nelly_man

Where I'm from, we can them TYME Machines, which has the benefit of not involving a redundant acronym. It does confuse people when we travel, though.

Or a trackball mouse that's secured in place.

I think Gene Sharp characterized it nicely in his essay, From Dictatorship to Democracy: A Conceptual Framework for Liberation. Notably, this essay has been cited as a major influence on the Arab Spring uprisings, so it's especially relevant to the Syrian protests.

Whatever the merits of the violent option, however, one point is clear. By placing confidence in violent means, one has chosen the very type of struggle with which the oppressors nearly always have superiority. The dictators are equipped to apply violence overwhelmingly. However long or briefly these democrats can continue, eventually the harsh military realities usually become inescapable. The dictators almost always have superiority in military hardware, ammunition, transportation, and the size of military forces. Despite bravery, the democrats are (almost always) no match.

One additional point, he was adamant about the distinction between nonviolence and pacifism. For him, violence has to be on the table, but as a last resort. As the quote indicates, violence is where you're at the biggest disadvantage, so why would you start there?

The biggest issue is water, and it would be difficult for them if they lose access to the Colorado River. Currently, only 10% of the river's flow reaches Mexico, so it's not unreasonable to believe that California would be in trouble if they don't secure control of the upper basin. In any case, it would make for a complicated legal battle between an independent California, the United States, and Mexico.

It looks like somebody asked about this phrase on the English StackExchange.

https://english.stackexchange.com/q/394762

You can read more about the scam they were referring to from Colonel Parker's Wikipedia article.

Presley had been showing signs of rebellion against Parker, and Parker believed that a stint in the Army would cure him of this. Parker was looking ahead when he persuaded Presley to become a soldier. Presley had wanted to join Special Services, allowing him the opportunity to perform while at the same time getting a more leisurely ride than other soldiers. Parker, on the other hand, was fully aware that any particular treatment given to Presley would instantly be used against him in the media and by those who disliked his style of music. If Presley could show the world that he was treated the same as any other young man, Parker told him, then more people would accept him and his music. Parker was also afraid that any attempt to block Presley from being drafted would result in a more detailed look into Parker's own service record. He also realized that it would be an excellent opportunity to promote Presley by having the media witness his induction day, including the army haircut that would see the shearing of Presley's iconic hairstyle.

While Presley served in West Germany, Parker appeared to be in complete control, but he was worried about the outside influences that Presley might encounter there. Parker had declined to travel to Europe to visit Presley, denying that he spoke any language other than English. He sent Presley's friends to keep him company, arranged for business associates to watch over him while working in Europe, and maintained regular contact with him. He was reportedly afraid that Presley would realize that other managers were prepared to sign contracts that did not require as much as 25% of his earnings.

I'm not an expert in the Bible, but I don't think it really ascribes omnipotency to God. I think it's better to understand it as God being able to do all that can be done. So He may have limitations, but they are such that no other being can do something that He is unable to do.

From that sense, He is not able to save humanity freely, but he can set forth a process through which He can achieve this goal with some cost. I.e., He can create a divine being (that is either Himself in whole, Himself in part, or a direct descendant of Himself depending on your interpretation) that is able to spread His message and display an act of extreme self-sacrifice.

I don't really understand exactly what the sacrifice did or what needed to be fixed, but I do think the stories make a lot more sense if you accept that God has some limitations. For instance, I assume that Noah's flood was his first attempt to fix the problem (by killing everybody except for the most righteous of His creation), but it failed because He can't do everything and doesn't know everything. And the story of Jesus was His next attempt to sort things out.

But that's just me thinking about them as fictional stories that really need to be edited rather than a divine and infallible truth.

Yeah, it's from the Torah or Old Testament and is the name of Isaac's wife. The name itself comes from the Hebrew for "to tie firmly" or "to bind."

https://www.ncsl.org/resources/details/legislative-session-length

That's pretty standard for state legislatures. A lot of states treat the legislature as a part-time job and expect their elected representatives to have other responsibilities as well. It used to even be common for states to only convene every other year.

There's no need to be fair here. Insulin is absolutely essential for diabetics, and the head of the FDA trying to proclaim that cooking classes are a viable alternative is nonsense. For type 1 diabetics, no amount of healthy eating is going to get their body to produce insulin. For type 2 diabetics, it is possible to eventually get to a point where you can be stable without insulin, but not for everybody and not right away. Insulin treatment is the only way to survive with diabetes for an extended period of time, and the focus needs to be on ensuring that insulin is both affordable and accessible.

Yes, there are things to improve in our food supply, but don't let that distract from how egregiously insane his comments are about diabetes.

I think it started around when he married Jenny McCarthy, who has long been a very vocal anti-vaxxer.

See, for example, this case from Louisiana where the defendant said, "Why don't you just give me a lawyer, dawg," and the state Supreme Court found this to be an ambiguous request as there is no such thing as a "lawyer dog."