deleted-05292014

Crazy. Talk about clouds and blue skies, racism flourishes. Get a thread with racism, Obama, and the N word to boot, and nada. Am I getting punk'd?

Ah yes but you fail to understand the mentality of some of the people that post here which is kind of representative of the population at whole.

The in your face racial slurs or outright apparent racism like this guy uttered generally speaking is abhorred. That's easy to spot and identify. It is the institutionalized racism, the hidden forms that some people like to ignore or deny exists. If you look at the topics on here the posts that usually stir the chit can are usually "that's not racist vs that's racist"

Yes, no?

I worded it poorly.. I was amused at the perfect thread to talk about race turned instead to pork.

Pork is the other white meat though.

NH is predominantly what liberal?

/snicker

http://time.com/101794/obama-backs-away-from-net-neutrality-campaign-promises-after-fcc-vote/

As a candidate, Barack Obama left little doubt about his promise to keep the Internet a level playing field. Now his position is far from clear.

Barack Obama was crystal clear during the 2008 campaign about his commitment to ensuring equal treatment of all online content over American broadband lines. “I will take a backseat to no one in my commitment to network neutrality,” Obama told a crowd at Google in 2008. “Because once providers start to privilege some applications or websites over others then the smaller voices get squeezed out and we all lose.”

At a 2007 campaign forum, he went so far as to specifically promise that his Federal Communications Commission appointments would defend the principle of a “level playing field for whoever has the best idea.” “As president, I am going to make sure that that is the principle that my FCC commissioners are applying as we move forward,” he said.

But on Thursday, the President made no public statement when three Democrats he appointed to the FCC voted to move forward with a plan to allow broadband carriers to provide an exclusive “fast lane” to commercial companies that pay extra fees to get their content transmitted online. Instead, White House aides released a press release distancing the President from the decision.

“The FCC is an independent agency, and we will carefully review their proposal,” Press Secretary Jay Carney wrote to reporters after the vote. “We will be watching closely as the process moves forward in hopes that the final rule stays true to the spirit of net neutrality.”

That shift—from a campaign promise to a call for hope—comes after months of public debate over the future of the American Internet infrastructure. In the vote Thursday, the FCC commissioners approved a plan that prohibited broadband providers from blocking or discriminating against content on current lines, but allowed for the addition of faster service options for paying content providers. FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, who was appointed by Obama last year, has argued that these new “fast lanes” do not violate net neutrality principles.

But at the time Obama spoke at Google headquarters in 2008, the sort of “fast lane” proposal put forward by Wheeler had already been dismissed as a dangerous intrusion on open competition that violated net neutrality. Companies like Google argued that once a “fast lane” was allowed, broadband companies like Verizon and Comcast would lose incentives to upgrade existing online speeds, creating over time a two-tiered Internet that gave advantage to incumbent content producers who could afford to pay the fees. “Creating a new ‘fast lane’ is effectively a method of discrimination, where today’s fast lane becomes tomorrow’s minimum bar,” Google argued in a 2007 submission to the FCC.

On Thursday, the Internet Association, a trade group representing Google and other Silicon Valley giants, restated its belief that the Wheeler plan appears to violate the principles of net neutrality. “We are opposed to all discrimination,” said the group’s CEO Michael Beckerman. Discrimination, he continued, included any regime that allowed prioritizing commercial content for a fee, “even if existing speeds are not downgraded for everyone else.”

The White House statement left open the possibility that the President would come out against the Wheeler plan at a later date, saying the President would consider “any option that makes sense” if the FCC’s final version violates net neutrality. But his options are limited. Obama could propose new legislation but it’s unlikely to pass during an election year.

Net neutrality rules that did not allow a fast lane were established in 2010 by a previous FCC chairman appointed by Obama. But they were thrown out by the D.C. Circuit Court in January this year on the grounds that the FCC lacks authority over the broadband providers, which are not currently categorized under Title II of the agency’s statute.

The proposed rules approved on Thursday asked the public to weigh in on whether the agency should re-categorize broadband providers to fall under Title II, a move that would give commissioners a blank slate to establish new net neutrality rules.

