Free Republic

I see no where in his official bio that he was a member of the federal reserve.

I have no idea whether Cain was part of the Federal Reserve or not, but are you seriously saying that you trust any candidate for politial office enough that if you don't see something on their official bio, you won't believe it is true even if other sources confirm it? Do you think Clinton puts "got a blowjob in the Oval Office" on his bio? Are you an idiot?

The Constitution applies equally to all humans, drug users are a sub species and are not included.

You are a worthless piece of human excrement not worth pissing on, and I hope one day you say something like that to a real American's face, and get your teeth knocked out, and then get pissed on even though you aren't worth the piss.

Sorry for the double post, it was unintentional.

You sure do hope so don’t you. What is happening in Egypt is a miracle. I can’t believe how well it is going. Not like Libya.

It has nothing to do with what we hope, and everything to do with learning from history. Obviously we all hope that a moderate, Western-style government which respects the rights of all Egypt's people emerges over the next few years.

However, hoping doesn't actually make things happen, and in this case, what you are hoping for has a very, very low probability of actually happening.

The really annoying thing is that, in a couple of years, when the rational ones among us are proven right and Egypt is much worse off than it was before, we will then be accused of having wanted things to go that way, just so we could be right.

Churchill was right about Hitler, that doesn't mean he wanted Hitler to launch a massively destructive war of conquest, it just meant he had enough understanding of the world to know where things were going, and to try to convince others to act accordingly.

You sure do hope so don’t you. What is happening in Egypt is a miracle. I can’t believe how well it is going. Not like Libya.

It has nothing to do with what we hope, and everything to do with learning from history. Obviously we all hope that a moderate, Western-style government which respects the rights of all Egypt's people emerges over the next few years.

However, hoping doesn't actually make things happen, and in this case, what you are hoping for has a very, very low probability of actually happening.

The really annoying thing is that, in a couple of years, when the rational ones among us are proven right and Egypt is much worse off than it was before, we will then be accused of having wanted things to go that way, just so we could be right.

Churchill was right about Hitler, that doesn't mean he wanted Hitler to launch a massively destructive war of conquest, it just meant he had enough understanding of the world to know where things were going, and to try to convince others to act accordingly.

I live north of 183, in Austin, Texas. I don’t need to bring my army anywhere, you are the one who made the original threat. If you are in town, let me know, and I’ll gladly PM you my actual address, so you can come get your ass kicked in person.

I am 46 years old and officially a boomer. Bring it snot nose. You are an idiot. I will crunch your face.

It is your idiotic generation that wrecked this country over the last few decades, and left our generation to work until we are 80 with to pay off your idiotic ponzi schemes. As for your threat, which actually wasn't to me, I'll just say I'd love to kick your old, dumb ass.

Doctors have the RIGHT to the opportunity for wealth, same as you and me.

Medicare is socialism. It is in the advanced stages of failure.

Don’t blame doctors if you want your care for free.

This argument would hold water if the current medical system was not a cartel. Unfortunately, due to lobbying by the doctors themselves, it is just that.

There are plenty of times when I have known exactly what was wrong with me, and exactly what prescription I needed, but I was not allowed to just purchase that medicine as I would be in a free market system. Not even a nurse with years of experience could provide it, instead I needed to go to a doctor and pay for an office visit.

My contact lense prescription has been the same for several years, but if I want a new set of contacts or glasses, I am required by law to get a new prescription whether I feel it necessary or not.

A former girlfriend used to be on birth control, she'd been on the same pill with no problems for years, and would have to visit the gynecologist every year anyway in order to have the prescription refilled. The list goes on...

If you want a free market system, that goes both ways. What doctors in this country want (and currently have) is the power to force people to see them whether their services are wanted or not. Once doctors go that route, they have no business whining if the government restricts what they can charge.

Just wanted to clarify that the “you” in that previous post was not directed at the poster whom I quoted about TACC. The “you” was a generic “you”, referring primarily to those writing various comments I’ve seen on this thread (and another about this topic) stating that the NSA must have computers way, way more powerful than this new Chinese one, because, you know, they are the NSA, and they kick ass.

Alot of research is done by universities on computing clusters of this scale. It isn’t just the spooks.

Case in point is the Texas Advanced Computing Center http://www.tacc.utexas.edu/

I'm curious, are you a Longhorn, or are you familiar with TACC for some other reason? (Not that TACC is a secret or anything, just curious since I work with TACC almost daily.)

Also, as you pointed out, these types of machines are used all the time for science and engineering, both open science and classified work (I don't do classified work but I've been at various national labs for brief periods. The fact that the machines exist for classified work is not a secret, you just can't use them if you don't have a security clearance).

Three other responses to things that have come up on this thread. First, the benchmarks actually do require that the computer works together on the same problem, you can't just shove 100,000 processors together and all have them run a separate problem and then claim you are the fastest. There is no need for conspiracy theories here, the Chinese are much more advanced than we might like. However, just putting the computer together and running a benchmark doesn't ultimately prove that much if they don't have useful applications that require this much processing power.

