pirana

Is waterboarding torture? Simple question. Not that simple but, i feel the application applied in our case, no I liked the quote the other day from Jesse Ventura: "Give me a waterboard and thirty minutes and I'll have him confessing to the Sharon Tate murders." Yeah, Jesse is a goof a lot of the time; but that one is gold. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Is waterboarding torture? Simple question. No, they have a nice clean sounding euphimism for it now. It is referred to as "enhanced interogation techniques." This administration has lied so badly, so many times, and been caught covering it up to boot; that any post-admin attempts to justify or explain just looks like more of the same. I was watching some raw footage the other evening of Rice getting grilled about waterboarding. She was very careful not to outright lie, but her responses were so incredibly deceptive, vague, manipulative, evasive, etc. That such nasty people end up in the highest offices of our country is a very sad statement about our state of affairs. Truly pathetic. I mean, I don't expect anybody to always be right, but I expect leadership to have certain qualities; among them being honesty, being principle driven, being open to new ideas, etc. That adminstration was the antithesis of what we should expect from leaders. Cheney's current behavior just keeps reminding people of how dishonest, self-serving, and unprincipled they were. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

ABSURD! I read thru an article in the NYT this morning and a group of patients, oncologists, and others are suing a company that has patented a gene that causes breast cancer. I thought you had to actually invent something to get a patent. how can a natuarally occuring thing, much less a thing that exists in damn near every cell of every living human, be patented? There was mention later in the article that the whole situation is the result of ambiguity in patent law; and hopefully over the course of this lawsuit people with the authority to do so will make sure these kinds of shenanigans are nipped in the bud. Anybody out there with patent law/medical ethics background got a take or inside info? I would think you could not patent a gene any more than you could patent a raccoon (just a normal raccoon, not some glow-in-the-dark mad scientist creation). Kind of harkens back to Middle Ages when Europeans would sail across the ocean, land on some beach, then right in front of the natives plant a flag and claim the land. It's my land (gene) and you can not own it, right? If I go in for examination and the doctor finds something unusual with my eye, can he patent my eyeball? " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Again! Again! Which reminds me of a funny discussion I had with the kids the other day. I was using the Banana Splits and Cartoon Town to explain that every generation has their insipidly stupid kiddy shows. But the Splits were different in that they had toy guns and neat little dune buggies that they drove fast and crashed a lot and lots of mock fighting and other miscellaneous violence. No point really, . . . I guess. Except that now i have a strong urge to get the Banana Splits theme song loaded as my ring tone. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Then they should have said the circumstances were right, not the timing. They were only reacting to their circumstances, not waiting for the right timing. Nit picky? Yes; but I expect professionals to get it right. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Could be, but it might be the low quality of the file I posted. On the Times sight it looked much better. And while no source is above suspicion, I trust it much more than say the Sun or Enquirer. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

You either have a narrow view or you miss the point. I think you are correct (about missing the point). I get that they are anti-USA. I get that they feel the need to communicate their dislike of the USA. What I do not get is who they are communicating to and for what purpose (which is why I poke fun at the grammar). Are they: 1 - Communicating to USA leadership? 2 - Communicating to their own leaders? 3 - Communicating to the USA public? 4 - Communicating to a domestic audience? Whatever option it is, it is either futile or unnecessary. I do suspect that a fifth possibility is that they are just communicating to their own selves and peers the way a sports fan does when they hold up a banner at a sporting event. If that is not it, then I do miss the point of who they are comunicating to and why. To whom do you think they are displaying banners and why? " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Then the sign should be in Urdu. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Good post winsor. Especially salient is that most of our legislators know very little about the topic. But in their desire to answer to the emotional fears of their constituents (fears flamed by emotional rhetoric from lobbyists on all sides of the issues); we will probably end up with some real shit before it is over. It is unfortunate that so few lawmakers (or their constituents) know much of anything on the topic, outside of emotional pleas and anecdotes, and the pablum shoveled by the lobbyists. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

