Let's remember that one of the "triumphs" of the Civil Rights movement in 1965 was the voting rights act that LEGITIMIZED gerrymandering in order to offer minorities more political power by concentrating them in districts so that they could win.
We can't have it both ways - we can't legitimize fiddling with boundaries for your precious cause (giving minorities the vote), and then not do it for mine (re-electing me). Slippery slope indeed.
"Let's face it, it is a merchandising excuse."
So? The original Star Wars (IV, for the clueless) was just meant to be a superficial serial-action cowboy movie in space. (shrug) It doesn't have to be deep to be enjoyable.
And seriously:
"... I tried to watch Episode I with my wife, "
If you're introducing Star Wars to anyone why in heaven's name would you start with Ep I? Holy Christ, I'd show them 4, 5, apologetically 6, and pretend 1-2-3 never happened
I watched the trailer, and it's on the bubble for me. I'll probably go see it mainly because Lucas ISN'T in charge. If he was? It would be a netflix-when-I-have-2-hours-to-kill at best.
2.0 TDI is 9.2s 0-100kph. 2.0 TSI is 6.5s 0-100. Why would you compare these two engines? Even the 1.4TSI is more powerful than the diesel at 8.5s, and then your comparison is much less favorable:
148 g/km for the gasoline vs. 143 g/km for the diesel. I leave it as an exercise in judgement as to whether the 3% improvement is worth the cost.
They are also heavier and more expensive. Nothing comes for free.
Seeds have this annoying habit of ignoring power lines.
"If we really want our elections to reflect the will of the people,"
What "people", though?
Let me be absolutely clear: gerrymandering is bullshit - I'm *all* in favor of algorithmically-determined districts, such that they conform to:
- must have the same population
- must be contiguous
- they have to recognize communities
It's easy enough to parcel a state into clumps of districts with the same population, but if they split (for example) a town's two voting precincts into different districts, that's a failed algorithm. I can't tell from the article how they addressed that. It seems like they may have tried.
The other point is that we need to decide that each person gets one vote. Not "one person gets one vote but because we feel sorry for a specific group we need to twist things to make sure that they have a chance". That - whatever the motivation - is intrinsically antithetical to actual democracy.
NEJM is part of the vast right-wing conspiracy harping on the dangers of Ebola merely because faux news tells them to?
You claimed that the cop would be a scapegoat if the Grand Jury returned a verdict that he could be charged.
No, I was responding to your hypothetical - not creating my own. If the Grand Jury had gone differently, I would have accepted their decision.
Yet you are defending the current decision as if you already knew all of this information, so the appeal to authority appears to be only a matter of convenience.
Of course it is a matter of convenience. When I don't have the time or interest in a subject, I defer to people who make it their livelihood. The other path is one to conspiracy theories and misinformation.
I gave the information, you will need to do the homework.
You gave no information. You said "Google it". Challenge accepted. I went out looking for evidence that police brutality is increasing. I found this:
an estimated 1.4% had force used or threatened against them during their most recent contact, which was not statistically different from the percentages in 2002 (1.5%) and 2005 (1.6%).
It's a short period (2002-2008), but there was no increase. I was unable to find longer-term studies. They either do not exist or my Google-fu is weak. I would love to know where you saw numbers indicating that there has been an increase.
Lethal data is much harder to come by. There seems to be a single guy trying to remedy this, but I'm going to lump this into "government does not want these to exist" like proper gun violence reporting.
Holding a person accountable for their actions is the absolute opposite of anarchy.
I was referring to the rioting and the "trial by mob" of the officer.
I've actually done this. I needed to arrange a call between Verizon and CallCentric. I called Verizon first and told them what I intended to do, and they gave me a direct line to call in order to set the call up. I probably should have kept that number
Here you imply that you need to be a Lawyer to figure two dictionary words.
Huh? No. I just think it is clear what I meant from context and don't see the point of you picking it out other than being pedantic.
I see it as a repeated appeal to authority and not a rational defense for your position.
I'll grant you that I _COULD_ go out and educate myself enough not to sound like a wannabe on topics such as grand jury investigations, forensics, and autopsies. I have not done so, and do not intend to do so for the purpose of a Slashdot discussion. My "state of mind" is called "humility". It's the same reason I don't levy half-assed criticism a bunch of people who have spent their entire lives creating climate models.
Pick a topic and search for it.
I was referring specifically to your claim that "Police violence against civilians has escalated, not the other way around."
your theory of change without action,
That does not accurately describe my postilion. Action is important, but it has to be the right kind of action. Anarchy in particular is the wrong kind of action.
You missed the part about money. And don't even begin to pretend the democrats aren't all about money.
Ya'll hear about the geometer who went to the beach to catch some rays and became a tangent ?
