You're lying again. He didn't claim to be David Duke, he claimed to be "David Duke without all the baggage". Without all the baggage. All the baggage. That baggage includes a lot of stuff, not just the one or two things you want to pretend it does.

He also said: "I didn't know who all of these groups were, and I detest any kind of hate group", and "For anyone to suggest that I was involved with a group like that is insulting and ludicrous." The latter covers your attempts pretty well.

Just addressing a convention does NOT create an association. This is the same kind of nonsense that McCarthy used to find communists, and if it applies to Scalise then it applies to Obama and Biden and a lot of other people for their associations, too.

No, he was SAYING exactly the OPPOSITE. "Without all the baggage". ALL. You keep trying to hang baggage on him that he never had in the first place.

And could you please make some attempt at punctuation so we know where one sentence ends and the next begins?

I don't know what you think you know about me, but I'm simply pointing out 1) your lies (about Byrd) and 2) your hypocrisy (by accepting guilt by association as valid against Scalise but not when it comes to Obama.) That's not being an "ideologue", that's being honest.

Your repeated attempts at trying to hang labels on a Republican and ignoring the same kinds of actions when it comes to a Democrat implies otherwise. I'm trying to get you to treat both the same but you seem unwilling to do that. I'd prefer it if you treated both the same and understood that guilt by association is a bad way of judging people, but I'd at least appreciate it if you were consistent in your use of guilt by association.

And the only evidence you have of racism against Scalise is that he spoke at a convention organized by a KKK member. That's guilt by association. Let's try this to see if you get the point. You are asked by a local scoutmaster to speak to a group of scouts about some topic you are an expert on. You happily agree to do so, and your talk is a great success. A week later the scoutmaster is arrested for sexual abuse of some of his troop. Are you a pedophile because you spoke at a meeting arranged by a pedophile? If it were Steve Scalise who gave that talk, you'd be hanging that baggage on him, I expect, but if it were you you'd certainly proclaim your innocence. And only an idiot would think that your talk to his troop proved your affiliation with his crime.

It's good that you seem to know what racism is, but you've still failed miserably at identifying them or acting consistently in trying to do so. I don't know why you keep doing that.

If you want me to take you seriously when it comes to your alleged identification of racists, then you'll have to be consistent. Either you'll claim that Obama is a racist/homophobe for his association with Byrd and his speech at his funeral lauding the man, which means "guilt by association" is your method of identifying racists and you're doing it with Scalise, or you'll be a hypocrite and let Obama off the hook while trying to skewer Scalise for things he didn't do OR say.

He has no "admitted associations". He gave a talk at a convention. Period. Just like Obama spoke at Byrd's funeral. If you fictionalize an "association" based on making a speech, then you need to fictionalize consistently.

It's about Byrd because YOU claimed that Byrd was not a leader in the house or senate, which was a lie you've been called on twice. Here's your statement:

I know you types like to bring up the Byrd strawman Byrd is not even alive today let alone being a party leader/whip in the house or senate.

It doesn't matter that Byrd is dead, Obama and a lot of other politicians associated with him, he was a strong leader in the senate in many different positions, and he was not only a member of the KKK but organized the chapter in his hometown and was elected to lead it. If someone with such ties to the Klan doesn't create guilt by association with people who idolize him, then simply giving a speech to a convention does not create such guilt.

No, he didn't. He said nothing about being a racist. He's done nothing that makes him a KKK member. "Without all the baggage" means without all the baggage. Maybe you aren't a native English speaker and you just didn't understand what "all the baggage" meant, but I've explained it to you sufficiently that you should know now. Continuing this further would only prove your hypocrisy when "guilt by association" only applies to Republicans you hate and not to the Democrats you don't.

Right now the GT750 is the best price/performance. Save the $25 to $35 bucks just isn't worth it in the case if you are a gamer.

If you are not a gamer, then sure.

Yes but money is easy to measure.
And results are easy to measure.

If the IT consulting company can deliver the results for less money--- or more importantly- if management merely believes that the IT consulting company can deliver the results for less money-- or even more importantly if a companies competitors are all using IT consulting company and delivering more services and product while also making higher profits-- then the jobs will flow away.

