richanddead

Registered bored user

richanddead wrote:
Question: Why did Jamie Fox make a joke about sign language?

Answer: Because he's a comedian.


richanddead wrote:
Sure he's a pos and so is Hillary but the Supreme Court seat is what mattered. He'll be gone in at most 7 years..the new justice will shape your children's life's. 

Yea I think that's what I think most people were focused on, this was more of an election for the direction of the Supreme Court. It was definitely the major issue running through my head in the voting booth as well but I figured if Trump lost, as the polls were indicating at the time, at least the Congress would be more conservative and Republicans would have a better chance in 2020.
richanddead wrote:
I'd still vote for Marco Rubio, I already knew he wasn't going to win when I cast my vote for him but I didn't trust Hillary or Trump. I figured I let the cards fall where they may in this election as the Presidency was already screwed. So decided that I rather use my vote in an attempt to signal that I wanted Rubio to run for president again in the future rather than focus on the current election. 
richanddead wrote:
stifler 

Things have been tough for him since his show ended.

richanddead wrote:
The guy seemed like he was trying to make a scene and be noticed for being an ass. He was going out of his way to make everyone hate him and seemed happy when everyone started shouting "lock him up."
richanddead wrote:
normalfreak2 

If it was a clear assault then yea I think he needs to have charges brought against him just like anyone else and to be clear, it certainly sounds like he assaulted the reported without cause. Yet I'd like a little more clarification of what happened to be sure, Michelle Fields said she was almost thrown to the floor and she had witnesses who said she was thrown "down toward the ground like a ragdoll" but once a video surfaced, it was pretty obvious that her claim was overblown. Not to mention the other reporter who said he was thrown out for asking a question, then it surfaced that he repeatedly pushed past Secret Service and that's why he was taken out. That doesn't sound like the case here, but I'd like to see all the evidence before making a declarative statement. The level of trust I have for the media and politicians is about the same.

richanddead wrote:
fancylad 
Yea I think Detroit did do it, not sure how it's working up there but it worked great in Baltimore. But yea I don't think anybody thinks the houses are safe. 


richanddead wrote:
This actually isn't as unusual for Baltimore as it is in most other cities, most buildings here are collapsing anyways, it's not unusual to walk under wooden supports on the sidewalks that prevent the buildings from imploding. Even then you can still see multiple roofs that have collapsed, mainly because they have 113 years of cheap reroofing and literally tons of extra tar on every roof. In fact, most of the residential buildings in the inner city still have their interior walls made of plaster made out of horse hair, oyster shells, and old newspaper from just after the great Baltimore fire. 

In the past Baltimore used to sell some of the house in the city for just $1. For $24 you could buy you own block. Developers loved it, bought tons of land and really improved the neighborhoods. 
richanddead wrote:
skypirate 

I thought the same thing the first time I saw it. The cop noticed the guy, pulled his gun, aimed, and fired all within the 27th second of the video. Honestly, it's hard for me to click my mouse as quick as he had his gun already aimed.
richanddead wrote:
whosaidwhat was supporting what waldo863 said not oobaka's sarcastic comment. That is why this comment is indented further than Waldo's and why waldo863's tag is in his comment.
richanddead wrote:
fuad119

Sure, it's even easier. Just open a second tab, google the kind of gif you want, right click it, choose "copy image," then go back to the IAB message box and right click inside the box and then press "paste."




richanddead wrote:
richanddead 

oh snap, thank you

richanddead wrote:
fuad119

Ok let me try it out

like this
richanddead wrote:
fuad119 

Hey fuad how are you able to link like that? Everytime I use HTML codes it doesn't work.

<a href="https://www.w3schools.com/html/html_links.asp">test</a>
<a href="https://www.w3schools.com/html/html_links.asp">test</a>
richanddead wrote:
normalfreak2 

I wouldn't be floored if he's not charged, I'm finding it more and more predictable that political elites are not held accountable. Before they would at least be investigated and given some kind of fancy sounding penalty that did virtually nothing. Now it's just devolved to issues that get lost in partisan bickering. 

This is all assuming that allegation is true, I'm not willing to go there yet but i'm concerned.
 
