Duderonomy

Well, at least you have facetime (virtual even if not personal) with the CEO. Keep track of the numbers and duties while you ran the department. Look for a new job, if you'd like to move up. It's obvious this company won't promote you when they just had a big opportunity to do so. All up what you want to do. If you don't care, then just sit pretty as long as you can. Just make sure the new boss trusts you. In my experience, HoDs generally dislike anyone they didn't hire so watch out for that. I've had to change jobs because HoDs favored their own hirees over me.

Bad parents breed good consumers. Good consumers fall into bad debt. Bad debt makes savers like me money. What was the poll about again?

Spoken like a true arsonist.

Ah, yes. Now that you know that I know what evil lurks in the heart of the highway, the tears come. I see them. Flow.

Given Rafay's recent contributions to the wildlife protection fund, and my utmost fascination with logix, I must change my vote. Unvote: Rafay Vote: Road2Victory

Hey baby, we went to different high schools together!

Tree-stumps can post. Ash can't. So arsonists can control who is allowed to speak in the game.

Why does the news media keep asking about Muslims when we've got bigger problems? Like, say: police training, student debt, monopoly abuse in the healthcare industry, the deficit, Syria, Iran, Ukraine, rent increases, infrastructure deterioration, and wage stagnation. There's only one man who can save us now.

Considering my infant nephew has eaten both his own poop and dog food, I think there are some things best left unremembered.

It's worth noting that the incompatible religion argument has been made before against Catholicism. JFK did not let the pope run the country. Also, I agree with you on marriage, Lys. It should be a civil contract between two people and/or a ceremony recognized by religious organizations. You either see an attorney or see a priest. Priests are allowed to provide services based on religious practices, while attorneys are not as a condition of their license. Any legal person above the age of majority can enter into this contract in any form, including poly marriages or asexual civil partnerships. Marriage is an artifact of a time when paternity could be uncertain and women were not given rights to property and work. It is outdated now. Children are protected by themselves, and I don't see any reason a spouse should be protected from their own bad decisions (like giving up working for an unstable marriage). I've had arguments with people about forcing religious authorities to recognize homosexual marriage, which violates their right to practice religion. A civil clerk has no such right as a precondition of their profession, which is usually a part of the oath they give on receiving office. Sorry homosexuals, but if your religious denomination does not recognize your union, then you need to pick a new religion. Sorry, government employees, but you cannot enforce religious strictures on the local populace. Back to the debate, it appears that Trump did not get a big bump from it, while the other candidates are catching up. I can only hope that his tide has ebbed, although I don't think it is the end of his candidacy. It's likely that the democrats will now win, because Trump will Ross Perot this election.

Obama is obviously a Muslim. Here he is seen praying in front of a crescent. http://www.wnd.com/files/2012/10/obama-cover.jpg Constantly talking about your favorite fantasy is irritating no matter what flavor it takes: Christian, Islam, Buddhist, Trekkie, or Jedi. Just because your particular fanfic is older does not make it special. Obama has chosen to not be annoying about his faith. This is to be celebrated, not derided. It's Christians like him that make me think religion should be tolerated as a cultural tradition. It's Christians like Kim Davis that make me wonder if we should have a Constitutional Amendment that requires government officials to operate in a secular manner. Oh wait, we do. You are not allowed to enforce a religious practice as a government official. Disallowing gay marriage in any fashion is a religious practice. I won't go into marriage itself (which I don't think the government should be licensing at all whether gay or straight, let contracts/religious authorities handle it with no formal legal recognition). If you, (a)attack secularism (b)think homosexuality is an abnormal and new phenomenon or (c ) think only God should heal the sick, I will vote against you every single time and make fun of you in front of everyone I meet.

Smokey the Bear says "Forest fires are srs bzns, son."

Oh I won't do that..........I'd rather connect the hose w/ gasoline. http://stayworkplay.org/wp-content/uploads/EvilMonkey.jpg I rest my case

Rafay is a scallywag. I seen him poking holes in the firehose. VOTE: Rafay.

Why did Road2Victory put a match to Robert2424 and KevinH? He needed more IRONs in the fire.

What the hell. I'll give at a shot if you guys don't mind a newbie. I look forward to the quiet life of a stump and randomly accusing personages of holding gas cans.

