Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



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

Comment Centrifuge therapy? (Score 1) 69

I suppose this will spur research into centrifuge therapy to help patients pass kidney stones.

In about 25 or 30 years the technology will be well-studied enough that we'll see the first installation in a major hospital, and maybe 10 years after that the insurance companies will cover the treatment costs.

Just like how MRI machines were developed.

(In the mean time, doctors will advise kidney stone patients to stay off of roller coasters, because there's no evidence that the therapy is safe or effective.)

Comment Probably mining rights (Score 1) 79

Okian Warrior, off the top of your head, answer me right now:

Do you think that one/third of US Uranium reserves were actually physically sent to Russia?

I do not.

Why - is it important?

(I'm not mentioning that a Russian bank paid Clinton $500,000 for a speech right before the deal, because she says there was no conflict of interest.)

Funny how if you add up all of Trumps indiscretions, they don't even total one of Hillary's speaker fees.

Comment So sad (Score 0) 79

Eight successful years as Secretary of State.

What is so bloody sad is that you aren't even right about THIS thing, and you probably vote...

Remind me again HOW LONG she was Secretary of State for?

And that is ignoring the "Why were they successful?" point...

Not to bring facts into the argument, but during her stint as SoS, Clinton:

1) Sold 1/3 of our Uranium reserves to Russia
2) Sold dual use (civil/military) tech to Russia
3) Overrode expert opinion and ordered military intervention into Libya that led to the downfall of Gaddafi

That #3 is interesting. Clinton was advised that Gaddafi was the only thing keeping militant islamists at bay, and that taking him out would result in them forming a separate state based on terrorism.

We now know that by overriding the advice of experts, Clinton essentially caused the formation of ISIS and the subsequent deaths of hundreds of people, here and abroad.

Here's what the Washington Times reported at the time:

“I had facts that indicated America was headed once again into an intervention that was going to be disastrous,” Mr. Kucinich told The Times. “What was being said at the State Department — if you look at the charge at the time — it wasn’t so much about what happened as it was about what would happen. So there was a distortion of events that were occurring in Libya to justify an intervention which was essentially wrong and illegal.”

People say that Trump is scary and will lead us into war, but they conveniently forget that Hillary Clinton actually *did* lead us into war - under false pretenses!

Oh, and let's not forget all the people who had access to top secret classified information on Hillary's server.

Comment Liberals and their insults (Score -1, Troll) 79

Why don't you go one step further and claim that his own words were placed in his mouth by the liberal media conspiracy. You guys are practically that dumb already.

Liberals. Always with the insults.

Other than name calling, what have you got? Name one thing that Clinton has done *ever* that has benefited the American people?

Comment Everything Trump does is bad (Score -1) 79

Why is it that, in the media, everything Trump does is "bad".

It's almost like he doesn't have a team of extremely smart people working on tactics which are vetted with A-B testing and focus groups.

It seems like everything he does has a negative editorial comment nowadays.

Are Clintons actions editorialized as well? I haven't seen any good examples.

Comment Re:Lefties? (Score 1) 11

If "not being a sociopath" is left, than I guess you're right, I'm a leftist. It comes from too much Sunday school, I suppose.

Comment Lefties? (Score 1) 11

If not being heartless is being a leftist, then I'm leftist. Letting children die so you can become even more filthy rich is just pure evil.

This is a drug that costs less than ten bucks to manufacture that stops children from dying a horrible death from a severe allergy. Charging six hundred bucks for it is beyond criminal and wel into Evil with a capital E. Satanically evil.

Comment Taxes are punishment? (Score 1) 4

If taxes are punishment then the rich need their taxes tripled after all the unpunished evil they've done so far this century. The poor are being punished enough - by the rich. If having to pay for roads and bridges is punishment, then having to pay for food and water is, too.

As a Christian, I have no problem with taxes (Mark 12:17). Of course, if you worship mammon rather than God, taxes would indeed be punishment.

Comment After the election (Score 3, Interesting) 196

If there is any, and I mean *any*, evidence that Trumps communications to said senior Russian officials came with a "wink and a nod", or indeed anything more specific, then there is every reason for the FBI to get involved....

And of course, selling a third of our Uranium reserves to Russia or selling dual-use technology to Russia doesn't count. It's not important, and was scrubbed from someone's Wikipedia entry.

Thinking through the outrage over Palmer Luckey (Oculus Rift founder) from his support of Trump, and all the crass, oafish things that have happened during this election, one thing seems clear.

The time to address these issues is after the election.

That's the only time where anyone can legitimately claim that their concern is real, and not partisan sniping.

The ends don't justify the means, and it's not worth tearing down the system "just this once". Getting your candidate elected is not worth sacrificing their legitimacy to do it.

If your candidate was worth his/her salt, then you wouldn't need any of these dirty tricks. Right now, the only limits we should have are legal ones.

I note that while Lyndon Johnson was negotiating the end of the Vietnam War, [candidate for president] Richard Nixon called up [Vietnam revolutionary leader] Pol Pot and said that if he delayed negotiations, Nixon would give him a better deal when elected. Negotiations failed, Nixon was elected and the Vietnam war was extended for 2 more years.

This was an American citizen interfering in the political process of the US, and promising aid to our enemy. It was clearly illegal, and the FBI of the time knew about it.

And did nothing. Illegal, and the FBI did nothing. Ring a bell?

Recently, Hillary literally(*) accused Trump of treason. That seems a bit over the line even for Democrats, and it seems illegal on it's face.

But now is not the time to complain, we've let these people have the run of our media, our internet, and our zeitgeist. Let's let it play out for another 6 weeks, then we can carefully examine these things with the benefit of hindsight.

(*) Using the correct definition of literally

Comment Not bad (Score 1) 847

I have to say, your post was well constructed and cogent, with no insults.

You make good points which are lost within fairly large paragraphs. The reader has to slog through a lot of words and actually parse them out to see your meaning. Consider making your point with short sentences and edit for terseness, I think you'll find that gives your position much more power.

If I came across your post in a different thread I would mod it up. I hope you'll keep posting here, it's rare to find someone who can compose an insightful post.

This is exactly the sort of debate we should be having on this site.

Comment The DNC are cheaters (Score 5, Interesting) 847

But really what did the DNC do do Sanders (who was not a Democrat prior to trying to run for President as one)?

They said mean things in private? They stacked the deck for her prior to Bernie running? And you think it is worth fucking-over America (the globe even!) so that she is not "rewarded"?

Early this year, when Bernie raised $60 million and Clinton had raised only $20, the DNC moved $60 million in funds earmarked for local campaigns directly into Clinton's account.

Bernie and Clinton won popular votes by roughly the ratio of their campaign spending, so the extra $60 million made a huge difference.

Bernie had momentum at the time, and would have outspent Clinton 3-to-1 in political ads. The extra advertizing would have very likely won him many of the early state primaries, and would have likely won him the national primary as a result.

Moving the money as they did is almost certainly a violation of federal election law, likely a violation of money-laundering law, and goes completely against any sense of neutrality in the DNC towards candidates. (Additionally, they short-sheeted all the local campaigns, giving republicans an edge in many areas.)

Effectively, they took all the campaign contributions people gave to Bernie and wasted them.

And you think it is worth fucking-over America (the globe even!) so that she is not "rewarded"?

It's worth standing up and saying "no" to corruption.

The people who gave support to Bernie Sanders should not have had their efforts wasted due to cheating.

Slashdot Top Deals

"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro..." -- Hunter S. Thompson

Working...