Phi for All

That was me. I think Ike was conservative where it was smart to be, liberal where it counted and progressive always. Obama is actually closer to Eisenhower (and even Bush I) than many Republicans want to admit. He's certainly not the liberal demon the GOP wants their base to think he is. I almost wish he was more liberal on certain topics, but he's smart enough to play things close to the vest and not waste any more political capital after getting us a toehold on universal healthcare. Obama has my vote. Obama made some errors during his first term, no doubt. But he also made some great moves, like establishing a good relations base with China, which will hopefully allow him to get firmer with regards to currency and trade. Romney talks tough but I see him caving in to China as soon as business is threatened, which would really put us at a disadvantage in the long run, and in the long run we need to work well with China instead of for China. Obama has done a good job with Iran, another potential war he wants us out of. He's isolated them nicely with the cooperation of most of the global community. His stance with Russia has been good enough to get some help from them with Afghanistan, so perhaps he can work further to get their help with Iran and perhaps Syria. I think Romney would get talked into invading with a Geiger counter in one hand and a blank check in the other. Notice how fervently the Republicans jumped on the Benghazi embassy incident? That's because Obama has been superlative at handling terrorism to date. It's really the only thing they think they can pin on him, and that's been pretty sketchy and full of hand-waiving with little substance. I think Romney would end up lying or breaking a promise to the wrong Middle Easterner and make things worse than Bush II did. I heartily dislike the current Republican platform on terror; Obama has gotten that fire down to coals and Romney would most likely break out the gas can (again). I'm beginning to think the main reason the Republicans have been acting so loony lately is because Obama IS an Eisenhower Republican, and that's where the true Republicans OUGHT to be. Obama could have been the greatest Republican in history and it's driving them crazy. That's why they're rejecting sound, meaningful, realistic legislation that comes from Obama even though most of their base would probably consider it worthwhile, if only FOX would tell them about it, and if only it didn't come from a Democrat.

I think some of our biggest problems have come from allowing businessmen to run the country, which isn't as much of a partisan issue. Commerce is essential, but government as a whole is probably not meant to be run like a business. They have many similar traits, but their goals aren't always in alignment. And letting businessmen affect the laws that affect business is just a recipe for Corporate Muffins (you know, the ones where the wealthy get the delicious top parts and leave all the torn, burnt stumps stuck to the pan for the rest of us to scrape out). I consider the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to be a much more insidious Clinton giveaway. Like Obama, Clinton's biggest mistakes were in what he was willing to give up to get what he wanted. But at least Clinton knew how to play hardball when it came to the BS debt ceiling bluster the Republicans pulled on him yet got away with under Obama. Edit to add: OK, I finished the article, and I have to say I like the summation. Too much of what the GOP has been doing lately is stonewalling ideas that they would have loved if it hadn't come from Obama. I remember listing a whole bunch of bills in another thread that were practically Republican platform pieces but got shot down because they came from liberal sources that Obama could have pointed to come election time. Personally, I think this goes beyond stubbornness or obstructionism. In a time when whole countries are in dire trouble economically and face vulnerabilities from extremist groups eager to take advantage of any weakness, this insane blockade of logic to further party politics at the expense of the country as a whole is akin to treason, imo. I don't know which part of the GOP to blame for the rest of what they're doing. Is the witch hunt against science due to big business special interests afraid of what the AGW debate will bring to light, or is it the religious right who hate it when science has facts to counter faith? Is this insane warmongering due mostly to an increasingly conservative attitude that lashes out from fear, or is it more big business dealings from lucrative arms and "democracy building" efforts? Are the tax gifts to the rich just an example of how powerful the spin has become now that the media is fully in the control of what we're fed both physically and intellectually, or are there really that many of the rest of us who think keeping the wealthy happier will make the crumbs that fall from their tables bigger?

Romney doesn't want to help small business. Small business is the biggest competition to big business.

"Hi, my name is Phi, and I'm an orcaholic."

I have binders full of dragons from my D&D days.

