In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

[free thoughtpolice]

The closest cop to respond, how will they be equipped? Lethal/non-lethal? You can't really have a police force of every type everywhere at once.

No, but you can have a mix.

It's not clear from this incident how long the cops were on the scene. So if the lethal squad gets there first, just like they might call the hostage squad, or the suicide squad, or any other specialized squads, they call in and say "nutcase on deck", and then they do what they can until the nutcase squad gets there or until they are otherwise forced into acting.

And it may even be something the dispatcher can do.

> 911, what's your emergency?
> Okay, college campus, dude walking around shouting crazy things holding a knife?
> College campus, that's an automatic dispatch of the nutcase squad with Callahan and Kojak on deck as the closest cops.

>Never mind. Harry Callahan got there first.

[deLurch]

I've pulled the trigger on Milwakee Mythcon tickets if anyone else wants to join in. Might as well give them a chance if they are making an effort.

[CaptainFluffyBunny]

A second is all it takes for someone with a blade to end your life.

yes, that's true, but in this case (and in others), cnn describes the knife as:

> A knife is not visible in the cellphone video seen by CNN. Footage shot by CNN affiliate WSB after the shooting, however, shows a metal, flip-open utility tool that would likely include a small blade, lying on the ground.

God knows I have no idea how to defend myself, but it seems like it might be reasonable to use mace, pepper spray, bean bags, rubber bullets, a big pole, a baton, a taser, or other techniques prior to shooting this guy.

All of those only work if you have them, have been trained on them, and have overwhelming force present. Even then, the failure rate of non-lethal options in subduing people is actually quite high. In that situation, the officer has aggravated without subduing, and rarely has enough time to clear their sidearm for use. So you'd best have others with firearms to pick up slack in the likely event that the non-lethal option fails.

[free thoughtpolice]

A 2 inch blade or even less can easily be lethal. Utility knifes and box cutters are deadly weapons.

[jet_lagg]

Still, I somehow wish that every police force had some healthy mix of lethal vs non lethal squads and the non lethal squads had their nightsticks and batons and rubber bullets, and even net

http://www.caerleon.net/history/army/gl ... 1ed_lo.jpg

It would make life more interesting. I'll give you that.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_oIsbQuFqthw/T ... es_net.jpg

[InfraRedBucket]

Still, I somehow wish that every police force had some healthy mix of lethal vs non lethal squads and the non lethal squads had their nightsticks and batons and rubber bullets, and even net

http://www.caerleon.net/history/army/gl ... 1ed_lo.jpg

Blimey , Roy Hodgson's certainly cranking up team discipline after Crystal Palace fail to score yet again in his first match
as manager.

[feathers]

Actually, lots of Vance books would translate great to screen. To Live Forever would make a great sci-fi thriller, and Emphyrio might actually be one sci-fi movie David Lynch could do well.

Is that a warning we shouldn't read Emphyrio?

No, it's a great novel. On second thought, I'd hate to see Lynch do to it what he did to Dune.

...or most any other production.

[deLurch]

[feathers]

Any word if Mykers account was hijacked? or worse, that the suicide attempt was real?

Apparently real, but described as a drunk session that got out of hand.

He does seem a bit bipolar, doesn't he. First with the 'Let's phone PZ Myers' employer' thing, then the T-shirt episode, now this.

[Guest_936d3dec]

I was promised loogie guns (with the occasional katana)

A wet, smacking burst, not loud enough to be an explosion, sounds from the back
of the Mobile Unit. It is the soft thup of a thick wrestler's loogie being
propelled through a rolled-up tongue. It is the distant, muffled splurt of a
baby having a big one. Y.T.'s hand, still gripping the bars of the gate, stings
for a moment, then feels cold and hot at the same time. She can barely move it.
She smells vinyl.