Second, there is no reason to believe that the NSA has significantly more powerful computers than this. If you want to believe that because it makes you happy, go ahead, I don't have evidence against it, but there is no reason to believe that they would have access to more computing power than the national labs, when an important goal of the labs is to increase computer simulation capabilities for use in national defense related research. Obviously it is possible that the NSA has computers that are 10 times more powerful or 100 times more powerful, but it is unlikely, since that would put them years ahead of the forefront of computer research everywhere else. It is possible that the NSA is hiding the existence of a Stargate and are currently preparing us for an alien invasion, but I don't just assume that the NSA is doing everything I see in movies.

Finally, as you pointed out, alot of the reason for this is not technology, it is funding. We could build larger computers than this, but building and maintaining them is expensive. Few if any private companies have the need for computers like this, so if the US wants to stay ahead in this field, the US government is going to have to step up and pay for it. Obviously this is government spending, but new weapons and defense technologies don't invent themselves.

From the article:

The official says the question is whether financial institutions were acting with criminal intent or were simply overwhelmed by events in the wake of the housing market's collapse. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the investigation is just getting under way.

This is why we need a French revolution in this country, with guillotines and all. Do you think a regular person would get anything like that kind of benefit of the doubt from the FBI or the police?

"Sorry, officer, I was only speeding because I was overwhelmed by the situation, specifically how late I was for this meeting."

or...

FBI Agent: We chose not to bring criminal charges in this case, since even though the defendent stole a car, he was just overwhelmed by losing his job and having his old car repo'd.

I'm here in the WRW building, on UT campus about 5 minute walk from the library. Lots of helicopters outside still, and occasional sirens.

Wide variance in how seriously people are taking this in my building. I have my door open, just walked across the street to ACES building since I was supposed to have a meeting. Apparently the computer sciences guys over there are a little more jumpy than us engineers, a bunch of them had locked themselves into their offices.

One thing you have to understand is that UT massively overestimates every threat. A single non-violent wallet theft will get emails sent out for weeks. Obviously a guy with an "AK-47" is a threat, but the chance of a second shooter is nearly zero. If the guy was shouting "Allahu Akbar" while shooting, then second shooter is a possibility, but a nut like this isn't going to have an accomplice. I say "nut" due to the reports that, first, he didn't hit anyone but himself, and second, he was waving to people he passed, without shooting them.

Will be interesting to see how long UT keeps looking for this second gunman. Knowing them, it will be days.

I'll have to be extra careful, since I have two guns... zing!

I'm here in the WRW building, on UT campus about 5 minute walk from the library. Lots of helicopters outside still, and occasional sirens.

Wide variance in how seriously people are taking this in my building. I have my door open, just walked across the street to ACES building since I was supposed to have a meeting. Apparently the computer sciences guys over there are a little more jumpy than us engineers, a bunch of them had locked themselves into their offices.

One thing you have to understand is that UT massively overestimates every threat. A single non-violent wallet theft will get emails sent out for weeks. Obviously a guy with an "AK-47" is a threat, but the chance of a second shooter is nearly zero. If the guy was shouting "Allahu Akbar" while shooting, then second shooter is a possibility, but a nut like this isn't going to have an accomplice. I say "nut" due to the reports that, first, he didn't hit anyone but himself, and second, he was waving to people he passed, without shooting them.

Will be interesting to see how long UT keeps looking for this second gunman. Knowing them, it will be days.

I'll have to be extra careful, since I have two guns... zing!

The point was very simple. Republicans, especially those of the "go with the candidate who can win" mindset, should look in the mirror before calling Libertarians "political prostitutes". If you want an example, another poster on this thread was actually blaming Palin for taking away an "easy win", i.e. Murkowski.

If you are not one of the Republicans who advocates taking any candidate who "can win", then the comment wasn't addressed to you specifically, I just picked your particular post from the half-dozen or more on the thread accusing Libertarians of being "political whores", "losertarians", etc.

Just like being pregnant or not, you can't be "a little bit of a political whore". You endorse one obvious RINO, then you are a political whore, at least until you publicly change course. Sarah Palin has done enough for conservatism that, at this point, I'm willing to give her a pass for Fiorina and McCain, but most Republicans haven't even come close to earning that.

I would note, in fact, that if the Libertarians do in fact allow Murkowski to run on their ticket, than all of those negative comments about them will be true. Nonetheless, almost all of them apply equally well to most Republicans. Remember, for example, that George W. Bush actually campaigned FOR Arlen Specter against conservative opposition in the primary at one point.

They see a chance to win with a flawed candidate, purely out of name recognition.

Which makes them political prostitutes.

I don't see what the choice of Carly Fiorina as Republican candidate for Senator in California has to do with this thread...

