Yes it is. But it is good males were discriminated against. For one it is showing the true ugly face of that movement. Also It will force males supporting that third wave feminism to abort themselves, as a concept, and move on to other more meaningful battles.

Everyone who tells you YOU should stop having babies and heat yourself...

How would you describe Consciousness with an equation? The pen you are describing was born on the monitor of a CAD program, then mathematically fed to a machine tool, or a melting block of plastic. The pen was defined even before it was in your hand, even before it was created from a factory, even before the final CAD file was saved.

A black hole. We predicted it could exist. We can observe what it does. We are not sure what is inside. Consciousness is like that... kinda.

With or without a bitlicense from New York?

Comcast is one of two companies to have earned Consumerist's "Worst Company in America" title on more than one occasion (once in 2010 and again this year, 2014), and it looks like the company is lobbying for a third title. That is, unless there's another explanation as to how the cable giant can claim (seemingly with straight face) that it's in agreement with President Barack Obama for a free and open Internet.

In case you missed it, Obama issued an open letter to the FCC urging it to enact strong net neutrality rules and to reclassify Internet service as a utility, all in support of a free and open Internet. He made clear that he's against things like paid fast lanes and throttling speeds, and in response, Comcast issued a statement of its own saying it backs the exact same things, it just doesn't want to go the utility route.

"A clear consensus has emerged for the FCC to adopt new rules that will strengthen the open Internet and ensure that the Internet remains a vital engine for innovation, economic growth, and free expression. And while some have been led to believe something else, we support net neutrality," Comcast stated in a blog post.


http://hothardware.com/News/Wolf-In-Sheeps-Clothing-Comcast-KissesUp-To-Obama-Agrees-With-His-Stance-On-Net-Neutrality/


------------------------------------------------------
I know one thing: if it is good for Comcast, it is not good for my freedom of speech or bitcoin. Anyone who's against bitcoin will support 0bama's control over the internet. It is that simple.

"Warmists" cannot have a sense of humor as they know something we do not...





 

When I read "0bama wants to control the World Wide Web internet", I wonder how people from belgium or South Africa feel about that change in their life  

0bama is a dud. He lost big and acts like a 6 year old now. None of those things were a priority, but since he realizes he will be remembered as being worst than Nixon (as the watergate scandal did not have any lethal casualties, as in dead people) he is pushing for stuff, spaghetti on the wall to see what will stick. He is a man child and everything he does was and is about him. He did not even care enough about the democrats, and now some of them realizes that too, but too late.

I have nothing against people with a belief they cannot prove with science either.

"My side is the most right"    

Male discrimination. Hair is hair.

Jackass-ishness is caused by global warming too.

Feminists Want To Stop Shaving In The Name Of “Gender Equality”…


Women at George Washington University (GW) should stop shaving during the month of November in the name of gender equality one student said last week.

In a column in The Hatchet, Jonah Lewis urged GW women to start a new movement that would parallel Movember by ceasing to shave in order to raise money for women’s health issues. The student argued that the women’s campaign could “one day rival what men raise during Movember.”

“If women at GW decided not to shave for the entirety of this month to raise money for women’s health issues and promote body positivity, the initiative could grow into a movement matching Movember,” Lewis wrote. “It would open up conversations about how our culture expects women to treat their bodies and their body hair.”

“For women, growing out hair is an unexpected and daring risk. That makes not shaving an exercise in body positivity and self love for most women,” Lewis continued

[...]
For decades many feminists have argued that the pressure for women to remove body hair is a consequence of patriarchal dominance.

“Body hair, weight, Barbie, domestic violence, violence against women, male gaze, street harassment, to me it all feels connected,” a New York feminist said in February, according to Salon.

“To me, hair removal is a kind of violence against women. Just one that we’re tricked into doing and paying for ourselves,” she continued.



http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=6064

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe this to be a great idea but should not be constrained to just one month. Everyone needs to have an easy visual clue to how to pinpoint a third wave feminist anytime, yearlong. This could be a good start...

