Phi for All

Seriously, is there something in Revelations about making a penis joke about the Virgin Mother that triggers the apocalypse? I'm guessing no physics here. You don't need flying buttresses to keep an erection going these days?

The kind with the worm dissolves buttons.

I think the teacher would like the imagery of "animal" behavior from people who like to "party". John's been drinking like a fish, lumbering around like a bear, howling like a wolf, dancing like a peacock. Though perhaps I'm being too literal.

As long as we keep up the perception that this is a battle against evenly matched foes, each side nobly persevering in their duty to defend their People, deadlocked in a titanic struggle to maintain decency, integrity and the American way of life, I don't see any solutions. Americans usually admire calling a spade a spade, but we love battles more, so this isn't being perceived as the hostage situation it really is. Anything Obama does that isn't capitulation will be viewed as uncooperative by the Reps, and capitulation means the Dems are right back here every time the Reps lose in Congress. While the Intelligent Design crowd couldn't sell their "Teach the Controversy!" stance for education, they've shown marked success with the whole "Obamacare Battle" strategy. One thing I'd really like to know is if all this Tea Party sentiment is legitimate or not. I know the movement started in upstate NY to protest taxing non-diet soft drinks. It called the representation involved in such laws into question and was basically a great exercise in civic movements. Then the Tea Party started to attract some very wealthy supporters and the message seemed to change as well. Now many people suspect that the Tea Party is being used by corporations who want everything privatized and are just piggybacking their special interests along with the party's. But why do there seem to be so many people supporting the Tea Party stance? I know lots of people who admired Ted Cruz' efforts and don't like Obamacare but when questioned don't know much about either. They all agree that big government is bad but can't say why a program that subsidizes oil isn't part of the same big government that wants to coordinate national disasters. They scream about mandated healthcare coverage like the government doesn't mandate anything else. I doubt the mandate was driven by the government anyway, since the insurance industry has the most to gain if everyone has to be insured. I get the feeling many who share a few Tea Party ideals never wanted it to go this far. They rebelled against wiser heads and took up with this underdog and now they're regretting it, realizing how rabid and radical this conservative movement has become. And many people still want government to be smaller, they just don't want it to be smaller in ways that benefit corporations more than people. They still want better representation, and hopefully now they realize that the current Tea Party doesn't represent them either. They want what they want but aren't willing to shut down the whole government to get their way. I hope, anyway. I also hope this doesn't cause too many more people to give up on interest in their government. I think we've lost most of the younger ones already with crap like this.

If you're still around in a couple of years, I'm going to wave this one in your face on Quote Night. We're all here to learn, and that's best accomplished when we attack the argument and not the person. Socially, it's good to have a tool that lets people know you don't appreciate an uncivil tone or poor answers. It's better to let reputation handle that instead of letting Moderators judge what's uncivil and what isn't.

I've heard of people taping a tennis ball to their pajama back to keep them from rolling over, but a contact trigger there that fires a catapult filled with rolled-up socks sounds like more fun!

Snoring can be a symptom of a more serious condition. Best practice is to always see your doctor (this goes for everybody) for a professional diagnosis on any health matter. If the doctor thinks the snoring is affecting your health, insurance will usually pay for a sleep study to assess individual habits and occurrences. Any advice given on the internet can't take specific circumstances into account. Does your roommate get enough sleep? Fatigue can contribute to snoring if she's working too hard. Does she drink enough water? Proper hydration keeps tissue and mucus from getting sticky. Does she drink alcohol before going to bed? Too much relaxes muscles in her throat that vibrate as she breathes. Has she gained some weight recently? If the snoring came with the weight, it could be occluding her airways. Has she tried sleeping in a different position? Lying on her back probably triggers snoring more often, so lying on her side could help.

I wish I could claim it. I paraphrased it from somewhere.

The problem with your "sheer stupidity" detector is that you're using the 180 degree setting and pointing it only where you want. To be truly effective, you need 360 degree coverage. I see your point here but I think it's more than just two sides finger-pointing. Boehner got backed into a corner by the Tea Party but the media is backing the whole Republican party into a corner. Even news outlets that are supposedly more liberal continue to talk about compromise and report each time Boehner asks for a chance to sit down and negotiate. They use cutesy pics of boxing gloves popping out of both the White House and Congress, making it seem like a legitimate fight is taking place. It gives the impression this is a battle which will be won through persistence, toughness and dedication, not that this is a completely inappropriate, ineffective and desperate gambit that threatens to undermine our political process, and lose what grounds we've gained economically. The media aren't using the more appropriate graphic of Cruz holding a gun to Boehner's head while Boehner holds a gun to the President's head, while the President stands with the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of government firmly behind him, telling them, "There is nothing to negotiate, this deal's been done". When vandals smear feces on a statue, the media should just call them vandals instead of trying to be fair and say they might just be sloppy organic gardeners. The media has made this all about perseverance and pride and whose dick is bigger, all of which are completely at odds with what is actually happening to the country. It's obvious to me that this fake impartiality must increase ratings and give the illusion of fairness. It sure does lengthen the news cycle and insure more internecine posturing, which just makes the cycle even longer and more lucrative.