It won't really stop until we have wage parity between the two skilled populations. Before- when you had to physically be present, it didn't matter so much. But today you have lots of working from home and virtual offices. Of more expensive programmers- only the very best will get the jobs. The average work/duties can be done by average employees in other countries. It's a very difficult fact.

It will resolve it self- but it's going to take a couple generations.

After I posted, read the only negative review of the book - it was from someone who had bought the Kindle version, which apparently was horribly with many formatting errors and text being cut off/overlaid by images...

A photographer was given broad access across all of NASA years before the mission launched to fix the Hubble, and he put together an book of amazing photos and stories behind the mission:

Infinie Worlds by Michael Soluri. They have a hardcover and a Kindle version, not sure how the pictures would come out in the Kindle version but the hardcover is pretty large and the photos look great.

"Seem to" is not "you said...". It appears you revere him because you attempt to handwave away his documented history. Like claiming he was not political leadership in the senate so apparently his racism/homophobia isn't relevant.

Except it isn't irrelevant. If Scalise has a "KKK affiliation" because he appeared at some event sponsored by some KKK member, then Obama has the same affiliation. If you want to nitpick that Byrd didn't sponsor his own funeral, then you can pick from any number of high ranking political leaders who spoke favorably about Byrd at other times.

I quoted to you sections of the Wikipedia article about Byrd that I previously linked to. Those sections show that Byrd was, indeed, a party leader in the senate, including both majority and minority whip and even President Pro-Tem. Saying he wasn't a leader is simply ignorant; ignoring the facts when they are presented in front of your face is malice.

Without the baggage. That means without the negative things attached to him. Like RACISM. Sheesh. Don't you know what it means to "have baggage"?

I'm doing nothing to water down David Dukes, and your claim is laughable. I'm pointing out to you what "without the baggage" means in English.

Well, he got elected once.

A former one-term Republican Louisiana State Representative, ... He served in the House from 1989 until 1992.

Wikipedia. You ought to look things up before you post.

Yes, and that includes racism. Most folks would call a history of racist actions "baggage", but apparently not you. You seek to paint a politician you hate with a brush that he doesn't deserve.

Good for you. Since those policies prevent your support, they'd be called "baggage", now wouldn't they. The only mud you can sling at Scalise is that he wasn't explicit enough in saying what baggage he meant when he said "without the baggage", and since you want him to keep carrying some baggage you can use against him, you'll ignore that it isn't his. Unless, of course, you can provide some list of glaringly racist activities that justify it. No, all that can be produced is that "he spoke about economics at a convention". That's the same kind of "guilt by association" that Obama would deserve for honoring Robert Byrd, so either you accept that Obama is a racist KKK sycophant or you are a hypocrite.

So what exactly is the difference between a shirt made from quality cotton with $15 an hour labor that costs $25 and a shirt made from quality cotton with $1 a day labor that costs $5?

What is the difference between a standard business program (nothing super advanced- a well recognized pattern) turned out by a $9,000 a year programmer in india vs the same program turned out by a $90,000 a year programmer in a 1st world country?

Get what you pay for mainly applies when the savings came from material quality. It is very hard to judge the quality of human labor other than by results.

Indian and Chinese labor have challenges (face being a big one- never saying "no, that's impossible" is another one) but they are on parity with u.s. workers and have been for the last 5 to 7 years.

It would be nice if it were that simple.

How can a corporation paying $80k to workers compete with another corporation paying $15,000 per year for similarly skilled labor?

The H1B is abusive and addressing it will slow down the trend.

But indian and chinese (and other) labor won't equalized until after 2045 and they will have a competitive advantage until wages equalize.

I wish addressing H1B's would fix the problem. But fundamentally, as long a 6 year masters degree can live "well" on $30,000 in china or india (and costs under $16k) while an 6 year masters degree (that cost $80 to $160k) requires $70k to live "fair" and $120k to live "well" things will stagnate or get worse for the higher paid person.

Chinese and Indian labor have challenges but they are "good enough" in most cases.