Same here, I don't really trust Julian Assange but I'll always pay attention to evidence of one's claims when it is made available.
richanddead wrote:
5cats 

I think you are correct that in time other deviations will also become legal. In my opinion, my government should not be involved with marriage, I think it is a violation of the establishment Clause of the first amendment. I think it should be left up to the churches as to whom they accept as a valid marriage. The government I think should only grant people civil unions, but because it has tax implications I feel it should applicable to all people not just those in love. Roommates and other such pairings should be applicable as they also share bills and should not be preferenced out of tax advantages because their relationship is not romantic. I'm unfamiliar with all the laws of Canadia but I also agree that legalizing such practices as pedophilia would do irreparable harm to society. 

I will say this though, the law, in general, is mankinds attempt at bringing justice and decency to society. As with any manmade thing, humans impart their own flaws into it's being. Nothing made by humans will ever be truly perfect, as humans themselves, diverse in their beliefs, will never be truly perfect.
richanddead wrote:
How is he being a dick? He's making it clear that people have abused the previous policies and now he's cracking down. Also if you honestly think this makes your boss a tyrant, you better be happy you found such a comfy job. 
richanddead wrote:
Remember the subprime loan disaster and the financial meltdown that followed? All of it--all of it--a creation of anti-regulation Republicans. It was 100% their handiwork. 

I'm sorry little squirrel but you are the one who is wrong on this. Republicans tried countless times to increase regulations on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and impose GSE reforms. It was always the Democrats who blocked it saying that Republicans were just fear-mongering or trying to hurt the poor and minorities. Their slogan was "Everybody deserves a home."

When Republicans would try to pass reforms like the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act, it was Democrats who blocked it.

When  the Bush Administration sent Treasury Secretary John Snow to recommend that Congress enact "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises."  It was Democrats like Barney Frank (D-MA) who disagreed and said "these two entities – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – are not facing any kind of financial crisis … The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/11/business/new-agency-proposed-to-oversee-freddie-mac-and-fannie-mae.html

When Republicans like Senator Chuck Hagel (R-Neb)  introduced a measure to create an independent federal regulator with enhanced authority over Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Bank. Democrats like Harry Ried (D-Nev) that rejected the legislation reforming GSEs saying "The legislation from the Senate banking committee, passed today on a party line vote by the Republican majority, includes measures that could cripple the ability of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to carry out their mission of expanding homeownership."

http://www.upi.com/Dems-rip-new-Fannie-Mae-regulatory-measure/20231122581039/



And they spun that into: "The Clinton administration forced the banks to make loans to people who couldn't afford them. It was the fault of liberals who wanted to micromanage the economy and interfere with the private sector."

Actually, the Clinton Administration was partly responsible because they pushed for less stringent credit and downpayment requirements for working-class and middle-class families. Even Factcheck.org agrees with it.

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/10/who-caused-the-economic-crisis/
richanddead wrote:
insaneai and trimble

Your doubts are not unfounded. As I'm sure you know the temperature has fluctuated greatly within the Holocene. This is a graph of the temperature data from the 10,019 foot GISP2 ice core extracted from Summit, Greenland, in 1993. It is the deepest and most ideal ice core in the northern hemisphere and is one of the longest and most accurate temperature reconstructions of the Holocene available. The data from the ice core becomes unreliable after the year 1855 because it takes years for snow to be compacted into the quality of ice that can be reliably studied. For this reason, a red dotted line has been added afterward to represent the continued warming from that point to now. 


As you can see, today we are right around the same level as the medieval warming period yet there are several points where temperature actually exceeded today's climate such as the Mid-Holocene, Roman, and Minoan warming periods.

This data has been verified several times by other means such as dust and pollen mapping, sediment cores, coral beds, insect records, tree ring data, and even written records from ancient civilizations.

https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v361/n6411/abs/361432a0.html

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/266/5191/1680

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/95RG00498/abstract

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/1999JD901093/pdf

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0033589485710794


richanddead wrote:
normalfreak2 

 I agree wholeheartedly, Clapper definitely should have been put on trial for lying to congress about the metadata and he should have also been investigated for his handling of military intel reports as well. How one can claim that they're the Director of National Intelligence but say they forgot about the Patriot Act is beyond my reasoning. In fact, although I am unsure of the validity of his accusation, Julian Assange is now claiming he has proof that Clapper perjured himself again during Clappers most recent meeting with congress.

 I think especially with Clapper, one has to seriously pick the pepper from the fly shit. The only reason I believe him that the Russians may have been influencing our elections since the 60's is because of Senator John Kennedy, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism, began listing names of major politicians of the past who he claimed the Russian government attempted to either subsidize or oppose their campains.