What the heck is "visually efficient lighting"? Energy efficient I get. Warm I get. But visually efficient?

Apparently there's no word for "Zip gun" in Australian.

Use high fructose corn syrup in the roach motels instead of glucose. I'm surprised they don't do this already, since they use it in everything else.

I'm not sure what the color of skin has to do with anything. Could you elaborate?

Personally, I think smoking crack is fairly stupid thing to do, and anyone smoking crack should be tossed out of office with as little dignity as possible. Regardless of whether or not it is legal. It wouldn't hurt my feelings at all to see him treated exactly the same ways a Barry was. As for criminal charges, I stated my opinion on this already.

But if they had, Obama would have taken all the credit for it, right? Because the (R) can never do good, and a (D) can never do bad in your world ... right? I'm just waiting till some Libtard tries to blame the IRS scandal on GWB. Oh wait, already happened ....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/23/nancy-pelosi-george-bush_n_3326029.html

Personally, both presidents are(were) awful. Both have eroded Liberties in such a way that short of tossing out both (D) and (R) congress critters and replacing them with (L) and (G) people, they (Liberties) won't come back any time soon. It seems like the American People love their nanny state, and being protected by the evil boogie men.

Mayor's smoke crack. Barry and now this clown. Yawn. Make drugs legal already.

I have no sons, you insensitive clod.

But if I did, I would.

Subsidies to oil companies? You mean "tax breaks" for Depreciation and Exploration, which are not the same thing. The government does not send money to the Big Oil Companies. In fact, the government makes more on every gallon of fuel than the Oil Companies. The whole "Subsidies" line is a load of crap created by the Greenies and Left to make it seem like Government is paying oil companies money, when the reality is exactly the opposite by a large margin.

As a Fiscal Conservative Libertarian, I don't want the government picking winners and losers, because it becomes a fertile ground for handing out goodies to campaign contributes, while punishing people who vote against you. IF you think this is a good idea, you're part of the problem of the corruption that both the (D) and (R) participate in.

Elon Musk, Solyndra et al should have to compete with other good ideas for money. It might take a tad longer to secure funds, but caution should be exercised in fiscal matters.

That being said, I also agree with Tesla's argument that they shouldn't be required to have third party dealerships to sell cars. The problem with old laws is that they remain long past their usefulness, and never get retired. I would suggest that we have sunset clauses on all laws, that they have to be voted on to extend. New laws have short Extentions (1 year, 5, 10, 25, 50, 100, permanent) . Only when a law proves itself standing past the test of time should it become permanent. Most laws are to solve some sort of temporary "new" thing. (However, that being said, these things probably shouldn't be a "law" to start with, but that is a whole other discussion)

Not entirely true: When someone makes a screenshot within the alotted time the picture is visible (the sender can set the amount of time it's visible), you can still make a normal screengrab (only have experience with an iPhone here), but it will notify the sender that a screenshot has been taken. The iPhone does not need to be unlocked for it.

Backwards. The party with a vested interest in keeping people dependent on professionals who dole things out to them is the Democrats. That's the backbone of their entire constituency and the framework within which they describe everybody: needing a handout, or needing to be used to pay for handouts. Without playing middlemen to that one-way street, there would be almost not power in that camp. And so they seek to preserve it at every turn.

No, the ORIGINAL Kyoto Treaty was based on the falsified and erroneous information from the U.E.A.

Piltdown Man was used to prove Evolution.
Made up facts were used to prove AGW (for Kyoto).

See my point. Piltdown man did not prove Evolution because it was fraud, in the same way that UEA fraud didn't prove AGW.

My guess, is she ignored the warning signs or had enough self esteem issues. These things typically just "happen" in a vacuum.

This is (one of the reasons) why I tell my daughters that they should be very careful when dating. Because if you sleep with a stalker, they will stalk you.

Oh, I wish I had mod point!