Conquer Club

If the metric system is so great, why isn't there one for time? 24 hours doesn't sound so metric, but it does sound like the amount of time it takes your mom's triple chins to stop giggling after I throat f*ck her.

MeDeFe wrote:Do you really think we can't see you?

natty_dread wrote:

MeDeFe wrote:Do you really think we can't see you?

No... we are counting on your sense of humour though.

jbrettlip wrote:If the metric system is so great, why isn't there one for time? 24 hours doesn't sound so metric, but it does sound like the amount of time it takes your mom's triple chins to stop giggling after I throat f*ck her.

Each day in the Republican Calendar was divided into ten hours, each hour into 100 decimal minutes, and each decimal minute into 100 decimal seconds. Thus an hour was 144 conventional minutes (more than twice as long as a conventional hour), a minute was 86.4 conventional seconds (slightly longer than a conventional minute), and a second was 0.864 conventional seconds (slightly shorter than a conventional second).

Clocks were manufactured to display this decimal time, but it did not catch on. Mandatory use of decimal time was officially suspended 7 April 1795, although some cities continued to use decimal time as late as 1801.

stahrgazer wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:He's not a Republican, clearly.

He's like me: someone who was once proud to be a Republican, but now feels tainted by its corruption.

stahrgazer wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:He's not a Republican, clearly.

He's like me: someone who was once proud to be a Republican, but now feels tainted by its corruption.

thegreekdog wrote:

stahrgazer wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:He's not a Republican, clearly.

He's like me: someone who was once proud to be a Republican, but now feels tainted by its corruption.

So you prefer the uncorrupted Democrats?

PLAYER57832 wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

stahrgazer wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:He's not a Republican, clearly.

He's like me: someone who was once proud to be a Republican, but now feels tainted by its corruption.

So you prefer the uncorrupted Democrats?

No political party, including the liberaterians, is truly lacking corruption. Politics is made to function within a certain level of corruption. Ironically enough, that's part of us being a Republic and not a straight Democracy. The problem is when it gets out of control. Recently, it has gotten out of control, I believe.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

stahrgazer wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:He's not a Republican, clearly.

He's like me: someone who was once proud to be a Republican, but now feels tainted by its corruption.

So you prefer the uncorrupted Democrats?

No political party, including the liberaterians, is truly lacking corruption. Politics is made to function within a certain level of corruption. Ironically enough, that's part of us being a Republic and not a straight Democracy. The problem is when it gets out of control. Recently, it has gotten out of control, I believe.

thegreekdog wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

stahrgazer wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:He's not a Republican, clearly.

He's like me: someone who was once proud to be a Republican, but now feels tainted by its corruption.

So you prefer the uncorrupted Democrats?

No political party, including the liberaterians, is truly lacking corruption. Politics is made to function within a certain level of corruption. Ironically enough, that's part of us being a Republic and not a straight Democracy. The problem is when it gets out of control. Recently, it has gotten out of control, I believe.

Yes, no political party lacks corruption. Therefore, that's not a reason to change parties... unless you don't like the corruption in one party but like the corruption in the other party.

Phatscotty wrote:do you believe that things are out of control enough to do something about it?

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:do you believe that things are out of control enough to do something about it?

I definitely don't believe the tea Party is the answer, Nor am I happy with the Liberaterian party. For a bit, I was interested in the green party, but only for local elections and they have never really had a firm platform except on a few issues.

Mostly, I think its a choice between Democrats and Republicans, but its not a choice about ideology, its a choice between individual candidates. We try to pick the one who will do the best job, from the available choices. And then I definitely do communicate with them once elected.

notyou2 wrote:Back on topic people. Oh, and BTW, the vote is over. The bill passed. Is there something else happening in the US that the rest of the world can debate?
No?

OK, lets go look in on jolly old England shall we. I think they are in the midst of a very close election.

Phatscotty wrote:

notyou2 wrote:Back on topic people. Oh, and BTW, the vote is over. The bill passed. Is there something else happening in the US that the rest of the world can debate?
No?

OK, lets go look in on jolly old England shall we. I think they are in the midst of a very close election.

yes, now the thread can transfer from all the reasons it should not be passed, to all the evidence that you were wrong about everything and bought a load of bullshit....yet again

Sen. Tom Coburn drew ridicule last month for trying in vain to prohibit sex offenders from getting Viagra prescriptions under the new health care law.

But Coburn is now having the last laugh after the Congressional Research Service confirmed his assertions that sex offenders not in prison could get Viagra and other drugs treating erectile dysfunction under health plans subsidized by taxpayer dollars.

In a memo to the Oklahoma Republican, who is one of two doctors in the chamber, and provided to FoxNews.com, the CRS said there are no provisions in the new health care law "which would require health plans to limit the type of benefits that can be offered based on the plan beneficiary's prior criminal convictions."

"Additionally, there do not appear to be any provisions that would specifically restrict qualified health plans' coverage of drugs prescribed to treat ED," the memo read.

"Therefore, a convicted rapist, child molester, or other sex offender who is not incarcerated would not appear to be excluded from enrolling in a qualified health plan through an American Health Benefit Exchange in their state solely because of that conviction," the memo added.

Coburn offered an amendment blocking this to the companion bill that reshaped parts of the health care law. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., dismissed it as a "gotcha amendment" designed to be difficult for Democrats to oppose. But the amendment failed 57-42.

The CRS is also seeking information from the Department of Health and Human Servicers congressional liaison office per Coburn's request on whether there have been known cases in which federal health programs such as Medicaid provided sex offenders coverage for drugs to treat erectile dysfunction.

But the CRS sent Coburn news articles that describe cases in which sex offenders did receive those drugs through state Medicaid programs.

Night Strike wrote:Like how the claim about sex offenders being able to get Viagra is true.

Phatscotty wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:do you believe that things are out of control enough to do something about it?

I definitely don't believe the tea Party is the answer, Nor am I happy with the Liberaterian party. For a bit, I was interested in the green party, but only for local elections and they have never really had a firm platform except on a few issues.

Mostly, I think its a choice between Democrats and Republicans, but its not a choice about ideology, its a choice between individual candidates. We try to pick the one who will do the best job, from the available choices. And then I definitely do communicate with them once elected.

the green party is the answer to an out of control government?

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:do you believe that things are out of control enough to do something about it?

I definitely don't believe the tea Party is the answer, Nor am I happy with the Liberaterian party. For a bit, I was interested in the green party, but only for local elections and they have never really had a firm platform except on a few issues.

Mostly, I think its a choice between Democrats and Republicans, but its not a choice about ideology, its a choice between individual candidates. We try to pick the one who will do the best job, from the available choices. And then I definitely do communicate with them once elected.

the green party is the answer to an out of control government?

In the few local elections where it was active, yes. Long term sustainability is always the best goal.

The current policies that look to business profits as the only measure of real success are part of why we are in the mess we are in right now. Its like saying you can make more immediate money from selling off the wood and bricks that make your house. True, but incredibly stupid beyond the immediate future.

Its not about business and profit VERSUS the environment, its about LONG term profits that will last, versus a "boom and bust" short term economic gains. .. let a few people get rich, while everyone else gets the leavings. Its about what is best for society, the average hard-working person, versus a very few lucky individuals.

When even China is showing more concern for alternative energy, environmental concerns than many US politicians, something is incredibly wrong in the US.