The MetaCop's partner climbs out of the back seat of the Mobile Unit. The
window of the back door is open, but everything on the Mobile Unit is so black
and shiny you can't tell that until the door moves. Both MetaCops, under their
glossy black helmets and night-vision goggles, are grinning. The one getting
out of the Mobile Unit is carrying a Short-Range Chemical Restraint Projector --
a loogie gun. Their little plan has worked. Y.T. didn't think to aim her
Knight Visions into the back seat to check for a goo-firing sniper.

The loogie, when expanded into the air like this, is about the size of a
football. Miles and miles of eensy but strong fibers, like spaghetti. The
sauce on the spaghetti is sticky, goopy stuff that stays fluid for an instant,
when the loogie gun is fired, then sets quickly.

MetaCops have to tote this kind of gear because when each franchulate is so
small, you can't be chasing people around. The perp -- almost always an
innocent thrasher -- is always a three-second skateboard ride away from asylum
in the neighboring franchulate. Also, the incredible bulk of the Personal
Modular Equipment Harness -- the chandelier o' gear -- and all that is clipped
onto it slows them down so bad that whenever they try to run, people just start
laughing at them. So instead of losing some pounds, they just clip more stuff
onto their harnesses, like the loogie gun.

The snotty, fibrous drop of stuff has wrapped all the way around her hand and
forearm and lashed them onto the bar of the gate. Excess goo has sagged and run
down the bar a short ways, but is setting now, turning into rubber. A few loose
strands have also whipped forward and gained footholds on her shoulder, chest,
and lower face. She backs away and the adhesive separates from the fibers,
stretching out into long, infinitely thin strands, like hot mozzarelL.A. These
set instantly, become solid, and then break, curling away like smoke. it is not
quite so grotendous, now that the loogie is off her face, but her hand is still
perfectly immobilized.

"You are hereby warned that any movement on your part not explicitly endorsed by
verbal authorization on my part may pose a direct physical risk to you, as well
as consequential psychological and possibly, depending on your personal belief
system, spiritual risks ensuing from your personal reaction to said physical
risk. Any movement on your part constitutes an implicit and irrevocable
acceptance of such risk," the first MetaCop says. There is a little speaker on
his belt, simultaneously translating all of this into Spanish and Japanese.

[jet_lagg]

Any word if Mykers account was hijacked? or worse, that the suicide attempt was real?

Apparently real, but described as a drunk session that got out of hand.

He does seem a bit bipolar, doesn't he. First with the 'Let's phone PZ Myers' employer' thing, then the T-shirt episode, now this.

I shared his frustration at the lack of retaliation after Myers doxxed Skeptickle. That said, his complete meltdown during the flounce spoke to some serious issues. I'm glad he's getting help.

[deLurch]

During his flounce, due to his heavy use of sarcasm all the way around, I completely thought he was joking around. Mykeru is far from perfect. Something he readily admits. Part of what I respect about him. He is and is mostly a dry drunk. He knows this, and thankfully he asked for help when he fell down. It isn't like he does this all of the time.

[Ape+lust]

Andrews is the guy who thought a softball interview with Steve Shives was a good idea and was surprised by the blast of shit he got for it. He talks like he's attuned to dishonesty and hyperbole, yet somehow missed that Shives is a demagogic crank.

It doesn't make too much sense to judge Seth by just one interview, but if you're determined to do so:

https://youtu.be/JmpPYB-7e_o

When he writes Mythcon and asks for Sargon-Armoured-Shoe to be disinvited because they don't "represent the kind of compassionate, respectful activism I want to see fostered and cultivated," then I don't mind pointing out the time he treated Shives as something other than a bellicose nutter.

[feathers]

This article goes through the issues with Tasers in the US from the mainstream official US perspective.

Taser vs. Gun: Why Police Choose Deadly Force Despite Non-Lethal Options
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ta ... on-n656461

In many cases I've read about, tasers are just used as instruments of torture to people who are unarmed and/or form no obvious threat. "Behaving erroneously" is too wide a dragnet to use as justification.

