OT: Berkeley

Do you find Milo repulsive? I think he's cool and funny, and he makes enormous sense. The world would be better if more people were funny and tolerant like Milo. He's outrageous because it works, and sells books... now #1 on Amazon. I've got mine on order.

The Left has no sense of humor.

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com 
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

a

of

ink

on

Gosnell also killed one of his adult clients. That was particularly repulsi ve, but nobody is actually advocating that. It's fair to say that Gosnell w asn't a representative abortionist, and that pro-life lunatic think that th ey can get away with claiming that he was.

Abortion kills a lot of fetuses. A fetus has to be born alive to acquire th e status of a baby, so no abortion has ever killed a baby.

Gosnell does seem to have ended pregnancies by prematurely inducing labour, which got him into different legal territory. If he'd provided effective p ain relief for the fetus while it was being expelled, he might have been o n safer ground, but somebody who murders one of his adult patients wouldn't seem to be into legal niceties.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Saturday, February 4, 2017 at 10:28:06 AM UTC+11, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrot e:

e:

e:

g the constitution - the people who riot and set fires are the people who h ave been disadvantaged by some particular set of rules that they perceives as not treating them fairly. Since the constitution was written by a bunch of well-off tax evaders primarily interested in maintaining their own grasp on political and economic power, the US has quite a few rules that work th at way.

are - they deliberately covered their faces and wore identical black clothi ng to disguise their identities. But that doesn't stop you from making a to tally fabricated bio for these criminals. Yes criminals, we DO KNOW they ar e that!

So you don't know who they are either, so you reject my plausible hypothesi s - it's been found to be true anywhere where the police have been competen t enough to capture and identify rioters - as "ill-informed".

You haven't even bothered to set up a counter-hypothesis, so you are in you r regular emotionally-loaded content-free abuse mode.

possible. In fact the constitution can be amended - and has been - which ma kes it clear that the founding tax evaders didn't see it as a collection of irrefutable axioms. If they weren't confident that they'd got it absolutel y right, why should you be?

endment, not by five people who have absolutely no accountability.

The nine justices of the US Supreme Court would argue that they aren't chan ging the US constitution, merely clarifying its interpretation.

Right-wing nitwits can convinced themselves that their interpretation of th e US Constitution is more reliable than that of a selected group of elite j urists, but that does reflect the fact that right-wing nitwits don't have a particularly firm grasp of reality.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

When it comes to ill-informed garbage, Sloman is the top go-to guy. Heres another asshole thats full of shit and invents 'facts' to suit himself:

wingers/

YOu could not make this shit up (but he did!)

Only as part of the postal system (post roads). Eisenhower had to justify the Interstate Highway System on national defense grounds.

Wrong. Colleges would have to figure out how to exist with fewer students. Costs would plummet.

I know you're a communist and would never consider that supply/demand rules such descisions.

No, only a true Marxist would say such a stupid thing.

I did much the same, though we did have freezer rights at the inlaws. ;-)

I was being snide. Can't expect snowflakes to contribute anything.

Because of the student loan programs and other absurd governmental subsidies.

The US Constitution gives interpretive power to the Supreme Court. That isn't a function you can lightly dismiss. Would you away with paper currency (an interpretation of 'to coin money')?

Be a conservative, honor the decisions of that branch of government. Even the decisions that you don't like. You aren't the court.

s

Julian Barnes hasn't bothered to identify the ill-informed garbage he claim s that I've posted. I suspect he'd have to go back to "The people who riot and set fires aren't the people who are interpreting the constitution - the people who riot and set fires are the people who have been disadvantaged b y some particular set of rules that they perceives as not treating them fai rly" to find something he didn't like.

The chance of finding a bunch of constitutional lawyers in mob of pyromania c rioters does strike me as slim. If he finds the claim ill-informed, he ou ght to be able to point to some kind of counter evidence, but the people he fronts for don't collect and package up that kind of "evidence" so he's fo rced to fall back on his own unsubstantiated claims.

The right makes a great fuss about rent-a-mob demonstrations. When some gro up of rioters at a Berkeley demonstration look unfamiliar to a Berkeley pro fessor it's not unreasonable for him to imagine that it was a rent-a-mob de monstration, assembled to provide extra publicity for lecturer involved.

