taxing an element is necessarily part of the "solution." just amazing to me..really.

fantastic. in full support. i don't think humans are going extinct with their actions, but you do and want them to, so we are convenient bed fellows.

i'm cold. i heart global warming.

i think it's cool that we are using former life to enrich our livelihood in the form of fossil fuels and dinosaurs.

that's all true. and i actually use the sun to power my house, but i doubt you do.

Um, maybe we shouldn't demagogue all science that disagrees with our religious philosophy just yet. Because, you know, science will show the truth in the end.

*sigh*

I simply deny the basis of your argument. - Nationalized health care is should not automatically be assumed as better health care. - Raising taxes is good for GDP growth? Give me a break...the corollary you're trying to make is non-existent. Any macro-economic professor worth the pants he wears will tell you that, "this is all theory." - If you believe tax increases are the formula to success, why not just keep raising them? Do you have a limit? Do you not acknowledge any negative impact on an economy to increased taxes? Do you believe that a centrally controlled economy creates wealth somehow? - How does it feel to be a part of a political philosophy that demagogues success and appeals to the black emotions of envy and class warfare?

ignorance.

That strawman does not exist. Period. I have not put up a strawman, I have put up a real belief system by many.

Great quote. Whatever your philosophy of choice, there is no doubting science. Earth is not a fragile set of elements that is about to destroyed by a particular element from a particular set of elements. It sucks to be devoid of a moral backing. Don't fill it with demagoguery of all those that don't think in lock step with yourself.

Whatever "damage" you think there is, please explain to me how taxes are going to correct it?

Because anything that doesn't fall lock step into the religion that says we are on a path to human extinction within this century unless we start taxing corporations heavily, is obviously seriously flawed. If only environmental science had the same rigorous processes as the rest of the sciences...

Did anyone actually traverse the story back to the original article from IGN (http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/117/1178844p2.html) and read it?

Albeit, a quote from McNamara, but if just this holds true, I don't pity anyone working for the company

There was a bonus scheme for working evenings, and people got a month off for that," he said. "And people who worked weekends got paid for it. We brought in a weekend working scheme for that. But contractually, we don't have to do that. Part of the thing is that we pay over the odds, and it says in their contract that if they need to do extra time. I've done 20 years of not getting paid for doing that kind of stuff.

Don't let silly things such as facts and truth get in the way of the story you want to spin!

http://twitter.com/DefendWisconsin/status/40283131852365824
(the downtime was due to server migration, unless the governor also hacked their twitter account).

Which makes for a good plot, imho. I don't think the issue with the movie was a bad plot. I think the issue was completely in it's execution and, more specifically, the dialog. The father/son relationship was so awkward as played out with the dialog. The random conversation about his motorcycle just felt so out of place. Sam's conversation with Quorra about the sunlight, etc seemed like it was written by a fifth grader.

The first half of the movie was filled with what felt like obligatory CG action sequences that just <i>had</i> to be a part of the movie. Then we get a random interjection with the club owner character that was so obviously a rip of 5th element and the wackiness of the show host from that movie. Finally, the latter half was stuffed with a bunch of bad dialog in an attempt to finally fill out the plot and felt so completely half ass.

Yes, 2 million+ web developers are very interested in how you are going to continue to make their lives a pain.

So, idealists only exist on one side of the debate? Give me a break.