[Guest_936d3dec]

Hillary Clinton just floated the possibility of contesting the 2016 election
Analysis by Chris Cillizza, CNN Editor-at-large
Updated 4:08 PM ET, Mon September 18, 2017

In interviews over the last week surrounding the release of her 2016 memoir "What Happened," Hillary Clinton has been hugely critical of President Donald Trump. She's suggested he is a misogynist and said repeatedly that she fears for the country with Trump in charge.

But in an interview Monday with NPR's Terry Gross, Clinton raised that critique up a notch -- not only questioning the legitimacy of Trump's presidency but refusing to rule out the possibility of contesting the results if Russian collusion is proven by special counsel Bob Mueller.

Here's the full text of the back-and-forth, courtesy of CNN's Dan Merica:

Gross: I want to get back to the question, would you completely rule out questioning the legitimacy of this election if we learn that the
Russian interference in the election is even deeper than we know now?

Clinton: No. I would not. I would say --

Gross: You're not going to rule it out?

Clinton: No, I wouldn't rule it out.

!!!!

This a big deal. The 2016 Democratic nominee, who won the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes, is expressly leaving open the possibility that she would pursue legal action to invalidate the last presidential election.

I've paid close attention to what Clinton's been saying since she lost the election and I have never heard her broach the possibility of a formal challenge of the results.

Knowing what we know of Clinton, it seems unlikely to me that she simply spoke off the cuff here, that this was just an unconsidered remark. She doesn't really do that sort of thing.

And, context matters too. Clinton floated the idea of formally contesting the election after she said this about how she envisions her role in the party going forward: "I expect to be really active, and my voice, I'm going to keep out there. I'm not going to just go slowly and quietly into that good night."

Given all of that, it's logical to conclude Clinton knew what she was doing here.

[deLurch]

@Guest_936d3dec - That is CNN just pulling crap out of thin air.

Gross: I want to get back to the question, would you completely rule out questioning the legitimacy of this election if we learn that the
Russian interference in the election is even deeper than we know now?

Clinton: No. I would not. I would say --

CNN's interviewer fished for a scenario where she would not completely rule it out, and she agreed that might be a hypothetical scenario.

CNN is making up stories with gossamer legs.

[shoutinghorse]

Of course, makes complete sense, I'm just surprised no one's thought of it before. :lol:

[Kirbmarc]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DKCFH8fWkAAx-H3.jpg

Just when I thought that Trump was done and the Democrats had a chance to wipe him and the GOP out in the 2018 elections, here comes Clinton to give him new ammunition. I can already imagine Trump's tweets: "Crooked Hillary wants to steal the election because she can't accept that she lost! Sad!".

Clinton really doesn't know when to shut up. She could have said that she was waiting for the results of the investigation, and that she wasn't going to accept a leading question. She could have said that it wasn't her responsibility. But no, she had to say that she "wouldn't rule out" contesting the election, when the Muller investigation still is far from complete.

Just like she could have waited until she was elected to pontificate about "baskets of deplorables", but no, she had to talk about it before the election, when it could have easily been used against her (and guess what, it was).

Hillary is her own worst enemy. At this point she's also one of the Democratic Party's biggest liabilities.

[Kirbmarc]

@Guest_936d3dec - That is CNN just pulling crap out of thin air.

Gross: I want to get back to the question, would you completely rule out questioning the legitimacy of this election if we learn that the
Russian interference in the election is even deeper than we know now?

Clinton: No. I would not. I would say --

CNN's interviewer fished for a scenario where she would not completely rule it out, and she agreed that might be a hypothetical scenario.

CNN is making up stories with gossamer legs.

Why didn't Clinton say "this is a leading question about a hypothetical scenario, I refuse to answer it"? I agree that Gross is fishing for an answer but come on, this isn't the first time that she's been interviewed, she should have known how it works. Maybe she's had a bit too many softball interviews?

[Guest_936d3dec]

> CNN's interviewer fished for a scenario where she would not completely rule it out, and she agreed that might be a hypothetical scenario.

> CNN is making up stories with gossamer legs.

