Thankfully a government default was avoided. Apx 300,000 people were out of work for a period of time, and for them until they receive back pay (if they receive back pay) they will have additional credit card debt, will be behind on bills, probably have mounting late fees on those bills, maybe had to significantly dig into their savings. ... but at least they will be able to get back on their feet. And others avoided being furloughed thanks to aproximately 10% of Republicans doing what over 90% of the American people wanted and voting to avoid default and get government back to work. Does anyone else find it odd that those exact same Republicans (144 in the House and 18 in the Senate) ALL delayed and voted down the Farm Bill over 3 Billion dollars because it was too expensive, but proudly and gladly waisted 24 Billion for absolutely, positively, nothing at all? Anyone?  

Some of the buttons aren't working. All the main ones, support, dispute, Create, Browse, etc at the top work. But no up or down voting, dismissing old debates, the scroll down menus don't work, and can't "see all" arguments are open them on the page to reply. A little annoying. Especially if someone posts a replay more than two arguments deep, all I can do is stare at it stewing over all the clever things I would have said ><.:.   (joke, but  I really can't post anything if it's more than a couple arguments.)   Wondering if it's just me or my settings, or something with the site or Chrome.

Apparently there was a Universal vacuum when it came to "clever" phrasing concerning an Asian basketball player. Ignoring he's not the first Asian basketball player apparently as well. So are these in good humor or racist?

I notice when I'm thinking it's my own voice, which seems natural at least to me, but than I though, is it? Maybe some hear a parent talking to them or some voice they do not recognize. Well, most likely most of us hear the voice we perceive ourselves to have (though we usually find "I don't sound like that" when our voice is recorded). So, do most hear their own voice? If so what if you are born mute, what does the voice in your head sound like then? ... and no I'm not crazy, everyone talks to themselves in their head. Right? Right?

So from what I can gather their god Paterno heard about some kid getting literally fucked in the ass by one of his coaches and did jack all about it. Hence they fired him. Now my first reaction is that he should be hung from a goal post by his balls. I don't care that he didn't do it, I care he didn't do anything about it. Everyone who knew should be looking at jail time IMO. However, you have these kids protesting "wah they fired the coach, wah." Really? Their goddamn football games are more important than little boys getting raped? I say fuck Penn State, their entire program. Suspend them from playing any sport for the next five years and fire every single person in the football program and start from scratch. It's a game for christsake. Maybe I'm wrong. Anyone care to defend the creepy old man who doesn't care if kids are getting raped?

Background: You are walking along the beach deep in thought, miles from any civilazation. You have neither a phone nor an iPad (nor any other means of communication) on you. It is just you and your sturdy walking stick. It's a nice stick, about your height and strong as any piece of wood, but basically it's you... and you're a good swimmer. CONUNDRUM: 2 people are balanced on a scale and should one fall off the scale the other will drown in the quickly rising tide. The waves are coming in fast. You have time to swim there and back but you do not have the strength to save both and the waves would drown one surely before you could go back to save the second. They are both tied and surely will drown if the waves reach them. You know this, there's no sneaky way out of the fact that if you leave one there they will drown. **There is only 1 correct moral answer to this question. WARNING: it takes great thought and I will be surprised if anyone gets it right.** NOTE: I'll tell you the correct answer in a couple days, or let you know if someone gets it right.  WHO THEY ARE: You know them both. 1 is a long time criminal who has been in and out of jail perpetually his entire life - he however has 3 kids who depend on him since their mother passed away and the worst thing he's been convicted of is stealing food. This he does often however and he's sceaming "save the girl." He's also an alcoholic and could hold a decent job if he would just stay sobber a while. 2 is a young lady, late teens. She is very attractive, but selfish. She's something of a bully in fact, teasing poor girls and ugly girls constantly. There are many who would be happy should she drown. On the other hand she is young, as mentioned, and is only acting as she's seen others her status act without much thought. Also, she's crying and screeming with little thought (as is her way) "Save me please, please save me I can't swim and he's a criminal!" So again, who do you save? There is 1 and only 1 correct answer in the moral sense and all othe answers are morally wrong. It does take thought. Your first hunch is not right and I promise simply "guessing" will never get you the right answer, no matter your answer. That is your only hint.   **ANSWER** Enigmatic's answer was great, however in the act of untying the individual the scale would sink as you would need to climb on to it in order to untie him. If you could untie it quick enough it may work. You're assuming one or the other knows how to swim as well. Ax was on the right track with the sturdy walking stick, as much as that may irk him :) Use the stick to hold up one end of the scale by placing it beneath, than save the other and go back. The main point is who different people deem more worth saving and why though. It usually says something about ourselves. 

