I spent quite a bit of time in the American midwest. It is hardly unpopulated. And if it were any more populated than it already is, where would we get our food from?

What about people who develop mods for the game? I would like to see modding made easier - a sale to Microsoft doesn't give me much hope.

I like that she is speaking out on this, but I wish she would say something about the attempt to repeal the free speech/press part of the first amendment that the Democrats are working on. https://beta.congress.gov/bill...

``Section 1. To advance democratic self-government and political equality, and to protect the integrity of government and the electoral process, Congress and the States may regulate and set reasonable limits on the raising and spending of money by candidates and others to influence elections.
``Section 2. Congress and the States shall have power to implement and enforce this article by appropriate legislation, and may distinguish between natural persons and corporations or other artificial entities created by law, including by prohibiting such entities from spending money to influence elections.
``Section 3. Nothing in this article shall be construed to grant Congress or the States the power to abridge the freedom of the press.''.

For clarification, Section 1 will be interpreted as "for any purpose we say 'protects the integrity of government" no matter how far-fetched a regular person would think it is. (see Wickard v. Filburn).
"by candidates and others" will be interpreted as "by anyone and/or everyone"
" reasonable limits" means "however much the party in power decides"
"and may distinguish between natural persons and corporations" means whichever party in power can choose to limit corporations but not individuals, and they can also choose to limit individuals but not corporations. It's unclear to me if it also means they can choose which people to limit (though they'll surely figure out a way to do so).
" Nothing in this article shall be construed to grant Congress or the States the power to abridge the freedom of the press." Given that a straightforward interpretation of this statement would negate the entirety of the amendment, the Court will have to conclude that it doesn't mean what is says and that it does indeed grant Congress the power to abridge the freedom of the press (since you'll need money to buy ink).

I agree we should fund this. But we should also cut spending somewhere else to pay for it. If Ebola is important enough to spend the money on (and I believe it is) then it is important enough to find the money to spend by cutting other programs. When you see someone proposing spending without explaining how to pay for it as the President is doing here (and plenty of Congressmen are equally guilty), they're not being serious about governing- they're campaigning.

How did you get modded down for this? The corruption in Africa is world famous with many relief organizations complaining about how much charity funding the local governments and warlords divert to their own purposes in maintaining power.

That was good advice to read the article. Why can't Obama ask for a clean bill to fund this Obama thing? If he wants funding to handle the massive surge in illegal border crossers his policies encouraged, then he should pressure the Democrats in the Senate to get to work on the funding bills the House Republicans passed. ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/... ).
Instead Obama is adding his illegal immigration poison pill so that he doesn't get the funding for the child illegal border crossers and doesn't get the funding to fight ebola. All he gets is political points against the Republicans (when the press blames them for Obama's mess) and a chance to usurp more Congressional power because "Congress won't act".

The article also explains how he's trying to renew the import-export bank corporate welfare by attaching it to another important bill. Unfornately, just as the immigration debate shows there are a lot of Republicans and Democrats willing to help their rich friends at the expense of poor and middle class Americans by bringing a lot of cheap labor, the export-import bank will show that that there are a lot of Republicans and Democrats willing to help their rich friends with corporate welfare.

Most programmers and software engineers have the limitations you mention because consumers don't want to pay for the high quality software we want to build for them. People who go into the field tend to have some OCD-like traits, and making 'perfect' software is what they want to do. But we're not given time so we learn to take short-cuts.

When software is used in places where it has to work the first time, we'll be more than happy to adapt to the new set of circumstances. There will likely be a few glitches as with any engineering discipline (anyone remember the Tocama Narrows Bridge?), but things will get better when the correctness of the software is important enough to pay for.

Metric makes it so easy to get calculations wrong in ways that are hard to detect.

1. write you 'n' with 1.5 humps (a habit from writing cursive) or write your 'm' so that it looks like cursive when you didn't mean cursive, and suddenly a nm is a mm or a mm is a nm and your measurement is off by a factor of a million. In Metric all abbreviations in a given dimension differ by one letter, but in Human measurements they differ by 2 or more.

2. In Human measurements conversions usually require a bit of calculating rather than just decimal moving. A double-check shows clearly and easily whether you're in the right ball-bark. With the Reign of Terror measurements if you miscount on moving the decimal you're not likely to notice (or even bother to try) so you can easily be off by a factor of 10.

So everyone else makes a mistake and we're supposed to follow? How about if the rest of the world abandons metric and adopts some rational units instead?

America's military got serious about using metric in the 1950s. How have we done since then? When we were using good units we defeated the British, the Indians, the Mexicans, the Spanish, and were on the winning side of 2 world wars. Since adopting metric we've lost Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan (though admittedly one can make a strong case for blaming all of those on Democratic politicians rather than on the military).

I'm so sick of Denialists who refuse to except the facts about Communism and the evil it created for hundreds of millions of people.and the threat that it posed to those not yet taken by it.

Just like we used Nazism to push millions of young men into government service.

Well no, sometimes the monsters are actually real. Look up the history of the Ukraine, and who started WWII in Europe by invading Poland, and the gulag, and...(I could go on and on but I need to get some sleep).

To get to paranoia over communism you have to replace paranoia over nazism.

You think it wrong to call the concern about Nazism "paranoia"? It is similarly wrong to call the concern about Communism "paranoia". Communists killed a whole lot of people. They were equally involved in the invasion of Poland that started WWII in Europe. They killed millions in Ukraine through forced starvation. Name something the Nazis did and you can find the equivalent in Communism (except for developing nice cars like the Volkswagen; the Communists didn't do anything like that.).

Good luck getting Communism Deniers to admit this. I would be happy if we can get them to admit that Russian Communism was just as evil as Nazism.

One of these things doesn't belong here...

How many people were executed by McCarthyism? Sure, some careers were set back, but the same can be said of how we handle racism, sexism, and laws concerning homsexuality? People lose their jobs for speaking their minds due to fears the government will huge amounts of money to be taken from employers as a result of a lawsuit.

You have modern day examples of witchhunts but you choose one from 60 years ago. Why?

And the witches McCarthy were far more dangerous and worthy of being hunted.