Well, it was NPR's interviewer, Terri Gross, and the complete transcript is here:

npr org/2017/09/18/551217204/hillary-clinton-says-shes-optimistic-about-our-country-but-i-am-not-naive

Gross asks, Clinton says (paraphrasing) "wouldn't rule it out"

Gross asks again for confirmation and Clinton says again, "wouldn't rule it out"

Gross asks how would you do it and Clinton goes on at length...

And though I am sure Gross was happy to get these quotes, the extensiveness in which Clinton discusses Kenya's challenged and overturned election and the degree and depth she explores this question, and it's all "there is no legal way as I see it now, but if there was, I would"

[Really?]

Let's just go back in time, to when Trump questioned the legitimacy of the election results. What did Hillary say in response?

[Really?]

This, too.

[free thoughtpolice]

Let's just go back in time, to when Trump questioned the legitimacy of the election results. What did Hillary say in response?

Clinton made good points. Trump complained frequently that things were rigged when he lost and never had proof.
So far Clinton has not called for another election, but if it is proven that Trump illegally won the election what is unreasonable about that? Quite different than asserting that it is rigged before you have evidence. Of course, as Kirb wrote, it is foolish to even speculate about it before the evidence is in because if it is shown that that there isn't evidence of Trump rigging the election she is going to look stupid and a sore loser, kind of like Trump when he loses.

[jimhabegger]

GenerallyFading, I've sent you some PMs.

[jet_lagg]

Mike Cernovich has been served a cease and desist letter for illegal pepe use. I'm wondering if the poor sap knew when working his ass off to get a law degree he'd one day be forced to pen the sentence "Pepe is a peaceful frog who promotes togetherness and fun - not hate."

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/arti ... -alt-right

[Kirbmarc]

Clinton made good points. Trump complained frequently that things were rigged when he lost and never had proof.
So far Clinton has not called for another election, but if it is proven that Trump illegally won the election what is unreasonable about that? Quite different than asserting that it is rigged before you have evidence. Of course, as Kirb wrote, it is foolish to even speculate about it before the evidence is in because if it is shown that that there isn't evidence of Trump rigging the election she is going to look stupid and a sore loser, kind of like Trump when he loses.

This is just like the "basket of deplorables" thing: horrible timing. You don't act like a moralist before you've won, it alienates people who care more about their local interests that about what to them is only abstract morality.

She could have easily discussed the unsavory Trump supporters after she had won.

Here Clinton goes again. IF Trump had already been indicted, or a "smoking gun" had been found, then MAYBE you could talk about challenging the result of the election. But now Clinton is only feeding Trump's victimhood narrative.
Even worse is the fact that now the Orange Idiot can try to spin the Muller investigation as a plot of "the establishment" against the democratic result of the election.

Clinton is a smart person, yet she keeps making the same kind of mistake. I don't think she really understands the appeal of the "anti-establishment" messages, and she looks entitled and overly moralistic.

[free thoughtpolice]

Clinton made good points. Trump complained frequently that things were rigged when he lost and never had proof.
So far Clinton has not called for another election, but if it is proven that Trump illegally won the election what is unreasonable about that? Quite different than asserting that it is rigged before you have evidence. Of course, as Kirb wrote, it is foolish to even speculate about it before the evidence is in because if it is shown that that there isn't evidence of Trump rigging the election she is going to look stupid and a sore loser, kind of like Trump when he loses.

This is just like the "basket of deplorables" thing: horrible timing. You don't act like a moralist before you've won, it alienates people who care more about their local interests that about what to them is only abstract morality.

She could have easily discussed the unsavory Trump supporters after she had won.

Here Clinton goes again. IF Trump had already been indicted, or a "smoking gun" had been found, then MAYBE you could talk about challenging the result of the election. But now Clinton is only feeding Trump's victimhood narrative.
Even worse is the fact that now the Orange Idiot can try to spin the Muller investigation as a plot of "the establishment" against the democratic result of the election.

