Oh yes, if only IQ predicted economic, academic, or social success with any degree of accuracy...

Wait? It does?? With a substantial but not perfect correlation? Well, who could've guessed.

That is entirely what will not happen. If you manage to "destroy" much of anything, you'll just end up with more smaller, faster moving, less predictable pieces of space junk.

You seem to think no one with autism is high-functioning. Thanks for working so hard to make "autistic" a bad word like "retarded" is. I have an uncle who is quite severely autistic, and a cousin with a much more minor incarnation of the illness. Aspergers has no diagnostic or treatment criteria that distinguish from autism. The end.

That's a nice sentiment, but it's not how English sentences are constructed. Adjectives reduce awkwardness. It can make a real difference in complex clauses.

Not in the DSM anymore, because it's not really distinct from autism in any meaningful way.

Not inviting, but being honest about corporate behaviors. In the vast majority of cases, taxes for companies come entirely out of profit. If they make a profit in a region, taxes don't change that. And since taxes hit competitors(well, not apple apparently) too, it doesn't affect the marketplace dramatically. It gets a little fuzzy when stock markets, par values, and yield ratios come in, but the best understanding I've got is that taxes still play second fiddle to consumer habits for most industries.

Obviously you don't have enough hot grits.

It means Microsoft fully intends to spy on their customers all the time. Buried in line 4012 of the EULA of the first system update.

I don't "believe" obama on anything. It's just that even more than a cursory examination of these "scandals" reveals them to either be normal function of government misconstrued as a crime or a legitimate problem bent completely out of factual frame of reference in order to blame the president.

As to the entire rest of your post, I can't imagine the level of self-awareness you must lack to write all that in the context of discussing paranoia and not recognize it as such. There is almost nothing there but conspiracy theories unbacked by evidence.

I don't even like Obama much, I just hate the self-reinforcing confirmation bias circle the internet creates in paranoid people. Obama's aggressively center positions on near everything aren't sufficient for a modern world, especially with the overton window shifted so far right.

Let's see.... Nothing you posted was actually what your article said. None of it. It varies between misrepresentation to outright lie. Why can't you just use the truth in your arguments? Really? I know there's problems. Everyone knows there's problems. Making stuff up just makes you look legitimately paranoid.

1. Misrepresentation(A crime was committed, but it wasn't that, paranoid confirmation bias at work)
2. Outright fabrication
3. Was with a warrant, so no.
4. Being sued with a claim doesn't make it true. The complaint includes accusations that representatives were "rude". Really?
5. That's not what happened and that's pretty clearly intentionally a misrepresentation of the investigation's purpose, and only reflects your paranoia. I cannot understand how you'd possibly misconstrue the purpose that far, other than paranoia.
6. Oh no, someone has an opinion that's different than yours. And she's a politician. That's tyranny.

Christ this post is just doubling down on intentionally misreading everything. I used to be sympathetic about the damned IRS thing until everyone started pretending it meant something besides what happened.

The bolded part of your post represents the fallacy here. Even in the U.S.'s broken 2 party system, there are more than 2 sides.

That's needlessly antagonistic for when I lead the post with the assertion that it wasn't even a defense of my own position.

I just told you we don't need to be reminded that you're paranoid. Christ

No, but neither is fertilizer when you get down to it. I'm about to go on a tirade for a position that isn't really even mine:
Gun control is about impulsive people.

You're never going to stop a McVeigh of Bin Laden with gun control. They're meticulous planners who will not be impeded by inconveniences, and will work around them. They'll build their own materials, circumvent safety control systems, and seek to maximize damage. Those people aren't the most common problem. Their problem is that they are certain that their cause is just.

The most common thread in criminals, particularly murderers, is poor impulse control and emotional volatility. People kill because they get angry, or desperate. 3/4 of people who attempt suicide will be deterred by a simple obstacle or obstruction in their way. People being rational don't murder. Gun control is about limiting the ease with which someone can engage in irrational acts.