If you are looking for any actual evidence you will not find any. But there is a large industry built around people creating wild theories about some things they don't understand.
can't resist  |
|
|
|
what marijuana, mushrooms, et alia psychedelia do is temporarily alter/expand the way one can perceive, often in a way never before experienced given the conditioning that has previously beset them. This can allow an individual to question the reality which they thought they were in, and occasionally, some wake up. once this happens, one is able to gain perspective that may allow them to see the matrix for what it is. alcohol, nicotine, some other legal drugs like caffeine and amphetamines on the other hand don't quite do this. in any case, like beetcoin astutely observed, a lack of discipline usually leads to dependency/ruin/loss of Self. but that's what life is, a big learning process for the all of us edit: fun story about Christmas, Santa, and shrooms |
|
|
|
How did we manage to use gasoline without blowing ourselves up for so many years before our benevolent masters got around to protecting us? I can sleep better now knowing that my gas cans are spilling fuel all over me instead of spontaneously exploding.
With a lot of luck  .  This is a normal image on what kind of gas cans are used down here. I've seen people filling 2l bottles with gas a few hundred times and till now I haven't heard of them causing explosions . styrofoam cups on the other hand... |
|
|
|
|
if I was on the jury I couldn't send a man to prison for life without certain evidence. too circumstantial and not substantial enough. but that's just me
|
|
|
|
"Gerrymandering" is a false flag to cover for the Stalin-approved crime of literally not counting enough of the actual votes for the least possible evil, to ensure the worst possible evil wins every election that matters.
owning the media also makes this easier |
|
|
|
Being nice to children doesn't mean anything really. It's called grooming when paedophiles do it. So are you saying you believe it was more likely one of the other three just because they didn't like him?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_grooming |
|
|
|
|
I never understood them until after 10 minutes of trying to make sense of their picture directions. Those gas cans are abhorrent and leak everywhere.
|
|
|
|
|
What was Mr. Met's alibi/testimony to events? I understand that English is not his strong suit.
|
|
|
|
Stumbled upon this a few days ago, reading through it. It's a curious collection of writings. http://www.planetaryhq.com/I like the libertarian ideals in this perspective/story—question everything, power in the individual It kept me reading after trying the first two chapters. |
|
|
|
no, hence my deletion |
|
|
|
|
who was Mr. Met's lawyer?
|
|
|
|
^^^ Gerrymandering is used by both the main parties (Democrats and the Republicans), to increase their seat count. So no one can just blame any one party for it. Both the parties are responsible.
obviously, or else the side not participating would be out of the game. but beetcoin's thesis was that republicans are more effective at gerrymandering. not that it matters. |
|
|
|
it's actually just the areas where republicans are contesting. they are known for playing a dirtier/smarter game than the democrats, who act like pussies compared to them.
Are you smoking weed / shrooms right now? The vote rigging mostly happens in the inner city areas, where the Democrats get close to 100% of the votes. There are plenty of examples. not that it matters, but data analysis from one individual (Sam Wang, a neuroscientist from Princeton) suggests otherwise http://election.princeton.edu/2012/12/30/gerrymanders-part-1-busting-the-both-sides-do-it-myth/There are some simple lessons to take away from this.
Republican-controlled redistricting led to a swing in margin of at least* 26 seats, almost as large as the 31-seat majority of the new Congress. Those actions created a new power reality in the House – or more accurately, retained the old power reality.
In the states listed above, the net effect of both parties’ redistricting combined was R+11.5 seats. Putting all of this redistricting into nonpartisan commissions would lead to a swing of at least 23 seats. The resulting seat count would be 213 D, 222 R or even closer. It is possible that in the absence of partisan gerrymandering, control would have been within reach for the Democrats. I do not know of the slant of the academic at hand (he does a pretty good job of sounding neutral), though many in academia have leftist slants, in that academia often depends on public funding for research. edit: definitely leftist, lists Satan/Krugman in a "blogroll" reading list on the left of his website  edit 2: bryant.coleman, your claim is supported with at least Illinois's data |
|
|
|
|
only in this world do we have a pompous enough of a press to call the winners before elections even happen
|
|
|
|
I've noticed older people tend to be more brainwashed.
I tell my old hippie friends that the U.S. runs Al Qaeda. They say that's crazy, because they consume only mainstream propaganda like NPR, MSNBC, PBS, etc.
My young friends who don't own a television say: "Meh. Figures.".
 that's not enough |
|
|
|
It is obviously an older video since the DOW was showing around $11k. I believe it is now over $16k.
The huge debt will destroy the US.
Bitcoin user affected (with huge gains in USD value).
Why would a debt denominated is USD destroy the US? I'm not sure I understand that point, if anything they should borrow as much as they can while still maintaining a semblance of credibility. That seems like the rational thing to do unless I'm missing something. Which is quite possible... when you borrow and can't pay what you borrow back, you lose sovereignty hence banking dynasties As long as they can print the money they'll be able to pay it back, they are the ones in control here. As long as people are willing to lend then they are alright. It would take a lot more than the current debt to really have any sort of effect I would think. The Fed prints money and loans it to the states. the states lose sovereignty because they themselves do not have the ability to print money Ah, I see your point. I wasn't really thinking about in on a state to federal level. I was thinking more internationally where borrowing from China and such benefits the US in the long run. I guess it's a balancing act and it comes down to having a government competent enough to not screw it up... The Federal Reserve is not a federal institution, it's a public/private hybrid institution under the illusion it is a government agency. Their policies affect the public though their policy making is decided by the member banks (private). This is not by accident. http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/10-things-that-every-american-should-know-about-the-federal-reserve |
|
|
|
It is obviously an older video since the DOW was showing around $11k. I believe it is now over $16k.
The huge debt will destroy the US.
Bitcoin user affected (with huge gains in USD value).
Why would a debt denominated is USD destroy the US? I'm not sure I understand that point, if anything they should borrow as much as they can while still maintaining a semblance of credibility. That seems like the rational thing to do unless I'm missing something. Which is quite possible... when you borrow and can't pay what you borrow back, you lose sovereignty hence banking dynasties As long as they can print the money they'll be able to pay it back, they are the ones in control here. As long as people are willing to lend then they are alright. It would take a lot more than the current debt to really have any sort of effect I would think. The Fed prints money and loans it to the states. the states lose sovereignty because they themselves do not have the ability to print money |
|
|
|
  4 threads easy get shares what's your cpu? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