Clinton is a smart person, yet she keeps making the same kind of mistake. I don't think she really understands the appeal of the "anti-establishment" messages, and she looks entitled and overly moralistic.

Yup. I'm beginning to wonder how smart she is though. She certainly has an extreme lack of awareness about how she comes across to people that aren't gung ho supporters of hers. I'm guessing even those that generally agree with her never liked her preachy self righteous tone and a lot of them stayed home on voting day.

[Guest_936d3dec]

Clinton made good points. Trump complained frequently that things were rigged when he lost and never had proof.
So far Clinton has not called for another election, but if it is proven that Trump illegally won the election what is unreasonable about that? Quite different than asserting that it is rigged before you have evidence. Of course, as Kirb wrote, it is foolish to even speculate about it before the evidence is in because if it is shown that that there isn't evidence of Trump rigging the election she is going to look stupid and a sore loser, kind of like Trump when he loses.

I am not a lawyer or historian or anything other than a shit for brains, BUT, ...

If Trump won illegally, Trump will be impeached and Mike Pence will become President.
If Mike Pence aided in Trump winning illegally, Mike Pence will be impeached and Paul Ryan will become President.
If Paul Ryan and the entire GOP aided in Trump winning illegally, Paul Ryan and the entire GOP ruled out of order and James Mattis / David Shulkin / Elaine Duke will become President (they are the independents in the line of succession.)

There is less than zero chance that "challenging the election" will result in anything other than an impeachment at best and a taking back of the house and senate. There ain't gonna be no do over or recount or resignation that puts Hillary in charge regardless of how much Peter Daou shouts that anything less is unfair to the Queen.

The "best" outcome for the dems is probably the Russians investigation leading the impeachment of Trump and forcing, only through politics, Pence to make a Dem the new Vice President, and then impeaching Pence. That will never happen and when it does we will all "welcome" Joe Manchin (the "most conservative" Democrat) (or maybe DiFi) as President.

[Old_ones]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DKCFH8fWkAAx-H3.jpg

Just when I thought that Trump was done and the Democrats had a chance to wipe him and the GOP out in the 2018 elections, here comes Clinton to give him new ammunition. I can already imagine Trump's tweets: "Crooked Hillary wants to steal the election because she can't accept that she lost! Sad!".

Clinton really doesn't know when to shut up. She could have said that she was waiting for the results of the investigation, and that she wasn't going to accept a leading question. She could have said that it wasn't her responsibility. But no, she had to say that she "wouldn't rule out" contesting the election, when the Muller investigation still is far from complete.

Just like she could have waited until she was elected to pontificate about "baskets of deplorables", but no, she had to talk about it before the election, when it could have easily been used against her (and guess what, it was).

Hillary is her own worst enemy. At this point she's also one of the Democratic Party's biggest liabilities.

Why should she rule out "questioning the legitimacy" of the election? I don't even know what that means - its certainly not spelled out that "questioning the legitimacy" of the election would necessarily involve suing to have it nullified, or anything else. Its a stupid question, but I don't see why her answer is anything noteworthy. If it turned out that Russia did anything that amounted to directly intervening in the voting process*, for example, I would hope anyone would "question the legitimacy" of the election. You'd have to be dododave007 not to at that point.


---------------------------------
* AFAIK there is no evidence of that, but hypothetically.

[gurugeorge]

It's always struck me that while many on the left project a "macho fantasy" onto gun owners where they imagine themselves as characters in an action movie or video game, they do much the same themselves when it comes to asking why police can't use some sort of flawless supermove to disable a weapon-wielding criminal without somehow injuring them.

Of course there are exceptions. Really, really badass exceptions.

LOL, his reaction in trying to save face and look casual immediately afterwards is so very touching and so very human.