So if the door is shut- the likely result will be
a) wholey owned subsidiaries in other countries.
b) outright elimination of IT function here and purchasing it cloudwise from there.

It's not just IT- it's also radiologists, actuarials, and any other kind of easily offshorable expensive highly educated positions.

For India- at current rates we won't be at parity until 2065.

We really need to stop pumping inflation in the 1st world countries and deflate for a while to equalize labor costs.

And Scalise is not David Duke.

Yes, I'd say so. But Scalise didn't say "David Duke without the KKK", he allegedly said "without the baggage." I know it's hard to imagine, but that "racist" baggage is part of the baggage.

Yes, he means he's a politician without the baggage of KKK or a racist history.

Yes, I am, because Byrd and Obama are a perfect comparison to this awful racist KKK guy named Scalise. Unless you want to call Obama a racist with KKK affiliations because Obama spoke at Byrd's funeral (and even complimented Byrd), then saying that Scalise is a racist KKK sympathizer because he spoke in front of some convention where he was invited is just ridiculous.

Bigotry much? "You types"?

The fact he died doesn't change what he was.

Please review the biography of the man you seem to revere. Here:

Byrd served in the Senate Democratic leadership. He succeeded George Smathers as secretary of the Senate Democratic Conference from 1967 to 1971. He unseated Ted Kennedy in 1971 to become majority whip, or the second highest-ranking Democrat, until 1977. ... From 1977 to 1989 Byrd was the leader of the Senate Democrats, serving as majority leader from 1977 to 1981 and 1987 to 1989, and as minority leader from 1981 to 1987. ... After becoming chair of the Appropriations Committee in 1989, ... As the longest-serving Democratic senator, Byrd served as President pro tempore four times when his party was in the majority ...

Saying that Byrd wasn't a party leader is a patent lie.

"Without the baggage." I know you want to paint this guy with some hate issues, but you need to do better than this. Given the love heaped upon a true racist/bigot/homophobe, you'll need to explain a bit better why someone who gave a speech about economics at a convention is such a bad guy.

Er... maybe it's the companies (and now the state) you work for.

Don't worry. They'll find a way to disappoint you.

Yes, it's possible, but very very unlikely.

That means over a long enough time, it will happen.

And some of that "baggage" that he doesn't have includes ... wait for it ... I know it's hard to comprehend ... an affiliation with the KKK.

Unless you want to call Obama a KKK affiliate because he spoke at Robert Byrd's funeral and said nice things about him. You know, Byrd, the guy who not only had a KKK affiliation, he organized his town's KKK chapter and was elected it's leader. And who talked about "white niggers" as recently as 2001. And who opposed gay rights and gay marriage.

Scalise has no more KKK affiliation than Obama does. It's a non-story, and now there's a non-story that is most likely an attempt by a blogger who realizes his story isn't worth much to stay in the public eye. He's trying to extend his fifteen minutes of fame from a blog article that merited none to start with.

Why should silence be a goal? Being able to hear an approaching vehicle is not just a safety issue for blind people, it is an issue for anyone who is trying to cross a road and can't see approaching cars.

It isn't important to distinguish between multiple oncoming cars. What's important is that "there's a car coming", not that "the first car in the line is a Prius, the second one is a Volvo, the third is ...".

One person's "pollution" is another persons "ambient sounds". The sound of a properly muffled car engine is hardly "pollution". You're confusing the concept "I don't like hearing..." with "it is pollution".

And it is the responsibility of the person trying to cross the street not to step out in front of an oncoming car. Even were your job done perfectly, they'd still have to do theirs because the laws of physics say that I can step out in front of you much faster than you can stop.

Ahhh, ok. Blind people should just sit quietly at home listening to the radio and not dare wander about the streets where they might become a hindrance to you. They can't "watch" anything, so they shouldn't be anywhere that "watching" is required.

Should we also relegate paraplegics to the dust bin because they cannot obey the "walk" signal at a signalled crossing? They can only manage the "don't walk". And how dare they try using cross-walks in the first place. They aren't called cross-rolls, you know.