In correct. The southern strategy was the result of a third party. George Wallace ,the racist Alabama Governor was running for President on a Third Party line. Nixon's southern strategy was the belief that he could win states with only 40 percent of the vote - thus it was worth it for him to spend time and energy running in the south.

He was right. He would states with 40% of the vote.

The south didn't turn republican until 1994 so ... either this is a bullshit meme or Nixon was one hell of a long-term strategist.

really? I've used it with eBay and to send money many times. I've never had a problem with them. There may be a problem when dealing with numerous small businesses (and scam artists) around the world. Paypal has made my life a lot easier in dealing with small entities around the world.

How are they ripping people off?

Then they're opposed to Roe v Wade.

No. There were embryonic stem cells that could be used - BUT new ones grown specifically for research were not to be used.

I'm not a socon so I'm not defending them. I'm only saying that it's hyperbole to state that this research was illegal. It wasn't.

I'm an atheist and for stem cell research but demonizing people who disagree with you is not the best way to go.

I'm pro-choice and an atheist but I don't think that being pro-life is a sign of being a religious fanatic. What outrages pro-life people are late term abortions, which, by the way, were not sanctioned by Roe v Wade. Roe v Wade kept abortion illegal after the first trimester (13 wks). Medical research on stem cells were not opposed by the socons - only embryonic stem cells.

Where is it illegal? Certainly not the US. Social Conservatives argued that federal funds were not to be used on embryonic research. That's not making it illegal. It was only illegal to create, grow and harvest embryos for the purpose of research - that's not the same thing as making it *illegal*.

No. There are a lot of people who are philosophically opposed to there unequality of wealth. I speak with them everyday; there are some in my family.

Equality of outcome is desired by many. My point made about the 1% is that too many people are saying that everything bad happens because of the EVIL 1% who control the world. If only, they say, this 1% would pay their "fair share" and government agencies ran everything then the world would be wonderful.

Yes. It's possible. But supply and demand affects job prices as much as it affects commodity prices. Some jobs are undesirable (for whatever reason) and they command higher salaries as a result of poor supply (of available workers). Others have people lining up because it's desirable (teaching) and the wages are pushed down due to an abundance of supply.

No. This was true 10 years ago as well. And this 1% nonsense is tiring. It's boring and it's stupid. You're worried about the control of the 1% - then get away from government control of the economy. You worry about some having more than you. Right? Ohh the humanity. We're not all equal. So what do you do? You get the government to get back at them to force equality. But it doesn't work that way. And then you're surprised that they protect themselves, do jujitsu and use the government to their advantage? The solution is to not use the government to enforce equality - else as in the soviet union (and ever so evident here in the US) people who have the government on their side get the plums - and the rest don't. To paraphrase Orwell - some pigs are more equal than others.

Not so. How do I know that they are paid well? Because people line up to get those jobs. If the pay wasn't enough people wouldn't be flocking to those positions when the jobs open up. Ever see the line for people trying to get a fireman's position? It goes around the block.

How does ebola help large corporations? Stop with this brain-dead thinking. You think big corps such as McDonalds or Walmarts are helped by this? MAYBE some pharma companies are but the transportation and hospitality sector is crushed. Think bro instead of regurgitating this crap.

Lynch was not the best of folks - but his actions were in response to military action on the part of loyalists. He didn't simply say. "oh I'm going to hang people who disagree with me." If you compare the bloodletting between the American and French (and Russian, and Chinese and ...) Revolutions you'll see that the American Revolution was remarkably bloodless (as pertains people attacking their neighbors who disagree).

Again. Creativity doesn't mean making things up or lying. Now. I don't know much about accounting and it may very well be a bad example but if there is a problem to be solved, or can be done more elegantly, then that requires something more than rote work - it requires creativity (or problem solving if you will.) I know some people that don't think that programming is creative. I think it is. (And to nitpick - I think the SEC is only concerned about publicly traded companies.)

I can't speak to that. But some jobs are creative even if you don't think they are. I know some people like accounting. I don't enjoy that. But if someone enjoyed solving accounting problems then I would call that a creative job. Many of these same people (accountants) find coding to be boring. (I don't.)

That hasn't been my experience.