That's what he gets for making his toupee out of his pet's fur.

<quote><p> The mind-set of most people joining the police and similar (like the FBI) is not compatible with a free society, .</p></quote>

I would beg to differ on this. The mind set of most people joining these agencies is actually a love of country and law and order. But then they get drawn into the task of investigating crimes and continually run into the brick wall of the constitution in their well meaning efforts to root out criminals. That and the continual push from above to arrest the bad guys leads to them trying to make their jobs easier and more effective, thus looking for back-doors or to get them added to crypto software, or other work-arounds to the challenges on collecting information/evidence/intelligence without alerting the suspect(s). These limits and road blocks are good and absolutely necessary to a free society, but that doesn't mean these well meaning officers and agents don't get frustrated and try to seek other ways on occasion.

But that desire comes from a desire to capture and see the guilty punished, yes it can, has and will in the future lead to overstepping bounds (occasionally egregiously), but that does not mean they joined for want of power or control. (Okay some may become police officers for such but not the FBI.)

Funny, medical experts disagree with you. So please post your training so we can compare it with that of the deputy Surgeon General.

Not everywhere. In Utah for example a couple smaller cities in the southern end of the state have naturally fluoridated water but the rest of the state has to fluoridate. Those two cities with natural supplies had a much lower incidence of cavities than the rest of the state until artificial fluoridation started. Now the levels are about the same. My father was born and lived the first few years of his life in one of those cities. He has never had a cavity. Me, not so lucky, I've paid for more than a couple sports cars for my various dentists.

I will state that I do hope for greater separation of YouTube and G+. Not long ago I moderated a YouTube video shared to the community that was decent but was off topic to the community. Suddenly I'm getting slammed by the subscribers of that YouTube channel for daring to say a video posted by the channel owner was off topic to the channel. I had to repeatedly clarify to the idiot Youtubers that my comments were applied strictly to the non-related community on G+ where the video was shared. I never even visited the channel until after the outrage started.

My comment had been the moderation comment made on the G+ community feed. But the YouTube channel feed just showed it as another comment. And G+ nicely notified me of every thumb down and comment (all negative) made to my comment on the YouTube feed, by viewers who had no idea that it was made on G+. And of course the outraged YouTubers immediately went to my Youtube channel (to which I've never posted a single video) and started flaming me for daring to criticize a video when I obviously had no idea how to use YouTube or how to even make videos. (I'm not a big YouTube user and what I do post goes to my personal account to share with my family.)

That is by far one of the biggest flaws in the current system and one that I hope is fixed, and soon.

The problem with this metric is how G+ activity is tracked versus other social networks. In G+ a person makes a post, and say twenty people reply. It is only counted as a single post. In FB and twitter such an act is counted as twenty actions. And all the accounts are counted. On G+ for some reason they only tracked those who actually make original posts. Which quite often is quite the minority.

I moderate a rather active community on G+ it's not the largest but it's decent sized at over 17k members. Of that maybe 100 post once a month or more, a couple thousand regularly comment and the rest mostly just read.

But I can promise that even back in Jan we had more than 24 active profiles posting to the community. Only a few are primarily Youtube profiles, and that is just one community.

Amen. On FB it's so hard to keep a community on a specific topic. Either the community host/alias does all the posting, or it quickly wanders off topic and is soon little more than a page of spam posts because people have left it.

On G+ a community stays as on topic as the moderators keep it.. Some communities allow more variation in discussion and some keep a stricter line.

But funnies thing about this discussion here and all the Hate here, is that G+ is not dead, it's a vibrant forum with many communities and far greater control in what you see than FB allows.

G+ has not failed. It isn't FB, it is it's own variant on social networking and it's doing quite well. I hope this move by Google doesn't damage the current system too much.

It still will be when it goes into production. The cost per bird will drop greatly once we've fielded over 2500 of them.

The f-117 shootdown was pure dumb luck, it was hit by a ZSU firing blindly into the air. The ZSU works because it puts so much metal in the air that if you fly over-it at low altitude as that plane did, you are going to get hit. Shooting it down had nothing to do with countering the stealth capabilities. The Iraqi's had much more capable systems and didn't get a hit on any of our stealth birds.

He wasn't hanging out with a different buddy when we first went into Afghanistan. By the time he fled to Pakistan the Taliban had already been removed from power and the new government needed time to become established and capable of standing on it's own.

Because not all can be vaccinated. How many times does this need to be explained. Your choice not to vaccinate put's others at risk. It is not just a choice for your family, but for the immuno-compromised and the very young in our society as well. We all rely on the herd immunity and if you compromise it your choice then affects others and your rights end when they start harming others.

Amen, and forget choosing to keep the old UI as a preference. It forgets it every time. Seriously dislike the new UI it is less user friendly and less intuitive than the old one.

No, the President, submits a budget proposal. The House can enact that budget, parts of it, or toss it out the window entirely. The only real say the president gets on the budget is a chance to veto it after both the House and the Senate have had their say on the process.

Perhaps this is why Nigel Powers Hates the Dutch. Simply short mans syndrome.

Most who qualify as veteran achieved that status before President Obama was elected. It has nothing to do with serving HIM but rather serving the country. Veterans have a higher unemployment rate than the general public, mostly because most employers don't recognize the skills they bring and that their military training doesn't always translate clearly into civilian HR job listings.

Also this isn't a jobs program but a training program. If the economy doesn't create 75k jobs for those trained through this program it won't help them. But if the market is there then they will have the training to work in the field.