The proposed rules will be open for public comment through July 15

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I guess in all fairness, the circuit court ruled the FCC has no control over internet providers so it is only slightly disingenuous to blame the President but still I'm quite disappointed in this. At the end of the day it's not the Presidents fault, it's greedy companies like Time Warner who over charge for ####### service. Europe and Asia have better infrastructure, faster internet that is significantly cheaper than what we get.

Yes Obama keep priming the pump and the water springing forth will be forever. Remember though that if you stop priming the well runs dry. Of course we can just keep printing money forever and forever. No harm will ever come.

Inflation rose yesterday too.......thanks Obama!

It actually broke 2 record highs yesterday... Just saying

http://www.usnews.com/news/business/articles/2014/05/14/us-stock-futures-edge-lower

Perhaps I should have been more specific and said at close of market

NEW YORK (AP) — Stocks fell back from record levels on Wednesday as investors decided it was better to play it safe.

The Standard & Poor's 500 index fell 8.92 points, or 0.5 percent, to 1,888.53. The Dow Jones industrial average dropped 101.47 points, or 0.6 percent, to 16,613. The Nasdaq composite fell 29.54 points, or 0.7 percent, to 4,100.63.

The Russell 2000 index, a gauge of small-company stocks, fell 18.02 points, or 1.6 percent, to 1,103.14. The index has slumped 9 percent since peaking March 4 as investors sold riskier stocks.

Just sayin....

It didn't do too well yesterday.

But yes since Obama has been in office the market has actually done pretty well - but then again it really didn't have any choice under 8 years of Bush but to go up. I'm not really sure it matters a whole hell of a lot who is in the White House so I'm half joking when I say that. The Federal Reserve is independent and they set policy as far as interest rates go which will effect the market. They are only held accountable by Congress and the public but are independent.

If you have the stomach for it (and a fast internet connection) I recommend the forex market. Very fun

A lot depends on the bullets you use in your gun. as far as penetration is concerned. Slugs from a shotgun will travel a long way after going through drywall. Many people are not proficient using a hand gun. You read about the drive by shootings in the hood. The truth be known is they just put a few rounds down range and hope they hit someone.... anybody.

Well yeah obviously.....I actually wanted something that is going to stop a person dead in their tracks but also not continue far into the house in multiple rooms especially with other family members around.

Actually you are wrong. People only shot handguns close to their body and hold them sideways in Movies.

Also not sure your logic on less likely to miss and hurt others in another room. Most handguns are not as accurate as an Ar-15 and many hand gun rounds penetrate drywall and wood much more easily than a .223 round

The better choice is a shotgun

Your aim does not have to be accurate and the pellets are much less likely to penetrate walls, especially exterior walls and hurt others.

he saw it on TV

What you actually agree with Joe Biden? Hell has frozen over

Where I get my information? Well......My best friend started his own security patrol business and is very successful here in my city. The people who work for him are all ex military and ex police - he is ex military himself. Police are trained to fire guns sideways from the chest in close quarters - not like the video you posted. His chief security guy is some former Army trainer and actually demonstrated one time when I was over his house how to clear rooms because I myself was curious what I need to do in the event someone breaks in my house. That is what he showed me, I'm not an expert but I assume this guy knows what he's doing.

When I was looking to buy a gun for home protection they actually dissuaded me from buying a shotgun and recommend I go with a hand gun. Like you I thought a shotgun would be better. We had this exact conversation.

So without the disparaging comments I disagree with you and I'll go with the experts on this

Here is his companys page (http://www.psicolumbus.com/) Let me know if you are interesting in franchising, he's selling.

And your reasons are?

Too easy to be disarmed in close quarters like a house.I think handguns are more effective because you can keep it close toyour body.

Also less chance of hurting others if you miss, especially if you have family in other rooms.

Not really the most effective weapon for home defense in my opinion. Guess it worked in this case.

That certainly is what the Modi people want you to think. Reality will depend on a lot of factors. Factor #1: do the Muslims accept him as Prime Minister or do they decide to start something? If they start stuff, and it looks like they will because they already are, then there's not going to be much forward movement because the state will be busy putting out fires.

It seems like Western business interests are putting a lot of hopes in his government if he wins. I think the biggest problem facing any government there is the widespread cronyism and corruption.

The Somalis are refugees placed in certain communities by international refugee relocation organizations.

Interesting. Thanks I was always curious. No idea why they chose Minneapolis & Columbus.