It's taking the PRH a long time to let you know you don't meet the requirements for patentability. In the US, perpetual motion is one of the first things that gets your application kicked out.

Here's another article that attempts to put the pieces together behind these bizarre business dealings. My favorite part, for those tempted to dismiss outright any thought of wrongdoing:

"Proof" is not something science looks for. These two videos are questionable even as supportive evidence. FYI, assertions like this automatically cause the science-minded to raise their skeptic shields.

I just thought if it was like pot, that might be why it wasn't more widely used. Nobody wants something that's easy to grow that takes the place of several more expensive substances. That would just be... horrible.

The same nutters who would completely support such a measure if WE were insisting it be done with some other democracy?

Why isn't it more widely used? Does it get you high if you smoke it?

I also feel late term abortion needs to be for medical reasons. AFAIC, if a pregnancy is the result of rape and the woman has kept the fetus till the late term, the reasons for abortion due to rape are long gone. I'm perfectly OK with setting an arbitrary but logical time limit. We need to give women the right to have an abortion, and we need to give them time to decide. 24 weeks seems to work well.

Iptest banned as a sockpuppet of EquisDeXD. One has to wonder at what motivates such an individual.

Interesting. That was one of the ideas coming from Rep. Grijalva from AZ's 7th district, widely considered to be the most liberal congresscritter in the US.

He's already had different accounts here. Each one earned negative rep, and each one complained about the rep system. Go figure.

Could it be a ploy to make potential Obama voters feel helpless against a rigged system and think that their votes will be useless? Interesting article here.

I remember the irregularities from the 2000 and 2004 elections, and how we were looking for machines that were above reproach. The best one I saw took the electronically generated ballot, printed it and held the copy behind a clear security screen for the voter to verify as accurate, then dropped it directly into a secure box. The cost was right, the paper trail gave us something to check against the electronic record, it seemed ideal. And they decided to go with Diebold, a machine they proved could be hacked through vulnerabilities in the Microsoft OS everyone knew was at risk.

I guess what they're working with here, from this Wikipedia article, is avgas, a type of aviation fuel, or something of similar quality. I wonder if remote areas would actually have that much excess CO2 to capture. I also wonder what the effect on plant life would be if this were put into large scale production. Maybe a stupid question, but do we know how much CO2 is considered "excess", and what is necessary for trees and other flora?

Sure there is. Depending on where you live, make sure your government knows how important it is to you that manufacturers are held to standards that insure they don't irradiate their customers. They probably do this already, but business is always looking make the most profit with the least expenditure. Sometimes they cross this line so it's up to us to make sure regulations are effective in protecting us.

This is an important issue with sex, drugs, maybe even rock and roll. Can we always afford to wait until a child expresses an interest in more knowledge about these subjects? Since we can't be with them all the time, and they aren't always forthcoming about their inquisitiveness, do we try to put these issues in front of them tentatively and see what the reaction is, or do we wait until they either approach us for more information or it becomes a problem we need to deal with?

Oh yeah, he's Republican all right. They say they value personal property rights and then they go right for the spleen.

Unfortunately, I don't think we'll see much in the way of personal power in the future. Believe me, I would love to have some kind of home generated electricity and a couple of electric cars. I'd slowly replace my appliances to run on DC. But with something as volatile as av fuel, I don't see local gov allowing people to create and store their own fuel. Unless you could start a grassroots lobby movement that could outspend the big guys who've built the current infrastructure. You're right, this would have to go hand-in-hand with renewable energy as it becomes cheaper. No way is this viable as anything but an air cleaner until then.

If the costs can be brought down under what we pay for aviation fuel, that could mean a tremendous boost for tourism as well as reducing carbon emissions. I love ideas that solve multiple problems!

It says he's probably Republican.

You've got to be kidding me! This is one of the cornerstones of democracy. At some point the process should seen as above reproach. Election irregularities erode the confidence of the voters, and cause fewer people to be interested in taking part in the process as a whole. If you suspect the vote is being rigged, why bother?