Gruber video #5: Mocking critics as “adolescent children”


This one’s less of a smoking gun about deception, and more of a schadenfruede-tastic exposure of Jonathan Gruber as an arrogant crank. Watchdog.org’s Bruce Parker has this clip from the ObamaCare architect’s appearance before a Vermont legislative panel in February 2011, where one of the committee members read a warning letter about the dangers of adopting a massive, top-down government program controlling health insurance markets. After hearing a list of predicted negative consequences, Gruber dismissed it as something that might have been “written by my adolescent children”

The room may have exploded in laughter, but here’s what the adolescent writer predicted would result from ObamaCare:

Coercive mandates
Ballooning costs
Increased taxes
Bureaucratic outrages
Shabby facilities
Disgruntled providers
Long waiting lines
Lower quality care
Special-interest nest-feathering,
Destructive wage and price controls


You know, for an adolescent, these predictions look …spookily accurate, don’t they? The bill itself had a coercive mandate already, and we’ve seen ballooning costs in premiums – exactly what ObamaCare was promised to cure. There’s also a coercive HHS contraception mandate, too, courtesy of the carte blanche the law gave HHS to issue coverage requirements. The rollout was one bureaucratic outrage after another, and the web portal may be poised to deliver even more of them starting tomorrow. Thanks to the exodus by disgruntled providers, consumers now have a much narrower choice of providers, which has extended wait times for care significantly. ObamaCare is filled with taxes that will get passed along to the consumer, including the Cadillac tax that Gruber specifically cited as a central deception in the ObamaCare effort.

Who could this clairvoyant adolescent be? Parker explains that it was no adolescent at all. The letter came from John McLaughry, who served two terms as a Vermont state senator, but more importantly as a senior policy adviser to President Ronald Reagan:

“It was actually written by a former senior policy adviser in the White House who knew something about health care systems,” said John McClaughry, a two-term Vermont state senator and adviser to President Ronald Reagan in the 1980s.

McClaughry, who wrote the comment in an op-ed weeks before the 2011 committee meeting, told Vermont Watchdog he did not know Gruber made the condescending insult. However, he was aware of other videos discovered this week in which Gruber boasted of writing deceptive policies to trick “stupid” American voters.

“No one should trust this man. … Based on the rest of the stuff that’s come out on the videos, nobody can trust this guy. He has no use for transparency, he thinks people are stupid, and he’ll do anything to get this thing through and pocket his $400,000. That’s not in the interest of the people of Vermont,” McClaughry said.


http://hotair.com/archives/2014/11/14/gruber-video-5-mocking-critics-as-adolescent-children/

-------------------------------------------------------------
And yet he was trusted and paid, with tax payer's money by 0bama and his gang, to lie...

Global warming is the cause of it! Get with the program damn it! 

WaPo fact check: Yes, Gruber got $400,000 for ObamaCare work


Or, if you prefer a more acerbic conclusion, taxpayers paid Jonathan Gruber in the mid-six-figures to lie to them, and then brag about it to all of his friends and fans later. Glenn Kessler fact-checked an assertion made by Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) about Gruber’s paid involvement with ObamaCare while Nancy Pelosi et al kept claiming amnesia about the man called the “architect” of the law. Normally, Kessler jumps in to correct factually lacking claims, but this one gets the rare check mark.

The story begins in February 2009, when HHS signed Gruber to a contract to provide a micro-simulation model for four months at $95,000. They later added an eight-month contract for $297,000, bring the total known value of “almost $400,000,” exactly what Barrasso stated. For his year or so on the job — which would have been just a little more than the ObamaCare legislative effort lasted (June 2009 – March 2010) — Gruber received roughly what the President of the United States makes in a year. That’s not too bad for an MIT professor.

However, the fact check on Barrasso is hardly the most interesting part of Kessler’s review. What exactly did this micro-simulation model do to help Democrats craft ObamaCare? Kessler offers this explanation:


The model, the Gruber Microsimulation Model, is the coin of the realm, in large part because it is similar to the model used by the Congressional Budget Office. That means administration policy-makers could predict with reasonable certainty how CBO would score legislation. Given that legislation in Washington often falls or rises depending on the CBO score, that made this model a very powerful tool for administration officials.


Reeeeeeeeaaaaaallllly. Let’s recall what Gruber had to say about CBO scoring:

“This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes,” Gruber tells the audience with a smile. “If CBO scores the mandate as taxes, the bill dies.” … “Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage,” says the MIT economist who helped write Obamacare. “And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical for the thing to pass.”


Gruber bragged about gaming the legislative language in order to fool the CBO, and the mandate-tax issue was hardly the only issue in which CBO got snookered. The supposed deficit neutrality of the ACA was a house of cards that rapidly collapsed after passage, too, as well as the wealth transfers from the young to the old and the healthy to the sick, as Gruber explicitly mentions in the video. No wonder HHS extended Gruber’s contract for another eight months; they needed his model in order to keep cooking CBO’s analysis as the bill went through a number of changes in Congress through the fall and winter.