In about 2/3rds of the cases, that would be your employer going to jail. That is about the ratio of insured Americans in which the insurance company is only serving as administrator; the employer is calling the shots (but does not want you to know that in most cases). It's called self-insured, and is the largest market segment by far. The employer decides the benefits, can grant the exceptions, and for the most parts answers to nobody because of the loopholes available to them by law. Self-insured is one of the loopholes that needs to be eliminated to get health care financing on the right track. But yeah, if your employer decides a service should not be covered then the Prez of the insurance company should go to jail. Makes perfect sense. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

One essential part to any solution for it to have half a chance at success is to move away from state run and state regulated programs. One of the big problems is that there are 51 sets of regulation in place in the USA. One set of rules is a must for health care financing to be truly effecient. I'm not advocating a federal plan, or the government as insurer or even administrator; but for the feds to act as the sole regulatory body and a single set of rules for all. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

They must have gotten their hands on some Dr Suess books. It's supposed to be "America Go Home" or "USA go away" or something like that. What they've got is more something you'd see on a sports pennant. If they are going to do their banners in English for the benefit of the viewing public in the States they should at least make sure there is no ambiguity and that it might not be mistaken for cheering us on. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

The patterns of expansion and migration have been pretty well understood for several decades, with DNA now having confirmed what was understood from archaeological evidence and nicely filling in the details. What I find strange is the claim that only 200 humans made the migration. Have to check it out and see why they make that claim. The claim that "the timing was just right" is wierd too. I'd say that early human migrations were of course limited by climate; but that statement makes it sound like they had a migration plan, a scheduled departure window, and the climate changed just in time for it to be successful. "Oh dear, if this ice sheet doesn't retreat soon we're never going to make the 6:10 to Kensington." " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Oh! I love quizzes. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

My biggest gripe is what falls into that catch-all running-of-the-country category. Defense, shared amenities like fire & police, public primary and secondary education - all good and well. I don't think our welfare system falls into these categories; but my guess is that it's proponents see it as running the country. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Percentage is better. Make very little, pay very little; make a lot, pay a lot. Very fair, and those that pay very little still get the benefit of all the amenities paid for by taxes. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Ah, Microsoft. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Because the whole purpose of the hypothetical scenario is to create a two option choice. While some clever third options have been presented, that really defeats the purpose of the question. The post wasn't intended to be a riddle that could be creatively solved. Exactly. The purpose is to corner a person into choosing between 2 bad outcomes; maybe as a way of getting some sort of supposed insight into a person's character or principles. A form of mental masturbation. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

My contrived scenario is admittedly limited. Whatever its flaws, the underlying question remains. I threw in the probabilities so the risk of an attack could be perceived the same for everyone reading. The flaw is that the very generally stated question is purely hypothetical; a thought experiment and no more. When you give it real life details, and allow real life creativity in pursuing possible real life solutions; there is not much chance it will still be a moral dilemma. You've constructed what might appear to be a real life situation, then put unreal limitations in, thereby forcing a choice between 2 evils in a way that ignores the complexity of the real world and the creativity of people that might actually find themselves having to solve such a dilemma. All this so that no matter what answer is given (to the final question) you can say to the responder . . . "Aha! So you are evil after all!" Whenever somebody starts in with one of those I stop them and ask that they ask a real question about a real situation and save the moral hypotheticals for philosophy class. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

So what is the criteria for "successfully runs" and conversely what is it that happens for it to be judged as no longer running successfully? Is there a requirement for growth? " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Slaughter the cow and barter it as parts? " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

THE fundamental of life and nature is survival. After that comes a bunch of 2nd level needs. Good luck getting everyone in the world on the same page as to how to meet those needs; much less agreeing on what they are. Humans are hard-wired for survival, and to take care of themselves first, the local group second, and the bigger group last. The larger the community, the less likely to have full agreement. Politics IS the process of those who think they have the answers attempting to convince everyone to be like them. The movie itself is too full of sensationalism, half-truths, and conspiracy BS to be anything more than good entertainment. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Yowza! How does the song go? "Are you taking orders, or taking over?" Truly inspiring. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

How about recruiting someone that has experience with banners to be the friend on the other end of it? " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

It occurs to me that the people in this forum are, in general, slightly behind the times on the latest goodies available to the public, at least glow-in-the-dark wise. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley