AKA your kids get to grow up in permanent refugee crisis world.
And you know what ? I am a fool to care about this, because I'll be dead before shit gets really real. Hope you leave your kids some money!
Okay... A couple weeks ago, I decided to take another look at Python-- the first such look I've given the language since around 1997.
So far, I have the basic stuff down. I've got a quick script down that provides functions to add ANSI colors to my output, so I have that going for me.
I have Python 2.x on a VM on my work system, but I'm using Python3 on my home system.
I would absolutely, without reservation, shoot those down.
Enjoy that federal felony conviction.
Not an opinion, but a fact. They say what the government wants them to say. They are out pushing for war with the worst of them.
So what you're saying is that you don't actually read the Washington Post, and are just making stuff up.
If this is actually a credible report, then the U.S. government needs to stop funding the rebuilding/construction of areas that are CURRENTLY under sea level like New Orleans and the dikes and berms around it. No more federal funds of any kind for regions currently under water!
By that logic we should just write off large swathes of the Netherlands. Dykes and berms work just fine, and we have the engineering means to keep portions of land we consider valuable dry even if the waters rise 10 or 20 feet. New Orleans would fit in this category in my opinion. It is a unique part of American heritage and a cultural gem (one of not-so-many the US possesses), well worth the investment of Federal dollars to keep around.
Not to mention that it is by far less expensive to retain land by shoring up or building new dykes, than it is to reclaim land already submerged. Not as cheap as ditching it of course, but in places where it is worthwhile (New York City, Hoboken, New Orleans, Holland, and various other places) it is much smarter to keep existing places dry than leave them to be inundated and then realize our mistake later and either lose them forever, or pay even more to reclaim them.
Oh bla bla bla. You are just rationalizing the absurd.
Yes, it is absurd that people become violent and crazy, and they do things like hold hostages or grab kids or attack people, or force stand-offs. If people wouldn't do absurd crap like that, then the absurd crap like that they do wouldn't happen right in front of us every week. The fact that you're pretending it doesn't happen is curious though. What do you think that achieves? It's an odd personality quirk, at least.
You really stand tall for all this authoritarian shit
I see. So if one of YOUR family members is being held or threatened by some loon, you'd rather that member of your family get hurt than the cops use a taser to subdue the person who's the problem? Or would you rather they use lethal force? Or would you rather they simply walk away so that nobody can accuse them of being "authoritarian," using any sort of force against a person who, after all, hasn't yet killed your family member, he's just promising to if anyone comes close to him.
You don't actually understand what "authoritarian" means, do you?
Indianapolis Nascar staduim 250,000 people.
"Let's do it in the road", with apologies to the Beatles.
Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature. -- Rich Kulawiec