We've all been there haven't we? Someone makes us look like a fool and we quickly slip in a "What?" reaction, vainly hoping it will throw observers off the fact that we've just been pwned hard. :lol:

[Guest_936d3dec]

Why should she rule out "questioning the legitimacy" of the election? I don't even know what that means - its certainly not spelled out that "questioning the legitimacy" of the election would necessarily involve suing to have it nullified, or anything else. Its a stupid question, but I don't see why her answer is anything noteworthy. If it turned out that Russia did anything that amounted to directly intervening in the voting process*, for example, I would hope anyone would "question the legitimacy" of the election. You'd have to be dododave007 not to at that point.

Then the best thing she can say as elder statesman is that if it is shown the Russians monkeyed with the election, then it would be up to the American People, Elected Officials and our Constitution to decide how to proceed.

Otherwise she's just begging for people to make the claim she has plans to become Madam President.

[gurugeorge]

Still, I somehow wish that every police force had some healthy mix of lethal vs non lethal squads and the non lethal squads had their nightsticks and batons and rubber bullets, and even net

http://www.caerleon.net/history/army/gl ... 1ed_lo.jpg

http://media.tumblr.com/266eba3f4f3a5a5 ... qz4rgp.jpg

[free thoughtpolice]

Police should use canes on bad guys. First trick them into thinking you are a cripple, then...

[Old_ones]

Why should she rule out "questioning the legitimacy" of the election? I don't even know what that means - its certainly not spelled out that "questioning the legitimacy" of the election would necessarily involve suing to have it nullified, or anything else. Its a stupid question, but I don't see why her answer is anything noteworthy. If it turned out that Russia did anything that amounted to directly intervening in the voting process*, for example, I would hope anyone would "question the legitimacy" of the election. You'd have to be dododave007 not to at that point.

Then the best thing she can say as elder statesman is that if it is shown the Russians monkeyed with the election, then it would be up to the American People, Elected Officials and our Constitution to decide how to proceed.

Otherwise she's just begging for people to make the claim she has plans to become Madam President.

Oh bullshit. She isn't even running for office now and says she is "done being a candidate". No body is going to make her "Madame President" and she knows that - if Trump's presidency is abruptly ended there isn't any constitutional way for her to "win by default" (or at least not one that's ever been seen in American history). The issue of whether Russian meddling was significant enough to taint the results of the election is a separate question. I don't see why she should have to recuse herself from talking about that, just because the same meddling might have injured her campaign.

[CaptainFluffyBunny]

The transsexual student shot in Georgia is now inspiring riots. This will backfire and most people will support law & order. Either these students are unnecessarily stupid or they want to be more oppressed for real.
http://www.ajc.com/news/breaking-vigil- ... YLCf3KnwO/

[jimhabegger]

Our problem with ArenaNet was finally resolved.

My wife and I had each bought two expansions for Guild Wars 2, using my PayPal account. We were able to play one more time, then the next time we tried to play, we both got error messages saying that our accounts were suspended. We submitted tickets, and both got this response:

Hello,

Thank you for your patience while we investigated your issue.

After review of your account, our payment processor has determined that a purchase attempt that occurred on this account, or an account associated with this account, met certain criteria and displayed characteristics highly indicative of fraudulent purchase attempts or has committed fraudulent purchase attempts. As a result of these criteria or associations, this account has been permanently closed and is ineligible to be reopened for any reason.

Unfortunately, there is no further assistance or information we can provide you regarding this issue or account. Further replies may not receive a response.
Regards,

Xxxxxx
Guild Wars 2 Support Team

I created a new account using a different email address, and wrote to support again, explaining that we're living in China, and because of China's Internet blocking, we have to use VPN to access Web sites outside of China. Sure enough, that was the reason for the false allegations. That's happened with at least four of the MMORPGs that we've played, at least five times with WoW alone. There's only been one time that support never admitted its mistake. That was with Everquest.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

It's always struck me that while many on the left project a "macho fantasy" onto gun owners where they imagine themselves as characters in an action movie or video game, they do much the same themselves when it comes to asking why police can't use some sort of flawless supermove to disable a weapon-wielding criminal without somehow injuring them.

Torso, torso, head. Repeat.