Gruber didn’t limit his deception to CBO, either, Kessler notes. When speaking to journalists, Gruber made a habit of not disclosing his connection to the ObamaCare effort in order to pose as an “independent” expert — a deception in which the White House participated:


Gruber’s consulting was largely unknown at the time, and eventually it became an issue as he had been frequently quoted by journalists and lawmakers who may not have known of his connection to the administration; he also generally did not disclose his connection when writing opinion articles.

In one especially fishy circumstance, Nancy-Ann DeParle, at the time the director of the White House Office of Health Reform, wrote about Gruber’s work on the White House blog on Nov. 29, 2009. “MIT Economist Confirms Senate Health Reform Bill Reduces Costs and Improves Coverage” was the headline on the post.

DeParle made no reference to the fact that Gruber had already earned hundreds of thousands of dollars working for the administration. She described him as “a MIT economist who has been closely following the health insurance reform process.”


Barrasso was right about the $400,000 or so Gruber got from taxpayers, but that’s just the tip of the iceberg. That money appears to have been spent by the executive branch in a deliberate attempt to deceive Congress’ own analytical organization on a massive social-engineering experiment, and then aided and abetted by lack of disclosure of Gruber’s relationship to the project when dealing with the media. That’s dishonesty on an industrial scale, and goes way beyond Gruber himself.

The hearings on this should be fascinating.

http://hotair.com/archives/2014/11/14/wapo-fact-check-yes-gruber-got-400000-for-obamacare-work/

SMOKING GUN VIDEO: Jonathan Gruber Admitted Obama Was In the Room When Cadillac Tax Lie Was Created




On June 13, 2012, Obamacare Jonathan Gruber was interviewed by Frontline.  He told them that the Cadillac tax issue was addressed in 2009.  Obama knew it was going to be a problem, and they all agreed to lie about it.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_e00NjQvFM


What Jonathan Gruber is taking heat for right now, was planned out specifically with Barack Obama. It wasn’t just him. It was all of them, with Obama in the room taking part.

From Jonathan Gruber’s Frontline interview in June 2012.

The next time I see him is summer 2009. The big issue there is that he really wants to make sure I’m moving forward on cost control. I think that at this point he sort of knew we had a good plan on coverage, but he was worried on cost control. So we had a meeting in the Oval Office with several experts, including myself, on what can we do to get credible savings on cost control that the Congressional Budget Office would recognize and score as savings in this law.

And that was a meeting — it was very exciting, once again, because the economists in the room all said the number one thing you need to do is you need to take on the tax subsidy to employer-sponsored insurance. We need one minute of background on this. The way employer-sponsored insurance works is, if you get paid in wages, you get taxed. If you get paid in health insurance, you do not. …

So this tax subsidy economists have been railing against for decades, it’s super-expensive. We forego about $250 billion per year in tax revenues. It’s regressive — the richer you are, the bigger tax break you get. And it’s inefficient because it causes people to buy excessive health insurance. So everyone in the room said, “You want something that is real cost control that we know it will work, go after this.”

Now, the problem is, it’s a political nightmare, … and people say, “No, you can’t tax my benefits.” So what we did a lot in that room was talk about, well, how could we make this work? And Obama was like, “Well, you know” — I mean, he is really a realistic guy. He is like, “Look, I can’t just do this.” He said: “It is just not going to happen politically. The bill will not pass. How do we manage to get there through phases and other things?” And we talked about it. And he was just very interested in that topic.

Once again, that ultimately became the genesis of what is called the Cadillac tax in the health care bill, which I think is one of the most important and bravest parts of the health care law and doesn’t get nearly enough credit. I mean, this is the first time after years and years of urging — and the entire health policy, there was not one single health expert in America who is setting up a system from scratch, would have this employer subsidy in place. Not one.

So after years and years of us wanting to get rid of this, to finally go after it was just such a huge victory for health policy. And I’m just incredibly proud that he and the others who supported this law were willing to do it. …

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/11/smoking-gun-video-jonathan-gruber-admitted-obama-was-in-the-room-when-cadillac-tax-lie-was-created/



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0bama made the mistake of dealing with a dude with a big mouth who will never lose his job. I am guessing many more hours of videos like this one will surface... Drop... Drop... Drop...

Yeah right... Not to be confused with the school bearing his name.. and failing too just like him..... So 0bama is pretty accurate 

... Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner!...

He wants to flood the country, calculating he will bring new democrat voters for generations... Even if it could be painful for a lot of people right now, it will be worth it in perspective, in the long run. The part about border agents switching their mission is interesting... So why using the same old (not so old M4s) when the border agent's purpose will change to do paperwork anyway?

The full transformation of the US by this president is still moving along.



http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/14/us/obama-immigration.html?smid=tw-bna