OK, I get it. So let's use the military as the analogy, since the dreaded Obama-monster is C-in-C and it removes the profit angle. Command structure and procedure are very well spelled out, yet the C-in-C has a group of rogue captains who violate procedure by going around the regulations and try to fulfill their mission parameters in violation of protocols, causing their mission to fail catastrophically. Why do you blame the CIC when the captains violated command? Shouldn't it be safe for the CIC to assume subordinates will act according to their oaths? The C-in-C took oaths from those captains that they would uphold their duty in the tradition and manner directed by the service. If they took it upon themselves to act in violation of their mission parameters, how could any general be held accountable for those men? Please don't keep repeating that Obama is ultimately responsible since he's in charge. As has already been pointed out, we have checks and balances and compartmentalization at these levels to protect us from having to assign blame irrationally.

Where else in reality would you seriously hold this stance? Do you fire the CEO because some of his mid-level directors completely violated procedure and caused a costly delay in the project? The problem area is clear and it needs to be surgically removed so sanity and profitability can return.

Did this person's doctor get the scan pre-approved? That can sometimes raise a flag that gets the procedure rejected out of hand. I'm not that familiar with Medicare, but they approved PET scans in general (and surely for lung cancer?) maybe 4-5 years ago. I would definitely check into it and see if they've changed the coverage. Be a squeaky wheel.

The conservative part of me knows you're just projecting worst case scenarios on the whole process. It's simple too. You take what you fear most and pretend that's the way it is in every case. The hardest part is ignoring the fact that most people don't become dependent. The liberal part of me knows it's all perspective. Everybody wants to help the widow with five kids, nobody wants to pay for freeloaders, and we all want the Constitution to be upheld. But the progressive part of me really just wants all this tax money spent more wisely, and that isn't happening and hasn't been happening for a very long time. We know changing things takes time but we also know you have to start somewhere. Realizing that we all deserve a shot at good health JUST BECAUSE WE'RE CIVILIZED is a very good start.

So... it's only good because it works so well? Did I miss why we want to change that? You must know different scientists than I know. Socially, I'm happy if they mumble while looking at MY shoes instead of their own. The bit about how they subliminally use their superior intelligence sounds like sour grapes to me. Sorry, but the understanding of life is a pursuit older than science, probably older than religion. It got us all the way to the Dark Ages. Science has gotten us the rest of the way, and appears, as you yourself suggests, to be much more productive.

Perhaps you're thinking of physics like a tool that uses (for instance) US Standard measurements here on Earth but uses the metric system on Jupiter?

Didn't you love that? "People should have responsible sex and not go around making babies they can't take care of. Oh, and they should do that WITHOUT the best methods the modern world can offer!" Apply that argument to business and they'd be fired in a heartbeat. "Well, boss, we've spent a lot to get to this point in the project and we've been implementing the preliminary goals pretty well, but Cruz over in QC wants to revamp most of it, based on fears that it isn't perfect right out of the gate. Shall we revamp without knowing what might be wrong? Or we could continue implementing and refining based on actual data. Or we could just scrap the whole thing and eat the losses. Or we could scrap Cruz."

Likely enough to have it checked out by a professional.

! Moderator Note It's good protocol to provide a link to supportive evidence as a citation, and then copy/paste only the relevant portion so you aren't forcing people to search for your information "... some where [sic] near the end of the article". Example: From the Harvard Gazette: http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2002/03.14/01-thinking.html Doing this will also make you look less like you're trying to increase hits to other websites. Sound familiar?

I haven't seen any tapes, but whatever security was available had probably been warned to expect attempts on government locations during the shutdown. Wrong behavior in the wrong place at an extremely wrong time. Tragic.

If you increase the salt level in a solution, doesn't that cause it to expand, become hypertonic? Might that swelling cause the pain? Notice that I'm asking and NOT telling. This seems more like chemistry than biology. Let me know if you want me to move it there.

Before that can happen, we need a different voting system. Winner-take-all is a big reason why we have this current ~50/50 fiasco. It would be awesome to have an Eisenhower party, and I'd like to see some ideas from the practically non-existent left be represented as well (even some of those far-left Kucinich kind of ideas, like the public should keep owning our own utilities). Since our current voting practices historically guarantee the emergence of just two major parties, I have to assume those currently pulling strings behind the scenes want it that way. Fewer campaigns to finance, clearer lines to be drawn (us vs them) and it's just easier to fool most of the people all the time this way.

I disagree VERY strongly with this stance. This is NOT a challenge, this is a misrepresentation of the will of the People, this is working outside our democratic process, this is political extortion against the American public. This is many things but it's NOT a challenge. I'm sure the Republicans will make real challenges against the ACA in the future, rightful challenges that follow procedures that allow debate and concession, but if they force another government shutdown it won't be "the fight continues", it'll be a few extremists deciding by themselves that compromise itself is not legitimate. After 40 years of standing fast against turbulent opposition, do you really want Roe v Wade to be written off with a gun to our heads? In 40 years, won't our healthy children and grandchildren be happy the ACA didn't fall prey to corporate thuggery?

Thank you for sharing this. It got lost in the shuffle and I wanted to make sure it gets seen. I really hope Boehner can shower off the crazy he got sprayed with. I'm just sorry we have to pay $12M/hour to get him clean.

This is a community, and as such we feel the hopes and pains and joys and anguish of our members deeply. What strength, support and insight we may offer is yours; please take what you need. Our best wishes go out to your loving family.

C'mon guys, why not share here? Is it my breath? We're smaller than Facebook but with your help we definitely have a higher combined IQ.