Oh, sorry, you were talking about the Libertarians taking Murkowski, not mainstream Republicans (including Sarah Palin) endorsing Fiorina, just like they did Arnold before her. Yeah, I do agree that the Libertarians picking Murkowski would be really dumb.

I’m not exactly jumping with joy at some of her endorsements either, but you know what? That’s the way things go sometimes. Grow up, put your big girl panties on, and deal with it.

When she chose to endorse McCain, who through his assaults from within has literally done more damage to conservatism than any three Democrats combined, Sarah made a clear, unambiguous choice. She chose personal loyalty (loyalty that the McCain campaign never showed to her, in fact) over loyalty to her country and to what is right. It was the type of thing that other supposed messiah would do, and everyone here would accurately call it "Chicago-style politics at its worst".

Am I saying I wouldn't vote for her if she was the Republican nominee? No.

Am I saying that I don't think she is better than 95% of Republicans? No.

Am I saying she needs to figure our where her loyalties lie, and fast, if she wants to earn the Republican nomination in 2012? Yes.

She needs to decide if she stands for what is right, or what is safe and easy. Because after 2008, a whole lot of people who used to just vote Republican no matter what have decided that, in the long run, the price of voting for what is safe and easy as opposed to what is right is incredibly high. McCain ran a safe, easy campaign against Obama. We know where that led.

Evil Slayer, you have angered Palinbot 002837. Palinbots don't like to hear about Sarah's repeated poor endorsement choices. She certainly has many good qualities, but if endorsing Fiorina and McCain wasn't enough to cause serious concerns about her judgment, it isn't really clear what it would take.

Also, I guess by his standards, I could call perfect_rovian_storm a "newbie" since I've been around longer than he has. I've been a member with this name since 2002, and I went to my congressman's office in person to protest the endless recounts during the 2000 election with fellow FReepers back then, although I only lurked at that point.

Sarah Palin is a decent woman, and I agree with the vast majority of her views, although not her repeated poor judgment in endorsements. The Messiah-like personality cult around her, however, is simply disturbing, and in fact reminds me of the behavior of those who worship that other supposed "messiah", who is currently embarrassing our nation in the White House.

Leftist vegans create a society based on bad cops.

Cause --> Effect.

Leftist vegans - every single one of them - want non-vegan, meat-eating, destroyers of Gaia shot dead. And in the last century, they managed to murder almost 200 million of their own people who were not as enlightened as them. Hitler was a vegetarian, and did not drink or smoke. And the next time you buy an organic apple from a hippie, remember - there's murder behind their eyes. To protect the world, people like you must be eliminated, and they take no great pains to hide this belief.

All in the name of peace and love, of course.

Perhaps I should have been more clear when I said "I hate leftist vegans". I don't just hate leftist vegans, I absolutely loath and despise them in every way possible.

I also agree with you that, if they were in power, they would be far worse than the cops are today. I thus retract my statement about "taking them over 99% of American cops any day".

I was simply irritated by the incredible about of ass-kissing that was being heaped upon cops in general.

Whether people want to admit it or not, the days of Sheriff Andy Taylor are long, long gone. If not the majority, than at least a very large minority of cops in this country are now corrupt, power-abusing thugs. Worse, the majority of "good cops" and their DA friends insist on constantly covering for the misdeeds of their friends. Just today, a story was posted on this website about a cop being let off the hook after a driving drunk and killing a couple of people, something that a regular guy would spend years in jail for. I'll even give you the link:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2527919/posts

Just a couple weeks ago, a SWAT team (in Oregon no less, same state as where this current story is set) descended on a man's home, tricked him into coming out, arrested him, and seized his legally owned weapons, all with no warrant of any kind, when no crime had been committed. He was never even charged, at least as of the time the story was written. Of course the cops weren't prosecuted for kidnapping, illegal search and seizure, or anything else. Here is the link to that one, if you'd like:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2516964/posts

I could give you hundreds of stories like this if I had the time, and you felt like reading them all. Many of them are posted right here at FR.

Even if they are not actively breaking the law, then they are usually busying themselves with revenue generation in order to keep themselves in their highly paid positions, on the back of the people in this country who actually do real work for a living. Cops where I live often make over $80,000 a year. These are not detectives investigating murders, these are traffic cops pulling people over for going 5 over the speed limit or not using a turn signal (making sure not to give a ticket if it is a pretty girl they pull over, of course, in that case a warning will suffice).

Sigh... I also apologize for posting that last reply twice, accidentally. I refreshed repeatedly, and when the first one didn’t show up, I re-wrote it.

I realize that my reply to you earlier really shouldn't have been directed at you personally. I was irritated by a variety of comments on this thread, and I shouldn't have replied to your comment specifically.

I would guess that we are in agreement about disliking leftist vegans, and that we also agree that there are some good cops and some bad. I imagine we disagree about the percentage of cops who are good vs. the percentage who are bad. Perhaps in your area, they are mostly good.

In any case, I apologize for posting such a harsh reply to your simple comment about how you would serve cops free coffee if you owned a coffee shop.