It depends on the man. VP's don't have a lot of direct responsibilities, which can lead to a dead end position. Or they can use that extra time to wrangle support for the president. The modern-day role is to serve as a bridge between the President and Congress. Cheney had enough connections with lobbying groups that he was effective at pulling together congressional support. Biden and Al Gore have connections directly to Congress. That's probably why Clinton got so much legislation passed. He was a former governor with executive experience, while Al Gore knew Capitol Hill and who to talk to for things to get done. So any president/vice president dream team should be an executive who can govern with a politician/bureaucrat who can work the wheels of Congress. A president cannot trust the House Leaders for this role over the vice president, because the House Leaders are not beholden to him and have no consequences for being uncooperative. So their interests won't always align with the president. A dirty secret of any office in the executive branch is that an undated resignation letter often is a requirement of the office. So if a vice president goes against the president, that letter gets dated and distributed while the VP goes into "retirement". At the same time, the VP has the ear of the president or he wouldn't be in office. He goes to a lot of the same meetings, and the president has some trust in his opinion. That's a powerful thing. Yes, the office can be a stepping stone and can be a useful apprenticeship for legislators to learn about executive power. But otherwise, they're better off serving and advising the president than pushing their own agenda. At the same time, I'm sure you'd like her to receive medical treatment if she was injured, even if she doesn't get paid well, and it'd be better if she paid what she could into the system. True, she made her choice, but society needs phone saleswomen as well as HR reps. Not as badly, of course, or they'd be paid better. However, it's still better for me and any other self-supporting individual to allow the misguided or unlucky basic medical care so we can continue to have people sell us phones (or bus tables or mow lawns). To paraphrase and twist a parable from HitchHiker's Guide to the Galaxy: a society where public phone sanitizers can't afford to live is destined to die of a plague spread by those phones. Don't underestimate the value of the people at the bottom. It'd be nice if everyone could be a chief at a chief's salary, but let's make sure the Indians can live, too.

Funny thing about that word. The more you use it the less power it has. Eisenhower created the U.S. Interstate System with federal dollars at the start of the Cold War. So I suppose you would say that the Cold War was started between Socialists and Communists? Some things the government just does better, and society is better off if it does it. You can argue that pure capitalism does healthcare better, but a mix is actually more fiscally sound and better for society as a whole. We're headed for a Swiss system, not pure socialism (link below), which I think is one of the better options. EVERYONE gets basic health insurance so you don't have people going bankrupt over medical bills and everyone must pay some sort of premium for it (subsidized for low-income earners) so hospitals still get some money back. Employers and insurance companies can still offer platinum options for non-lethal/handicapped service. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/countries/ I'm a little more leery about higher education given the current issues with the U.S. system and the luxury education that most colleges sell as investment education. I think the feds should encourage local schools to go to a more vocational-focused system rather than the current academia-focused system we have now. Student loans definitely need to be better policed. What we need is 18-year-olds thinking in terms of the job market, rather than social status or an expensive excuse for unemployment. Sure, a $50,000 degree in literature might make you feel better, but everyone would be better off if you got a $15,000 associates in welding. You'd get more money, be less of a burden, and could save up for a retirement spent writing (which is what most "pro" writers do). I again espouse the current German system, which ensures that people get training to get jobs, not training to faff about for four years. I had a college roommate who wore a shirt that said "Liberal arts-we do less all day than most people do by 8 AM". Yeah, it's that blatant.

Pretty sure that everyone who is going to support Trump already has supported Trump. He continues to alienate portions of the Republican base that isn't a white male through his mockery of women (as if looks had anything to do with leading the country) and Latinos. As the other candidates drop off, one (Carson most likely) will get that support. He's an outsider, but the question is who ends up being his minder. Watch his VP nomination closely. That will tell you his real stance on issues.

I drink both coffee and green tea. However, I'd be remiss as a southerner without complaining that black tea is better cold.

I will admit that the presidency is more about the minders than the man. W. Bush would've gone nowhere without Cheney. Bill would have been lost without Hilary. Obama would've sunk without Biden. Part of the reason I don't want Trump in office. He's more likely to go it alone and fuck everything up.

What are you talking about?Culture. There are people who don't use hygiene often and use dry shampoo to clean themselves when they shower. I read an article that briefly mentioned a family without using soap for about month http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/02/how-often-people-in-various-countries-shower/385470/I like how you assume that I don't take showers by the simple remark that I make that I don't smell IF I were to not to shower for a X amount of time. My personal hygiene has nothing to do with my 'culture' or 'religion'Hmmm but I don't know people like you need can't smell. I guess you are truly a one of kind. Sweat and smell proof As long as he's showering and using soap/shampoo around 3 times a week, I don't care what he thinks he smells like naturally. Shampoo and soap overuse can destroy natural skin and hair defenses. Most shampoo in particular is horrible for your hair, with useless suds-producing agents damaging hair. One of the biggest scams is the conditioner industry selling you additional chemicals to "fix" what the shampoo has done. But I will restate that you often are not aware of what you smell like to others. You get acclimated to smells within a couple hours, and its best for all involved if you shower at least 3 times a week, taking care to wash odor-producing areas (like the armpits and groin) and odor-absorbing areas (like hair).

I could be not showering for a solid week and you won't smell me. One of the perks of being asian No its cuz of deodorant not being asian And the East Asian grad students could smell just as bad as the Pakistanis, they just picked their nose more. An important thing to remember: you generally don't recognize your own smell and most people are too polite to comment. And try to shower at least three times a week. More is bad for your skin and hair, but please don't go more than two days without a shower. Keep it brief if you must. I can manage 5 minutes in a hurry.