Read the instructions for the original Morality Test to fully undestand the rules. It takes great thought to come to the correct conclusion and your first assumption is incorrect, in line with how I described "Morality Test" **This one's easier** It so happens that you are living in London in 1349 and you love animals. In fact you love them so much you've not bothered to kill the rats infesting your barn. Your father has been laying traps and when he's at work you disarm them because even though they scare you, you know they are soft and fluffy and would kind of like to pet one. You are a young girl, no more than 10, and sound asleep when you hear your beloved Mittens and your beloved Rover making an aweful racket in the barn. No one else hears it, and feeling safe on your farm you go into the barn where you hear the growling and hissing armed with nothing but a large stick and a steel resolve to brave this out. Mittens and Rover are both torn to ribbons, bleeding terribly with a singly extraordinarily large rat trapped in a corner. They are dying. The rat is killing them, though they've fought bravely. Obviously you try to kill the rat with the stick, but it is too fast. You try for what seems an hour but has actually only been minutes amidst hissing and growling. More than once during this melee your small pets have saved you from being scratched or bit by this super rodent. You swing desperately again and hit a support beem which had been chewed nearly through by rats. The barn shifts and a beem falls and kills the rat! You've destroyed the support for the barn you realize with your mighty swing and the whole thing is coming down. Your brave and beloved pets begin whimpering. They are bloody from the hard fought battle but before the whole thing falls you can only save one. They won't move, frozen in fear. Who do you pick up and take to safety? The puppy or the kitten. There is only 1 correct answer, all other answers are incorrect. Your first guess is worng. I will tell you the right answer in a couple days (or when I get to it) or if someone gets it right I will let you know.   **ANSWER** Tons of good answers, but as someone mentioned it was during the black plague. If a rat is attacking a puppy and kitten there is likely something wrong with it, Black Plague, rabies, whatever. Both animals were bleeding from the fight it mentioned. Unfortunately during this time and with little medicine available or understanding of disease, letting them both die is very likely to save many other lives.

I'm late on this, I moved and somehow destroyed my hard drive and have been trying to make up a week of work. But apparently angry people = small penis according to SP. And it was one of the funniest episodes I've ever seen this year, or in years actually. Full disclosure: Yes I measured, any guy who says he hasn't is lying. I'm 0.1 below exact average length and 0.3 above exact average girth. All in average range though. Not bad for a white guy I think ;)  

1. Less than 3% of what they do is abortion related. And abortion is *not* NOT pulbically funded. I cannot emphasise that enough. 0 tax dollars go toward abortion anyway. 2. The vast majority of what they do is breast exams, cancer screening, etc. 3. Pregnancy prevention methods like the pill is estimated to prevent 2million unwanted births a year. This would equal aproximately 800k abortions according to statistics. Therefore it actually prevents abortions - it prevents far more abortions in fact than crazy people outside protesting. 4. For a large portion of women planned parenthood is the only place they can receive healthcare. It's estimated catching disease, providing reproductive care, etc is estimated to *save* billions a year. So ending it would actually increase our national debt in the long run.

Ignoring the fact that the basis of his campaign is a birth certificate any retard can look up... 1. He's bankrupted more casinos than have made it. 2. His idea of foreign policy is "fuck china" great tiger what does that mean? 3. Why does he keep saying "Uge" instead of "huge"? 4. And seriously, wtf is up w/ his hair? I'm 32. I'm aware either I'm going grey or shaving. Pick one. Save the gerbals. Vote no on Trump's rug.   As you can see, not a serious debate. Since I'm not really into making debates and no one is talking about the deal in Wisconsin, Lybia, the Gov shutting down, thought I'd lightly approach an actual thing going on. Trum is basically the Tea Party personified... problem with being personified is it sheds light on who your are. Anyway, Make fun of Trump, he deserves it. Defend him and prepared to be ass-raped.

1. Where are the people running CD and why hasn't there been a debate. 2. What do you thinK? 3. (for the record if anyone is wondering why I don't come here anymore, it's because no one is talking about important stuff... like this)

I'm watching Riddick and Vin Diesel's retarded acting reminded me of Tosh's standup. One of the jokes, I'm winging it: "... that joke was great unless you're a Vin Diesel fan, in which case you shouldn't be here, you should be home, coloring an elephant praying someone puts it on the fridge; but they wont because elephants aren't orange you idiot."

