Voting for the (R) or the (D), especially when both of them are downright horrible candidates, only ensures that we'll have more of the same into the future.
To put it another way, "Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos."
Your link says the word is non-standard and suggests you use regardless instead.
The worst part is that a former 4-star general just pled guilty to lying to the FBI when he was being investigated for possibly leaking classified information.
Sure. Unless you consider Assange's very sanctuary in the embassy is essentially a big, Ecuadorian, middle finger to the US.
A very good point, because it indicates that Ecuador's recent decision to deny Assange internet access is inconsistent with their previous practice and therefore an unexplained contradiction. In the history of Wikileaks, what have they released which not impact an election? Indeed, influencing political outcomes by releasing secrets is Wikilieaks raison d'être. And Ecuador just noticed that now?
My guess would be that Ecuador was threatened either by an official in the Obama administration or by a Clinton functionary promising retaliation after she wins election.
from parent post:
Preventing the distribution of information that Hillary Clinton made speeches where she said in private the same things as she said in public?
from one of Hillary Clinton's paid Wall Street speeches:
Clinton: “But If Everybody's Watching, You Know, All Of The Back Room Discussions And The Deals, You Know, Then People Get A Little Nervous, To Say The Least. So, You Need Both A Public And A Private Position.” You just have to sort of figure out how to -- getting back to that word, "balance" -- how to balance the public and the private efforts that are necessary to be successful, politically, and that's not just a comment about today.
Not only does Hillary Clinton advocate in private paid meetings to Wall Street bankers policies opposed her own public positions, she confesses in one of those meetings that she does. The contradictions between her public statements and private statements made to Wall Street bankers are why she suppressed the release of transcripts or recordings of those paid speeches during the primary and why their release by Wikileaks has been politically damaging to her.
They should definitely keep using the old stuff until they figure out how to build something that is actually a useful replacement. I've never managed an aircraft carrier flight deck, but I imagine it would be pretty useful (and probably have some good knock on effects) if you could see more than just the deck RIGHT NOW. What if you could see it ten minutes ago, yesterday, trend out what moves where and when, have pre-loaded configurations (including least cost pathfinding) to respot equipment...
Yeah, I don't have any trouble believing that whatever LockMart delivered was a piece of shit, but "nuts and bolts on a board" is not the end all be all.
Based on what I've seen in other cases, it seems to me like those fees are broken out so that a finger can be pointed at someone else and used for leverage. In other words, "Don't like that cost? It's all the FCC's fault", or something like that.
FWIW, the finger needs pointing. There was an issue with Viacom vs Dish a couple of years ago where Dish stopped carrying CBS. Huge screams in the media and from customers, finger pointing by both sides, but in the end it comes down to this:
In the past, the FCC mandated that cable and satellite companies carry broadcast stations in the local markets (not too big a problem on the cable side, but a big PITA on the satellite side). The deal was mandated carriage vs no license fees, and it was (in general) a fair one. Fast forward and the networks decided that since they were now entrenched, it was time to get paid by the evil cable/satellite companies "free riding" on their content.
The fact that it's a hidden fee is bullshit (the total should match the advertised rate + tax) but the fee definitely needs to be broken out separately, because charging to rebroadcast an advertising supported network in the very area they're giving the signal away for free is also complete bullshit.
I just looked. It's $0.30/bottle at Wallmart. That's much better, but still a bit pricy compared to the actual cost.
If you want a link, Sam's Club. Local supermarkets are in the $0.10-0.15 range, but I can't link to those.
So what's the excuse for $0.50 cent shirts going for $50 and $5.00 shoes going for $100?
The "State Actor" here, if you will, would have been the US leaning on Ecuador to take these actions, but I agree that a conversation like the above almost certainly happened. The conspiracy theories around this are just amazing.
Thats 3 K after 2 car payments for cheap sedans
Thats 1 K after buying food , non food Groceries and clothes at Costco
Not that I'm jumping into the middle of your argument, but if you're spending $2000 a month on groceries and clothes, that's your problem right there.
Water costs a buck a bottle in a convenience store, where it's nice and chilled and waiting to be consumed right now. Water costs less than $0.10 a bottle when you buy it by the case at the supermarket. It's even cheaper when you buy it in 2.5 gallon jugs.
It's convenience pricing, and nothing more.
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." -- Albert Einstein