Ok, there have been a few pitiful attempts, but you might as well include somebody throwing their shoe at GWB as an assassination attempt as laughable as some of these are.

Pfft. The Secret Service is antiquated for protecting the president. Maybe useful for protecting the family, but Presidents have known for awhile that the best way to not get assassinated is to have a total buffoon as the Vice President. I mean what crazy Liberal would shoot GWB knowing that Dick Cheney would take over? No one is going to shoot Obama and end up with crazy uncle Biden in the oval office! You can go back probably till Reagan and it holds true. And how many assassination attempts have been made on recent presidents? Zero.

There is always a possibility that the job and the employer are great and not trying to gouge you while in a vulnerable position. Or that their HR department is so incompetent they didn't bother to ask if you were currently employed and just assumed you were.

Yep, and if you are applying for jobs while unemployed, be prepared for zero negotiating room. The employer knows your option is to take it or continue eating into savings if you have it. You are almost better off taking the job and continuing to look.

Unless they invent a bullshit "disciplinary" reason for the firing in which case you are out your job and the termination allowance you thought you were entitled to. Are you a white male? Good luck fighting that one out with a lawyer...

Ahh but you forget that Google is filled with white males. No amount of lawyers can successfully sue claiming discrimination against this group. Ask me how I know... Here's a hint. An employer can fire a white male for any made up reason with no evidence even against their own policies and with a good performance review. A law group might send a letter but if the company ignores the letter, they won't take it to trial.

[Citation Needed] Considering close to 1/4 of the price of gas in most places in the US is ALREADY taxes, that would be a hard number to back up. Or are you comparing the price here to the even higher taxed fuel in other countries and calling that a "subsidy"?

I agree and to sell it politically I recommend we call it "reprocessing fuel for use in geothermal power plants."

Han Solo being chased by Minions? Oh wait, Minions is Universal...

Soundrels would also make an excellent movie... Alas, Star Wars will never be in the public domain in our lifetimes in order to make the movies on our own.

They wrote the legislation to be completely unable to accomplish those ends because the legislation was so filled with crap from multiple people with multiple objectives. The purpose of the Supreme Court is not to modify the text of the law to make it work. If the text of the law is wrong, it is the responsibility of the legislature to modify the text of the law through the legislative process.

However, for this law, it was passed in such a clusterfuck of a hurry that they didn't read the law first and ask these questions about how it would work in practice. Now they don't have the legislative numbers to fix it the right way and the POTUS has put public and political pressure on the SCOTUS to interpret the law with the intent of saving the implementation instead of interpreting the law based on the law.

The US didn't have a big standing army at the time because the intent of the Constitution was that the federal government not maintain a standing army at all times. Armies were supposed to be the state militias coming together in times of war to defend the collective nation of states. However, we have descended into a time when we have a standing army at all times which our founding fathers warned us was the gateway to a tyranny.

If the intent was that subsidies could go to Exchanges established by the Federal Government, then why did they put the "established by the State" clause in? They could have just left it as Exchanges and it would have been fine.

Again I have to explain to people the English language... It's called a "parenthetical expression." A parenthetical expression is an expression which is inserted into the flow of thought. It may be in the middle of a sentence or between sentences, but it DOES NOT DEAL DIRECTLY WITH THE TOPIC AT HAND. (emphasis mine, source http://englishplus.com/grammar...)

Let's simplify the sentence and then expand it back up. The base structure of the sentence is: The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. That is the meat of the sentence and the essence of the law. There is also some text in there about how the security of a free State requires a well regulated Militia, but there is no law requiring a well regulated Militia to be in place. Now I would argue that the well regulated Militia is operated by the "State" as you say through the National Guard program which is operated individually by the 50 States. However, the fact that DC is not a State and does not have a Militia should not be construed to mean that they can ban guns there as the residents of the District are still people who have rights, one of which is to keep and bear Arms, which shall not be infringed.

Exactly, the triangle goes Reduce -> Reuse -> Recycle, but everyone wants to focus on the last one... I guess it's because we've been sold on the idea that spending and consuming is what drives the economy. If we reduced, it would cause a great depression/recession/slowdown, etc. If we reused, we are basically putting people out of work right?