-- do really expect people can pursue happiness with Bing?
Actually, Yelp paid for this study and staffed it as well... See the footnotes of the first page in the first link in TFS http://www.slideshare.net/lutherlowe/wu-l
Ha ha...Yelp involved in accusing others of unfair practices? Oh, the blessed irony.
All I have to say is use another search engine if you don't like it. No one is forcing you to use Google.
Googe is a Basic Human Right. The US was founded on the principles of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness -- do really expect people can pursue happiness with Bing?
AHHHH! Please, government! Protect us from Big Search!
There are a variety of reasons why the ACA is a bad law. Primarily, it is because it leaves intact the insurance companies and the outrageous costs of medical procedures, and does not put an upper bound on medical malpractice awards. Basically, it just guarantees the insurance companies a few million additional subscribers, and puts the onus on employers to suck up the cost difference (either through their company contribution or the penalty they pay to have employees shop the exchanges on their own). And don't get me started on all the fees. And how about the fact that we're still getting final regulations from the executive branch? Congress enacted a law over which they gave up control to the executive? Well, they maintain the ability to stop funding, sort of; but that isn't going to happen.
tl;dr: I'm mostly just against the individual mandate -- which is little more than an admission by the government that they couldn't find another way to fund the law. But don't underestimate the impact of all the fees on companies. And the unintended fees in the form of the costs of implementing the various reporting requirements (e.g., 30 hour; 6055/6056).
I believe the "old saying" you want is:
None of us is as dumb as all of us. (http://despair.com/collections/demotivators/products/meetings)
Or one of my favorite movie quotes (Men in Black):
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it.
As long as there's a plausible rationale for why the text is the way it is
The reason the text is the way it is, is because of the election of Scott Brown to fill the seat of the recently deceased Ted Kennedy. The Democrats lost their 60 seat super-majority required to override a filibuster. So congress had to pass the bill "as is" with no changes or edits. It was either a flawed law or no law.
Regardless, I'm pretty sure they passed it without reading it. And not because, say, they wouldn't have passed it if they did; rather, because the bill as a whole is entirely unreadable.
Typos can indeed lead to ludicrous conclusions that can be corrected judicially. This was not one of them.
Apparently, six justices disagree with you...
But if six judges disagreed with you, and they happened to rule against your favored political party, would you placidly accept their decision?
I thought the spice rack was the first carpentry project to make or break a would-be carpenter? Honestly, it doesn't take a robot to make a birdhouse. My guess is someone could do it with all mechanical means with little problem. You're talking about six to eight pieces of wood, only some of which need to be cut other than to length, and one hole.
I figure all those cheap birdhouses in places like Christmas Tree Shops are made by machines in China. But that isn't the point here -- this robot is supposed to know how to do it, not just repeat predefined steps in a highly controlled environment. Robots already do that on a much more complex level - like assembling parts of cars.
We already have zombies: All those people that tune into Keeping up with the Kardashians and its ilk. Fortunately, they aren't likely to bite anyone that isn't also sitting on their couch.
You make a fair point, but I'm afraid it's not relevant to what Mayday and others are trying to accomplish. It's these kinds of commercials that have come to dominate the landscape and shape the broader dialogue on issues. Admonishing the public for giving credence to campaign commercials doesn't change the fact that special interest money is having an overwhelmingly negative impact on our nation. Ending corruption isn't about putting a stop to negative attack ads, it means liberating our system of government. We're no longer a government of, by and for the people. We are simply the governed. As long as Democrats and Republicans alike are beholden to the funders of their campaigns (largely the economic elite and Super Pacs funded by corporations) average americans have no voice in their government. Cynicism is the easy path my friend. Dig deeper, our nation depends on it.
I'm digging as deep as one can possibly dig. Their campaign finance reform is a analogous to only stitching up the skin as a "fix" for a compound fracture.
We have let the politicians run amok for quite some time, and as you state, the current system is not by the people -- but it is the people who have let it become that because as it turns out, we are lazy and would gladly trade some freedom for just a little more leisure time.
Cash in liberty; gain free time; repeat. Always repeat.
We have the government we deserve, and patching it with campaign finance reform won't fix what is broken: Us, and our critical thinking skills. Or maybe I'm as dumb as Homer Simpson, and the only reason campaign commercials don't work on me is because they aren't to the Batman theme music ("na na na na na na na na, Romney!").