I thought this was just my old laptop not having enough air flow. My solution was to use those gel ice packs to keep it cool. I keep having to swap them out about once an hour. I've got one of those belkin laptop coolers, I even started using the kids ice pops and putting them on both sides of the fan. It works. Some of that has to do with room air temp too. I'm in the south and it has been in the 90's and I can't get my house below 76 during the day. At night it drops to 72 and it doesn't overheat.

I don't know if the cause being described in the summary is the technical cause, but the game has overheated my system and cause it to shutdown about 10 times now.

How about the entire war on drugs? Those are innocent civilians that are constantly being brutalized and jailed.

I had that exact situation happen to me, it cost me $3000 in lawyer fees to get out of the "resisting arrest" charges. Since then I've had no love for those who "keep the peace".

In addition to that states like Montana have gotten rid of speed limits only to find out that their federal highway funding has been revoked. There are some places where there won't be another car for miles, wide open lanes, well kept where it is reasonable safe to travel at speeds in excess of 100 MPH. Studies on speeding have indicated that speeding isn't that dangerous, it is the weaving in traffic that causes accidents. I don't fault him for doing 127 MPH, I do fault him for weaving in traffic.

Not only will I give you a citation, I'll one up the original posters assertion. He mentions rubber bullets and tear gas, the citation I'll give you the government shot and killed the protesters.

<sarcasm>I prefer to wrap mine in tags, like bold, italic and underline.</sarcasm>

What history book have you been reading? The history of war is one of marching all over civilians. What you are supposed to do is walk in and kill every man woman and child so there is no one left to oppose you. So there aren't any children left fatherless to build a grudge of hatred towards your nation. This idea of not killing civilians is a result of the televised news cycle. Hell during WWII the firebombing campaigns in Japan killed 100's of thousands of people, more than the two atomic bombs.

The reason the war is taking so long is because they are at least attempting to not kill civilians. They aren't doing a great job of it, but at least they are trying.

So the problem isn't that we now have a permanent record of what we do, the problem is the "Puritanism" going around. We don't need to build forgetting into the internet, we need to evolve into a more tolerant species. You know the stuff people remember isn't the good job you did on your TPS report, the stuff that already gets remembered is the time you got drunk and the office party and put the lamp shade on your head. There may not be pictures, but everyone at the office already remembers that long after you're gone.

What is wrong with the way that Internet has been run for the last 20 years? Nothing, and when something did go a little awry they got hit with a civil lawsuit and it got fixed real quick. The FCC is the same organization which fines stations for saying words that are deemed inappropriate and finds the showing of skin offensive. What is to stop the FCC from imposing those same standards on the Internet? So the FCC gives us net neutrality, but at the same time starts censoring the web the same way it does public airwaves. Is that really what you want?

That is what I've been voting for lately, however the party platform doesn't believe in any social safety net. Is for the gold standard, where a fiat system works just fine. So the pure libertarians are just as wacko as pure democrats and pure republicans. Really if you want to take the best parts of each party and work with that you get mocked by all parties. All three have good ideas, but are to blind to see the benefits each other bring to the table.

Actually it took two. First they had to allow the income tax, then they could ban alcohol. Taxes on alcohol pretty much paid for government.

Thanks for the tip! Now I know to have clean room filtered grow houses!

On the birth thing, I just remember getting one of those stupid chain emails and I could see how people would get hooked, that was the only credible argument in the thing. I like to put myself in other peoples shoes before passing judgment. But like I said I didn't care either way, to me it was a non-issue.

The earliest TEA party stuff I remember came from Ron Paul and was coming from the campaign for liberty site. It was fair tax stuff and then got mainstream attention and got picked up by people like Sarah Palin and morphed into this ultra conservative mob that it is now.

As for being closer to the Democrats, I may be a little left leaning, but I could never call myself a Democrat, just like I can't call myself a Republican. The Democrats want to much to take care of everyone, I don't have a problem with basic survival care like in the form of soup lines, but I do have a problem with perpetual unemployment checks. I believe in the free market, with a safety net. The minimal safety net possible; the problem I get from my libertarian friends is they believe the that net will always grow and you'll end up going all the way to the left. That is why I can't fit in with the Libertarians either, you do need regulation because people are evil and game a totally free market system.

Basically I believe that the politicians have won by polarizing every issue. Both side are correct on many issues and much of what we need is a compromise from both sides taking what works from both parties and combining it into something better than what we have. The problem is that everything has to be black and white and is completely polarized leaving no room for grey ideas. Single payer health care for things like vacinations, but free market health care for things like distaster care insurance? A completely public system with a completely private system on top of it? Not going to happen both sides have polarized the issue to where for the left it is single payer or nothing and the right has it free market or nothing and they just flop control back and forth and everyone in the middle gets screwed.

I was happy with the Republican's being the party of no because it slowed down legislation, which to me is a good thing. The news has been saying how good it is that congress has been passing so much legislation this session. To me that is a bad thing, there needs to be much more thinking and debate about laws and less actual writing of laws. Congress was designed to be slow because passing knee jerk legislation has consequences.

To be fair, anyone educated in the last 50 years has been indoctrinated with some form of socialism; but not only does Obama have a lot of socialist views so do most of the far right bashing him for those views. The 'secret Muslim' conspiracy is wacko and wouldn't matter even if it was true.

Ok, for the birth-ers you're gonna have to bear with me a second. I don't buy it, nor do I think it would matter even if it was true. The claim was that he wasn't born in the US, lets say they are right, his mother was still a US citizen so he would still be able to claim us citizenship from birth anyway. They also had some argument about the type of birth documentation that was needed, and the piece they were looking for was never given. Some lesser piece was. And at this point if it became that big a deal (which apparently it did) who is to say that he couldn't forge the document? But like I said it doesn't matter he was sworn in and it wouldn't change anything. About the only thing that would happen if it was true is that it would allow Arnold a presidential bid. So, does it deserve mocking? It was important enough to be in the constitution, but they should have dropped it as soon as he was sworn in.

Did anyone actually think there would be "death panels" in the health care bill? From what I got from all the news coverage about death panels it just seemed like people were saying this bill could lead to it. They were following the slippery slope to its soylent green conclusion. I believe the actual argument for death panels went more like: The new health care bill will raise health care costs to the government, which will in turn cause the government to first cut "unnecessary" services to health care, which some group will need to decide what will be cut, which at some later time maybe 20 years from now will require cuts to elderly care, which at some point became 'death panels'; but I don't think anyone honestly thought that the bill in its current form was going to have death panels in them. If people actually believed that, then maybe they do deserve mocking; to me I thought it was just hyperbole.

As for the TEA party, the neocons in there are messing the hole thing up. The core of the tea party was fiscal responsibility. Lower taxes and reduce spending. Anything beyond that doesn't belong in the TEA party. It makes it hard for the people in the middle to associate with the TEA party when they start taking on social issues. Sarah Palin is ripe for mockery and her support of the TEA party actual keeps a lot of people from the middle and left out of the party. If you want social conservatism join the GOP, if you just want the fiscal conservatism but not the social bigotry that is where the TEA party got its initial push. It really sucks that the neocons took it over.

Anyway. I don't fit anywhere politically anymore. I grew up republican, but can't stand their imperialistic foreign policy, stance on gay and abortion rights, position on the war on drugs, etc; but I do think they understand economics better in word, but not in deed. They talk like fiscal conservatives, but they spend as much as the democrats. So where does that put someone who wants to download unlimited media at under $20 a month, drink a beer on Sunday after mowing the lawn, smoke a joint when on vacation, go to a gay friends wedding, and stop getting raped on my income taxes?

That wasn't punny...