The hypothesis wasn't advanced as a "fact" - more as a plausible hypothesis to explain the absence of the usual activists.

Of course Julian Barnes doesn't make up shit, which is a task above his pay grade. He just retails shit that other people have made up.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Well, my daddy-in-law was a cajun sugar cane farmer with some cows on the side, so we got free sugar and steaks.

And the idea that everyone should go to college. I don't remember universities being such voracious money-grubbers when I went to school.

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

lunatic fringe electronics

Oh, mine certainly was, though on a far smaller scale. The student fees went up every year (by what would be a laughably small sum now) for things that the students didn't want and couldn't afford. They finally took a vote on one of the proposals and it went down by 10 to

1 but the University decided that all no-votes (people too lazy to vote) were counted as "yes". Proposition carried.

On Saturday, February 4, 2017 at 12:11:04 PM UTC+11, snipped-for-privacy@notreal.com wrote :

Marx was pretty cynical about the governments of his day, but quite a few p eople, from a range of different political points of view, have been at lea st as cynical about the way governments work, and the way the people who op erate governments use them to feather their own nests and the nests of thei r close allies.

Krw is a trifle stupid to think that only one particular branch of politica l opinion can be cynical about politicians and their actual agendas.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Saturday, February 4, 2017 at 12:15:49 PM UTC+11, snipped-for-privacy@notreal.com wrote :

Student loans aren't - technically - subsidies. There is an expectation th at they will be repaid.

They do encourage as many people as possible to try to get a tertiary educa tion, which subsidises the economy by maximising the amount of skilled labo ur available.

This does involve getting the universities taking in more students and hard er-to-teach students, which makes the whole process more expensive.

The universities aren't encouraged to winnow the stream of incoming student s to exclude the students who are least likely to complete their degrees - the obvious way of doing it, by accepting only students with astronomic SA T scores, rejects too many student who can complete a degree, so what's cal led for is a slightly more labour-intensive selection process at the univer sities to select those that are merely bright enough to pass but sufficien tly industrious to do the extra work that their brighter competitors don't need to put in.

This is absurd, but it doesn't seem to be the absurdity that krw is complai ning about.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

You can change it by the amendment process, which also requires 75% of the state legislatures.

I understand why disingenuous left-wingers can pretend they never heard of the amendment process and claim they can change it by waving their hands instead, but I don't know why anyone honest would think so.

Latin is the language of the law precisely because it is not a living language. If it was then the meaning of words would change, and we don't want the meaning of laws to change without deliberate action.

"love afair with Islam" is fake news, you're not supposed to understand it.

--
This email has not been checked by half-arsed antivirus software

My sense of humor doesn't usually involve the type of "witty sarcasm" that's just thinly disguised insults at the expense of other people, that one then resorts to "OMG, can't you take a joke?! OMG, you're like, so sensitive" when someone mentions that the "humor" is just thinly disguised insults couched in the form of humor so you can get away with it for the reasons just described.

Milo is unfunny and so are you. You don't actually understand humor, you don't get it, you don't understand it. All you've got is sarcastic putdowns that are amusing to nobody except you. ;-)

For real, man. Nobody is impressed with this snarky sarcasm type of humor anymore, if they ever were. It's super low-effort and everyone knows that people who describe themselves as "witty and sarcastic" are just looking for an excuse to run low-effort insults on people and then fall back on "But I'm being a funny guy!" as a defense.

It is...way lame

And to provide stable currency, which they haven't done in 100 years.

It's under 4% of GDP. It was just under 10% with JFK and 6.7% with Reagan. We now have fewer ships than we did just after the Kellogg-Briand pact. That's some increase.

Sure, we can handle terrorism as a law enforcement problem, like the Clinton administration did. They convicted everyone connected to the

1993 World Trade Center bombing and some other attacks and it kept getting worse. On the morning of 9/11/01 I already realized that if we had arrested them the day before then they would have been released because they hadn't done anything, but many people still don't see that.

We spend over $10,000 per year for each student and we keep hearing from people in the teacher's unions and their cohorts that it would be great if we just throw more money at them.

The USSR never spent less than 3 times what JFK did or less than 5 times what Reagan did. They may have made some other mistakes but apparently we can't determine what those mistakes were.