[Kirbmarc]

Why should she rule out "questioning the legitimacy" of the election? I don't even know what that means - its certainly not spelled out that "questioning the legitimacy" of the election would necessarily involve suing to have it nullified, or anything else. Its a stupid question, but I don't see why her answer is anything noteworthy. If it turned out that Russia did anything that amounted to directly intervening in the voting process*, for example, I would hope anyone would "question the legitimacy" of the election. You'd have to be dododave007 not to at that point.


---------------------------------
* AFAIK there is no evidence of that, but hypothetically.

Because it's a stupid question, especially right now that there is still no clear evidence of any direct Russian intervention in the election. Also it's not her job to "question" anything on her own. There's already an investigation on going, there's a procedure for impeachment. She has little to do with either of those. By speculating about questioning the election she's not doing anything useful, and she only gives Trump ammunition for his victimhood/conspiracy. If she carries on talking along these lines and it turns out there's no evidence of a direct Russian intervention she'll end up helping Trump to make it look like "the establishment" was out to get him.

Basically she should at least have waited for the end of the Muller investigation before she started openly speculating about "questioning the election". Especially since in the rest of the interview she explicitly references an election in Kenya whose result was "questioned".

[KiwiInOz]

Police should use canes on bad guys. First trick them into thinking you are a cripple, then...

I've been training with what is effectively a walking stick for the last 18 months or so, in Silat. A very simple and effective weapon for attack and defense. After my next grading I will be onto two short sticks, and then in about two years, two swords.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

When he writes Mythcon and asks for Sargon-Armoured-Shoe to be disinvited because they don't "represent the kind of compassionate, respectful activism I want to see fostered and cultivated," then I don't mind pointing out the time he treated Shives as something other than a bellicose nutter.

Seth Andrews can go fuck himself. Or start his own conference of pretentious dickweeds.

I'm sick to death of recent ex-fundie apostates showing up and saying, 'So glad to finally join you all! I'll be taking over now and recreating my old religion just without the god part.'

I've been an atheist since I was 10. Go sit in the back, n00b.

[Kirbmarc]

The transsexual student shot in Georgia is now inspiring riots. This will backfire and most people will support law & order. Either these students are unnecessarily stupid or they want to be more oppressed for real.
http://www.ajc.com/news/breaking-vigil- ... YLCf3KnwO/

I think that a lot of people in the "College Left" are true believers in a SocJus Revolution by any means.

[fuzzy]

So, another Category 5 hurricane has begun plowing into the Caribbean. Maria and is on a similar track to Irma, and they're again hopeful it will turn northward before it hits Florida.
http://www.ssd.noaa.gov/PS/TROP/gglcontent/natl.gif

And this one has the dreaded "pinhole eye" which apparently makes a storm harder to predict.
https://i.imgur.com/UiAejY0.png

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09 ... y-4-storm/

[GenerallyFading]

GenerallyFading, I've sent you some PMs.

And I have now responded - it keeps saying the message is in my Outbox though, so I hope its gone.

[MarcusAu]

Sorry to hear about your PMS Generally.

[jimhabegger]

Police should use canes on bad guys. First trick them into thinking you are a cripple, then...

:lol: Last Friday my wife and I watched "Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief." One of the heroes, who was pretending to need crutches to walk, used his crutches in fending off someone who was threatening Percy.

[Hunt]

Police should use canes on bad guys. First trick them into thinking you are a cripple, then...

I've been training with what is effectively a walking stick for the last 18 months or so, in Silat. A very simple and effective weapon for attack and defense. After my next grading I will be onto two short sticks, and then in about two years, two swords.

Everyone has a plan until they get hit.

[Hunt]

[Matt Cavanaugh]

I brought up MythConGate at WEIT. It's getting juicy.

https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.co ... nt-1529178

[deLurch]

The transsexual student shot in Georgia is now inspiring riots. This will backfire and most people will support law & order. Either these students are unnecessarily stupid or they want to be more oppressed for real.
http://www.ajc.com/news/breaking-vigil- ... YLCf3KnwO/

Is that what this is about?