The eternal debate, is the day's dirt grosser than the night's dirt. For me, it's definitely the latter. Gotta get that wonderful funky filth off before respectable work. But honestly, it doesn't matter as long as you at least use soap on your smelly areas (armpits, feet, and crotch), as well as deodorant. I can tell you from my time working at a college copy shop that people CAN tell when you don't shower. Some of those grad students had a presence at twenty yards that no one should experience.

Those Arab guys probably don't want US led things or anything led by west, the main problem with the US is they only do things to benefit themselves and in most cases they're the only one who benefits substantially. The part that pisses people off is labeling it as giving freedom to those countries by allowing corporations to exploit them, after all the only reason the US attacks them is in the interest of removing someone who doesn't play ball with their interests. US doesn't give a shit about freedom of the people which should be obvious with republicans and democrats removing the rights of Americans themselves in the latter years. The only thing they care about is the freedom of money and resources into their pockets and the pockets of corporations in the US. Again, quite a broad brush to paint 300 million people with. I know quite a few people who would like to abandon the whole U.S.-hegemony thing, but I have a difficult time getting them to be politically active. Too much Netflix and not enough attention span. Part of the issue is the news media pushing American cultural superiority, when there's quite a bit we could take from Europe or even the Middle East. Not everything is about material well-being, although that can be blasphemy to some conservatives. Once a baseline wealth has been developed, relationships and experience become much more important, and people would do well to remember that. Sadly, the media has brainwashed everyone into their two-car garage life and European vacations. Europe is beautiful, but it's not worth half of your income and tons of carbon emissions to go. As I've told Lysistra before, you would be surprised with the reaction against conservatism in the Millenial generation. The Internet has been a tremendous blow to the materialistic point-of-view in the U.S. More understand that the world has multiple viewpoints, and fewer believe in imposing their own on others. As for "only going to war to benefit Americans", that's kinda the nature of motivation. You're more likely to lend money or give time to friends and family rather than to strangers. If a stranger wants you to do something for them, you ask for money and it's called a job or you do it anyway and it's called charity. I don't mind people giving money to help other countries, but it should be limited to what the receiving country can actually use without creating a corruption culture, like charity has done in some of Africa. More is not always better. Wars have been fought over resources for millennia, whether it be African tribes grabbing slaves for sale or British boats enforcing opium sales. I doubt the resources in Iraq or Afghanistan were worth the money put into them, and it isn't like the U.S. government will be taking those resources by fiat. They'll go on the world market to be sold like everything else. Kinda odd that the elites would pay for the war, pay for the reconstruction, and then pay for the resources at market rates if they truly intended to be self-serving. Afghanistan wasn't really a war for resources, since they don't have any easily-accessible ones. It was a war born out of insecurity and a misguided belief that you can change an entire culture over a few short years. Iraq was different, and I still have no idea how much coke W. Bush was snorting when he came up with it. Last thing we can do is leave them now, but we don't need to be getting involved in Libya or Syria. Edit: And good on Turkey getting involved. If they need support, they should get it, but they should remain in the leading role. Ultimately, Shepard, it sounds like you and I agree on the future role of the U.S. in international politics. Now I just have to convince more of my fellows. Second Edit because I think too much: If the rest of the world wants to help get the U.S. off of their backs, they need to stop portraying themselves as victims. They need to show themselves as cultures developing in their own way and that don't need political help from the U.S. The problem with constant victimhood is that the U.S. is a lone-wolf hero culture. We see ourselves as Batman, as Superman, as Spiderman. For the older generation, it's the renegade cop who disobeys orders to take down the drug kingpin and rescue the girl. We will never, ever, see ourselves as villains because that is a basic psychological defense mechanism. Otherwise the whole race would have committed suicide already. And sorry all you well-wishers, but that ain't happening. You have to deal with us just like we have to deal with North Korea and Cuba. If you portray another nation or people as an innocent victim, the American instinct is to form up a rescue. That comes in the form of aid, yes, but also as bombs and guns and troops. The U.S. will come in guns ablazin' ready to get the girl. That's a deeply-ingrained part of our culture. One that I think needs to change, but that will take decades. Instead, you'd be better off taking the North Korea and Cuba route. Do we hate them? Yes. Could we get resources from them? A definite yes in Cuba's case. Why doesn't the U.S. invade them constantly? Because these countries have always been careful to portray themselves as equals. Not just enemies, but equals. They refuse victimhood. And that means the U.S. treats them as hostile, but legitimate nations. You play the victim card, and the U.S. will treat you like a cat stuck in a tree. If you want respect as a culture, stop playing the victim and show that you are capable of solving your own problems like Egypt and Ukraine did.