pool lanes while alone get into an accident with another smug Prius driver. /edit to add: And why on Earth is this thing on the list? It can be used electric only, but burning gas it only gets 32 mpg.

The Hobby Lobby case wasn't one of the examples raised in this thread, but yes I've been watching this. I was making light of the same issue raised in your article when in this post I wrote... "Note that a law requiring such signage need not actually be passed for these exceptions to the statutes against murder to hold." It really comes down to RFRA being an immensely broken law due to the least restrictive means clause. As long as there exists a belief (any belief as long as you believe it) and you can imagine an alternative that is "less restrictive" on you being able to adhere to that belief (and to hell with everyone else) then you can ignore any law you want. There's a case referenced in the Hobby Lobby decision that I was meaning to look up that may have been decided against RFRA in a discrimination suit. That decision may have some arguments that temper this view of RFRA.

It's stupid but I laughed... http://www.theonion.com/articles/environmental-study-finds-air-in-chicago-now-75-bu,36407/

1) That is factually untrue. A Viper would get what, 24 mpg highway, to a Prius that gets 41 mpg even going 80 mph? Fuel economy isn't a factor in how a vehicle adds to traffic congestion. Overall length and how many passengers are in it define how a vehicle affects traffic congestion (driving habits notwithstanding.) Bill reiterated what I was getting at in his number 3) comment below. In my last post I intentionally used the past-tense when referring to people having received the stickers for buying hybrids. Giving them to electric car buyers is also stupid. Are they simply not handing out more stickers or have they expired/revoked ones they've handed out? I actually don't drive very often (much less on the freeway) but when I do I still see plenty of one passenger Priuses with the HOV stickers on them.

My only complaint about the Prius (and hybrids in general) isn't about them directly, but all those car pool lane stickers people that bought them received. Car pool lanes are on freeways, where hybrids don't have an efficiency advantage over any other small-engine or diesel car (which didn't get said stickers), and driving alone in your hybrid is just as bad for traffic congestion as driving alone in your dodge viper. So now you pack the car pool lane with more vehicles forcing traffic to stop and start more and negating its entire purpose. So yeah, if you hum a tune to yourself about saving the planet while driving your Prius alone in the car pool lane during rush hour I hope you crash... ...into another Prius.

I read your post as, "Okay, maybe not polio, but they're still littered with third-world diseases (e.g. tuberculosus, malaria, and leprosy)" and the article (which is very poorly edited / organized, but that's politifact's fault, not yours) marginalizes the threat of these diseases too, in addition to polio.

*shrugs* I invite people to read the article you linked to and decide what to make of it.

Aaaaaand this is my problem with politifact (as I've pointed out previously.) Nobody seems to have any interest in reading past the "truth-o-meter." In this particularly egregious example, you have cited a politifact article that confirms that someone said something as evidence that what they said was correct. Man, was my "solution" up thread hopelessly optimistic... /edited because words...

Problem: Conflicts of interest in the federal budget creation process. Solution: Make the seats and chairs on all appropriations committees earned by nationwide general election held a short time after each congressional/senatorial election. Good for the duration of the person's encumbancy, so after the first big one you'd only have extra elections to replace anyone voted out that cycle.

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB808 This is California. Gun control laws are basically like the SNL sketch with Dana Carvey about Gerald Ford dying... https://screen.yahoo.com/tom-brokaw-pre-tapes-000000991.html

It would be similarly amusing to see people with McDonnell-Douglass [sic] signs wandering around looking for a company that doesn't exist anymore.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088846/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

The slipery slope has been laid out, and it's taking effect: http://www.moonmontchronicle.com/supreme-court-rules-jcpenney-allowed-to-sacrifice-employees-to-appease-cthulhu.html http://dailycurrant.com/2014/07/01/hobby-lobby-stones-gay-employee-to-death/ While the court agrees keeping people from being murdered is a compelling governmental interest, unfortunately for those (former) employees, an outright prohibition on murder is not the least restrictive means of ensuring they don't fall victim to this fate, as that results in many people potentially spending decades in jail. The law could have simply required placards indicating the terms under which the company's religion mandates their death. Note that a law requiring such signage need not actually be passed for these exceptions to the statutes against murder to hold. Also, it should be noted that this ruling is only intended to hold in regards to stoning and cthulhu-based sacrifices. The judgments in all murder proceedings are reversed. It is so ordered.

There are 2 types of people, those who understand octal and those tha- Wait, that's no good... Dont be bringin the base H8 My first job was telling hexadecimal jokes, very similar to your octal jokes in most respects.

There are 2 types of people, those who understand octal and those tha- Wait, that's no good...

"I'm feeling better..." "No you're not, you'll be stone dead in a moment."

Agreed. I think people too easily look past the flaws in laws with which they largely agree.

Apparently I'm talking to Newsbusters now... From the decision... The problem here is that it permits a person, and now a company, to define "an act that is innocent in itself but that has the effect of enabling or facilitating the commission of an immoral act" as they see fit so long as the court determines it's an honest conviction. Alito doesn't "address" this, he completely shrugs it off... ...but every argument he makes could equally be applied to that case, so the above statement is hollow. I'm not that worked up about what this ruling specifically did. In fact, this is basically the hypothetical I said would be workable at the expense of reflecting negatively on the true religious convictions of the employer. My problem is with the statements made on the way to the ruling.

Religious freedom has serious "your right to swing your fist stops at my nose" issues. Religious freedoms don't grant you the right to live in a world devoid of abortions, certain contraceptives, blood transfusions, and homosexuals. Your argument is "fine, but don't make me pay for it" which sounds nice, but at some point that becomes your interstate commerce clause to force your religion on others. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4571041;#4571041 None of which are at the core of the Right to religious freedoms as spelled out by out Constititution You're correct. People generally don't argue for abortions, certain contraceptives, blood transfusions, and gay marriage on the grounds that they want to be free to practice their religion. That's just "their nose." A company looking over their employee's shoulder and jumping between their doctor and the insurance company because dollars might go from them to the morning after pill along that specific path is "swinging a fist." Adding language to state constitutions with the express purpose of prohibiting gay marriage is "swinging a fist." Passing legislation with the intention and effect of shutting down planned parenthood clinics is "swinging a fist." This "money represents my religious beliefs" argument is an argument that the dollars emanating from your pocket create a radius around you where you can swing your fists even if other people's noses happen to be there.

Religious freedom has serious "your right to swing your fist stops at my nose" issues. Religious freedoms don't grant you the right to live in a world devoid of abortions, certain contraceptives, blood transfusions, and homosexuals. Your argument is "fine, but don't make me pay for it" which sounds nice, but at some point that becomes your interstate commerce clause to force your religion on others. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4571041;#4571041

I'd agree if I thought they were human enough for it to affect them. We'll likely never know for sure, but I'd be fairly surprised if many (most?) politicians don't reek strongly of sociopathy or psychopathy. Pockmarked terrain is a Rorschach test.

It's like touching your handles, checking the chamber is a healthy compulsion. That said, I have a hard time believing that anyone would have loaded the gun while it was on display without malicious intent.

I think the people of this country make too many decisions based on bizarre misconceptions about what some other "large portion" is doing or believes. I feel like more and more of these stories should just read, "Ridiculous Individual Confirms Stereotype."

If you intend on using it at a commercial range, note that some don't want you using SS109 for various reasons. (e.g. It can chew up steel targets faster, it can throw sparks on impact which, if you're in a very dry climate/season, can be hazardous)

A bag!?! Did you see an SC Johnson logo over the door when you walked in? No, didn't think so. You hold out your hands. I give you the rubber bands.