Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:whew. (Score 3, Informative) 82

Trump is too busy starting a war with China by talking to Taiwan.

Yeah, that's the last straw. Taking a congratulatory phone call from a foreign leader is totally going to push China into attacking us. But the Obama administration selling Taiwan billions of dollars worth of sophisticated weapons systems, that's nothing that the Chinese would worry about.

Do you even listen to yourself?

Comment Re:Boko Haram? (Score 1) 328

the impacts of climate change were already factors in the conflicts driving a current crisis of migration into Europe, having been linked to the Arab Spring, the war in Syria and the Boko Haram terrorist insurgency

Boko Haram's name, translated, means "Western/Non-Islamic Education Is A Sin." They kill and rape in the name of that message. TFS directly links Boko Haram's insurgency to climate change.

It is a read hearing

The term you're looking for is "red herring." Red, the color, and herring, the fish. It comes from a technique used in training and testing fox hounds, to see if they can be too easily distracted.

So you're right, but only by accident, for the wrong reasons. The summary is trying to distract you from the evils of groups like Boko Haram by somehow making their willingness to slaughter villages and take hundreds of young girls into the jungle where they are then sold off as sex slaves somehow about climate change, rather than about the very reasons they plainly state that they do those exact things. People like you who try to tell those Africans that they're too dumb to know what they're saying, and that it's really the fault of climate change that they're murdering and raping their way through areas they're trying to convert to Islam ... people who trot that crap out are the worst sort of patronizing, condescending, smug racists one ever comes across. Quick! Absolve them of their ideology and actions because they're too simple, as a people, to realize that it's climate change and not the culture they're embracing that causes them to murder, torture, and rape! Whew, dodged a bullet there - wouldn't want to ever judge anybody, because every world view is equally valid, unless you're from a western democracy, in which case you're evil because climate change. Except that very dismissal judges them as too mentally inferior to resist murdering and raping, because ... climate change.

Which "smooth talk" is it that you think is somehow more persuasive in the context of climate change that makes someone who would otherwise not murder a girl's family in front of her eyes before assigning her to a rape camp ... suddenly change their world view and decide that's the right way to be? What would it take YOU to be convinced that's the way to gain political power? Or are you saying you, personally, could not be convinced to think that's OK, but those people in Africa are somehow by disposition more easily persuaded to take up that way of life, especially because Climate Change?

Comment Re: Trump! (Score 1) 525

Right. If you own stock, you own it. If it becomes nearly worthless, you own nearly worthless stock. You can choose to sell it or walk away from it ... but no, you don't get it taken from you by the Obama administration who then props it up with government loans so it's once again worth something and then have it handed over to political supporters as a prize.

Comment Re:Boko Haram? (Score 1) 328

So, instead of rambling on, how about specifically explaining how Boko Haram's murdering of villages full of people and kidnapping the young girls and subjecting them to gang rapes and forced marriage is a function of climate change. Be very specific. How does the climate change cause the rape? When a man decides to rape a woman and tells her village it's because they're not Muslim, what is the actual, climate-based reason for that rape? Specifically, please.

Comment Re:Trump! (Score 1) 525

It wasn't stolen from GM, it was stolen from the investors who owned the stock. Which you know. There wasn't anything "normal" about that transaction. Especially the part where it wasn't really a transaction at all, but a government-enforced transfer of wealth from private investors and retirement funds into the hands of a politicized labor union. Which you know.

Comment Re:Democrats are the enemy (Score 1) 554

How can you keep saying that while Trump keeps proving that he's only draining the swamp because everyone he wants to hire is at the bottom?

People keep repeating this meme, but always carefully avoid mentioning which "bottom," for example, is occupied by, say, Gen. Mattis. Or former Sec. Chao, or Gov. Haley. Be specific. In which way are these people the "bottom" of something? They're all going to agree to never lobby for foreign entities, and go half a decade after they leave office before they can do that work domestically. Which awfulness do they represent, to you?

Comment Re:Democrats are the enemy (Score 1) 554

fascist dickheads who want to tell them what is and is not okay to do

You just described the very essence of Californian political culture, and increasingly NY, as well.

And who says I hate California? I'm just pointing out that the people in that state got their wish at the polls, and all of their electoral votes went to the candidate that best exemplifies the condescending elitism, corruption, and contempt for the middle class that you seem to treasure. So what's not to like, right?