Some asshole commits suicide by cop and they go nuts? Not the cop's fault.

[MarcusAu]

I brought up MythConGate at WEIT. It's getting juicy.

https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.co ... nt-1529178

All three could be classified as pretty much middle-of-the-road. Maybe that's the issue - if they seem too reasonable then it could turn people away from the one true path of leftist-SJW-atheism (aka the ghost of Atheism+).

I like Seth, but think he made the wrong decision in asking Mythcon to dis-invite Sargon et al. He seems to be out of his comfort zone concerning discussion on this topic - which is not a reason for others to discuss it.

Mythcon itself will have to decide whether these politics have a place an their future conferences - or if we should maintain the polite fiction that we all think the same.

So in all - the reaction to Sargon/ Shoe/ Armoured - is more interesting than anything they are likely to say.

[MarcusAu]

*others NOT to discuss it

[GenerallyFading]

Sorry to hear about your PMS Generally.

It's OK, I'll get over it in a few days :-)

[feathers]

I am not a lawyer or historian or anything other than a shit for brains, BUT, ...

If Trump won illegally, Trump will be impeached and Mike Pence will become President.

Eh, I'd hope a rigged election evokes a re-election?

Otherwise, you can win your party the presidency by having a marionet president candidate win fraudulently, have him impeached, then carry on with the VP (who was secretly scheduled for the presidency all the time).

[feathers]

We've all been there haven't we?

Sure, sitting in a garden chair with a gun in your hand, in a standoff with half the local police squad. Ahh those good old days when we were young.

[feathers]

I've been training with what is effectively a walking stick for the last 18 months or so, in Silat. A very simple and effective weapon for attack and defense. After my next grading I will be onto two short sticks, and then in about two years, two swords.

I think I'll start with a walking stick some time, then go on to the rollator, and finish with the wheelchair. Beat that.

[shoutinghorse]

Pssst. Wanna buy a defibrillator no questions asked, know what I mean wink wink. Score each or I can do ya two for a monkey :?

[feathers]

Looks like Antifa finally found a Nazi to punch.

A Nazi who doesn't seem to have been violent, mind.

[Guest_936d3dec]

Eh, I'd hope a rigged election evokes a re-election?

Otherwise, you can win your party the presidency by having a marionet president candidate win fraudulently, have him impeached, then carry on with the VP (who was secretly scheduled for the presidency all the time).

Beats me, but my guess is that what happens depends on how widespread the fraud is (how many states) and who did it (the elected president, party officials, or other actors).

My total guess if I recall correctly from Bush v Gore, Bush had been declared and so the case was titled Bush V Gore and the Supreme Court took on a bias that Bush was the President unless Gore could prove otherwise, is that if the declared President was not involved, the bar would be pretty high to kick him out.

But here is 538 with a far more informed "who knows?"

fivethirtyeight com/features/what-happens-if-the-election-was-a-fraud-the-constitution-doesnt-say/

[fuzzy]

Looks like Antifa finally found a Nazi to punch.

A Nazi who doesn't seem to have been violent, mind.

Wow, that was a nasty punch. SInce they were stalking him, they probably brought a ringer to throw it.

[jimhabegger]

This summer my wife and I made our second trip to the US in the nine years that we've been living in China. It also happened to be the first year that the immigration office required us to have copies of our letters of no police record, and of my wife's master's degree diploma, authenticated by the Chinese embassy in the US. Before they could be authenticated by the embassy, they had to be authenticated by the US State department, and before that, they had to be notarized, and authenticated by the Secretary of the state of Virginia.

Besides all that, we had to apply for new visas, because our old ones expired the day we came back to China, and the school hadn't even begun working on my wife's new contract before we went to the US.

All that, along with arranging for transportation and lodging for our trips to visit relatives in Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Quebec, and Virginia, took up half or more of my time, during the trip, and for weeks ahead of it. It was well worth it, though.