The Somali immigrants are here because of the Somali Civil war in the 90s.

I read that they are not integrating well. Some from Minnesota went back home to join the terror group al-Shabab.

Generally speaking from my experience they are not very friendly and stick to themselves. A police friend of mine says they have gang problems but not like crips/bloods more like family clan warfare.

I misread I thought it said Somalia lol

I made it to 40 and did all of that except IV drug use. Diving with sharks will make organized religion more palatable to you I'm sure

Can't wait until next time I'm in Pinas. Great diving there

To prepare for martial law and take away our guns and cows.

Sad.

As a Christian though, I think it takes great courage to stand by her faith. I would do the same.

This is like pre-Roman adoption of Christianity when Christians were persecuted.

I'm not an immigration expert but my city has the second largest Somali population after Minneapolis. How do they get here? Are they on some kind of exception list I don't get it. Just curious bc it seems certain groups from various countries have a harder time to immigrate. I always joke that someone gave these Somalis the wrong map, coming to two cold States. Seems like they would want to move some place hot like Nevada or Arizona

Three people were killed while 17 others were injured as communal violence broke out in Kishanbagh area of Hyderabad on Wednesday.

...

The violence sparked over burning of a religious flag of Sikh community by some Muslims leading police to open fire to quell the mob.

...

As the news spread, people assembled in large numbers and some youths entered the nearby locality of another community and allegedly started attacking their houses and vehicles. Some parts of the area also reported arson even as police intervened and dispersed them, they said.

After some time, hundreds of members belonging to both communities gathered and pelted one another with stones and some police personnel, who tried to stop them, sustained injuries, a senior police official said.

Police opened fire to bring the situation under control and in the process, at least three persons suffered bullet wounds and succumbed to injuries while undergoing treatment at a hospital.

Around 1,000 members from both sides indulged in clashes ... police warned the clashing groups and opened fire ... the official said.

http://www.niticentral.com/2014/05/14/communal-clash-in-hyderabad-claims-3-lives-223327.html

Modi (sp?) if he wins will be very good for business and should spurn growth in India and also increase international investments. I'm not an expert in Indian politics but would like to hear your thoughts.

Regardless the West should pay attention as India is one of the largest economies in the world.

http://www.brookings.edu/research/interactives/2013/historical-house-ideology-and-party-unity

I saw this on PBS newshour this evening and thought it was particularly fascinating to share. This is a graphical tracking of voting in the House since the Civil War era. At no other time in our countries history have we been so divided along political parties.

You really see the great divide occurring with the 88th Congress (1963-1964) - obviously the passage of the Civil Rights act began the split between the two parties. In more recent times you see it start to expand after the Republican "revolution" in the 90s when they took control of the House.

The Republican party has also been more consistent ideologically and cohesive than Democrats over time. I don't know if that is good or bad, but something to think about when you hear politicians talk out the side of their mouth about being bi-partisan. I would suspect the only issues they are bi-partisan on is voting for their raises

I am pro gay rights and always have been, but seeing two men kissing still takes me some getting used to

Why do women love to have gay men friends

I mean it's like having Michael Kor purses. They brag about how many they got

Never heard of Michael Kors when I read your post then I'm checking out the market news for the day and see their stock is up. Looks like they are outperforming Coach by a lot, who I have heard of.

What a wonderful earth we are leaving for future generations huh?

Could have been worse.... A booger

Crashed~N2~Me

Posted Today, 07:49 AM

But Marvin, Jinx used a qualifying statement...and I think that's what Benny responded to.

Based on your comments = You and Jinx need to square off & get this confusion straightened out....?

I was talking about how we used to settle things back in the day.

break dancing lives on in Europe which is cool. It's kind of dead here although I saw some folks doing it a few years ago at a Non Phixion concert before the group broke up. Just regulated to the underground hip hop scene. I think kids thesedays exchanged aAdidas for glocks to settle beefs.

Speaking of beefs, you see that Jay-Z camera footage? I guess Beyonce sister is his 100th problem

how do you know if people on your ignore list have posted in this thread?

It shows the name of posts or replies but not content. There is an option to toggle if you want. I'm not sure how that works if I am directly quoted, if I will get an email notification. I tell you what Smoke give me a sec here and reply back so I can test.