Comment Re:Yes? So? (Score 1) 554

Doesn't matter. Any sane person wouldn't have voted for either. Unfortunately, that means 50% of the US isn't sane (and the other 50% is mostly apathetic).

One of the two of them was going to win. They're both annoying, though Clinton is far more sinister. Regardless, whoever one was going to shape the Supreme Court for decades after their turn as POTUS is long gone. Clinton said she'd be choosing activists to "reinterpret" the Constitution so she could get things done that she couldn't get through a congress that didn't agree with her agenda. Trump said he'd pick from a list of SCOTUS candidates that he published well in advance, most of whom are textbook constructionists disinclined to allow the court to be treated like a way to circumvent the legislature. That shit matters. Any "sane person" would choose the lesser of two short-term evils in happy exchange for not screwing the court up by turning it into a newly empowered lefty activist legislative branch.

Comment Re:Are you serious? (Score 1) 554

because from everything I've been reading

Try reading something other than HuffPo, perhaps.

As for the rest of your strange confusion about the difference between people's race and what they actually DO, well, maybe you can grow up and get over that juvenile perspective. The only reason people are "scared for their lives" is because lying propagandists are telling them to be, because those same liars will do ANYTHING to distract from why they lost the election.

Unless your only sources of news are Fox and Brietbart, there is no way you could miss the escalating fear out there.

Unless you choose some sources of news other than NBC, the NYT, and other liberal outlets, there is no way you'll figure out that it's the failed Democrat party and their lefty cheerleaders who are deliberately stoking that delusion ... even as organizations like the DNC were caught boasting about paying people to go to Trump events and start trouble. Even as lefty media outlets carefully ignore events where people with Trump stickers on their car or who - even as kids in school - voiced opposition to Clinton, are beat up, having their property vandalized, and worse. I know - it's no fun when it's anti-Trump people who are doing the beating, the burning, and other violent acts. Takes all the fun out of your narrative.

Comment Re: Bigger worries then Unsolicited Junk Texts (Score 1) 554

Not really, no. They still didn't manage to top Bush in 2004 by very much, if that is your idea of huge motivation leading to be very active, that's sad.

What? Exit polling shows a large group of people with the Supreme Court on their minds, and big portion of that - across party lines, voting for Trump - noted Clinton's hostility to the rights protected by the Second Amendment. Just like some people vote on abortion, etc., some people vote on that. And did.

All this election resulted in was a demonstration of the effects of the electoral college.

And the reason that WAS the effect of the electoral college was that large numbers of people in the fly-over states voted in opposition to Clinton, even crossing party lines to do so. And many people who normally vote Democrat simply sat it out, from disgust.

It is odd how turnout dropped. Perhaps we need an investigation, don't you think?

No, not at all. People couldn't have been clearer as to why they sat it out: total disgust with the DNC and with Hillary Clinton in particular. Women were completely unimpressed with Clinton as a candidate, and the turn-out numbers reflect that. Likewise with the minority voters who, it turns out, only came out previously because they had a kind-of minority person to vote for, previously.

Donald Trump would nominate a person who thought the Dred Scott decision was appropriate in a heartbeat.

See? Now you're just lying. No surprise. Nominating someone who actually understands the difference between the court and the legislature is not "hostile to the people," it's simply in keeping with the constitution.

Comment Re:Democrats are the enemy (Score 2) 554

Except more voters chose the Democrat.

Yeah. In practical terms... in California. This is news how, exactly? The Democrats campaigned for electoral votes, and so did their opponents. They took California for granted as they always do, because Californians - in enough numbers - are loyal servants to people like the Clintons. They were a given, and they were taken as such. That has nothing to do with the ongoing sweeping pummeling that the Democrat party has been feeling for years now, and which came home to roost especially this time around. Reflexively blue places went red. More Latinos, Muslims, and blacks voted against the Democrats this time around than last time around.

Consider California to be your measure of how "the voters" think if you want, please. PLEASE do that. Encourage more maneuvers like we just saw (Pelosi, once again in charge of the Democrat party's fortunes in the congress - fantastic! what a gift for the Republicans!), because that's going to mean even more of those up for grabs Senate seats abandoned by the Dems in just under two years. The "coming heavy" thing has already happened, and will continue to. Your assurance that the Democrats are somehow ready for that has already been proven false, in dramatic fashion.

Slashdot Top Deals

10 to the 12th power microphones = 1 Megaphone

Working...