didn't 'you the people' elect Obama? I hate it when people act as if this is some sort of dictatorship just because they lost an election.
Was he giving a speech to the CDC? No. Know to target the right audience. I'm still searching for the "point" he was trying to make targeting THAT group of people in an act that could be considered terrorism under our "new and improved" laws.
uhh... because they're rich and might lend money to the cause? Do you think the CDC needs convincing that malaria is a problem?
yeah, I was just posting about this at the same time you were. I really don't get it. The word has a specific meaning, and it's losing it very quickly and gaining a new one: "my enemy's advertising technique". Now I think I know why I need to explain what this word means to people every time I use it.
er... infected. not sure how elected worked its way in there
He said "there's no reason only poor people should be infected", not "there's no reason only poor people are elected". Poor people did nothing to deserve being infected.
Secondly, Bill Gate's little show had a lot more of a point than PETA getting naked. Whereas the latter is merely a publicity stunt, Gate's maneuver also serves to make potentially rich donors uncomfortable with the idea of the suffering of others by experiencing a small part of it. Nothing about PETA getting naked serves this sort of purpose.
Lastly, I also dearly hope that Bill Gate's political leanings aren't whats preventing you from otherwise helping to stop the spread of malaria...
What about this indicates a faux grassroots movement? Words like 'astroturfing' quickly lose their meaning when abused like this...
If you count civil unions, then he can also throw in the two remaining continents (unless you want to also count Antarctica) and several more states.
South Africa and Nepal were the latest to join, bringing Asia and Africa to the list.
Here's your source:
I'll never understand why people don't at least check wikipedia before demanding a source... and yes, the wikipedia article cites its own sources on the particular issues of Africa and Asia.
I wish I had mod points. Thank you. This is exactly what i think every time I see an argument like this, or about the chances of life originating on a planet; especially intelligent life. There's a fuck-ton of planets, so it's more about the chances of it happening on one out of many of them (which will then, not by chance, be the one where it's observed), rather than the chances of it happening or not happening on one of them.