The Bush tax cuts of 2001 are set to expire. Both sides have agreed to continue the middle class tax cuts. Pending issues: Those making over 250k/ year should receive an additional tax cut for money made over the 250k watermark. (It is additional, they still receive a tax cut on the first 250k according to the democratic plan.) Inheritance tax: This is called "Death Tax" on the right, estates and moneys over a specific 7 figure mark inherited are currently taxed at a lower rate than one's income, significantly so. The democratic plan calls for inheritance to be taxed at the rate at which one would pay if they were to earn the inheritance, instead of inheriting it naturally. Outside of those two issues, all points are agreed upon. House democrats, and some Senate democrats wish to get rid of the tax cut over the 250k watermark, and to increase the inheritance tax. Obama and republicans have agreed to include the cut for over the 250k watermark, and to keep the current inheritance tax. In essense keeping all of the Bush cuts. These two items alone will add over 700billion to the national deficit. Many democrats feel this is too expensive, and that it is better for all taxes to go back to the rates during Clinton's Presidency, then to cave on these two issues. Others feel that, with the incoming House Republicans, they will need to sign off on a tax deal with less cuts for the middle class, and more for the rich, if they do not act now. How should democrats procede? Other Background: Clinton supports Obama's compromise. Over 80% of the population, Republicans included believe the tax cuts for the rich should not continue. Over 50% of the population believes it is better to discontinue all tax cuts, than to continue tax cuts for the rich. Contrary to much media, those making over 250k are getting a tax cut either way, just not as large a cut on the money they make over 250k in a year.

Day 1. So there was this lady who worked somewhere in the agricultural department. In 1984 she talked about the first white farmers that came to her for help. She at the time did not work for the government, she worked for a non-profit... Let me repeat that I know Joe and his ilk are slow SHE DID NOT EVEN WORK IN THE GOV AT THE TIME OF THE SPEACH. At any rate, now she works in the Agricultural dept. of the US gov. A far, far right wing blogger posted a speach where she seems to say she did not want to help the white farmer. Fox covered it all day long - literally go to media matters, Obama's "racist" admin got more time than the oil spill. They covered Obama hiring (even though he likely never even heard of the lady, it was mid level in the Ag dept for christsake) they covered how Obama hired this terrible racist lady more than any one other subject. The video was there. It was obvious she hates white people... okay, they fire her. The Obama administration then fires her due to what Fox reported. Day 2. Turns out this far far right blogger edited the tape. The story the lady told was not racist at all. It was a story about learning that we are all kind of in this together and whatnot. Actually, it was sort of inspirational when one hears the tape uncut. (note in addition, it is a fact this lady's fatehr was actually killed when she was 16 by the KKK. This makes it an even more inspirational story, however, it does not need this extra fact, just a note.) Keep in mind, Fox was the only station to "break" this news. I guess other channels just don't take any stupid shit a blogger sends them as news, whatever. Drunk I decide to see what silly shit fox is saying... did they apologize for taking a hand in the firing of this lady? Did they apologize for not checking sources? Fuck no, they blamed Obama for firing her... all day long... that is what they did, they blamed Obama, for listening to Fox, and firing someone they said should be fired. Granted, I would never listen to Fox, and I assume everthing they say is edited, a lie, or a diseased hallucination of Beck's alcohol and pain killer riddled mind. But okay, (not Obama but) whoever is in charge of the Agr. Dept fired her based on Fox "News" He should not have listened to Fox... obviously they're retarded, but this admin has a retarded habit of trying to reach across the isle even though they just bite even if you have a treat for them. Fox News was wrong about the story... Fox blames Obama for listening to them. So seriously, do you watch this crap? Do you do it sobber? I do, drunk, to keep up because I need a lot of dead brain cells to keep up. By morning my brain cells are regenerated so I cannot even look at it. It just seems too dumb to me after a night's sleep, like trying to decipher dog's barking or something. This is what Qymosobi was talking about (though god knows what his take will be on this. Maybe the whole thing was a white conspiracy.) Fox race bates. They use dumb people to push a political agenda that helps their sponsors like those "trade money for gold" cons, and they twist things. Yes, MSNBC is left, yes CNN is a bit further left than right (but in the middle, and right by world-non-US standards) But, they don't just make shit up to feed the retarded masses. Fox has a monopoly and just making shit up. I am truly interested what silly defense anyone can come up with on the right, I'm sure I'll need a shot after.

So it's an issue that the right wing has been crying about for a decade now. Obama is to allow increased offshore drilling as part of his energy plan. Now that he has made yet another compromise with the general idealism on the right. Is offshore drilling a good idea, and will conservatives finally stop with the "he's the antichrist" bs?

While we have a two party system each of whom claim to represent the people, it seems there has been a steady shift of power from the many to the few in this country for the last 200 years, and it makes little difference who is in power. Shockingly, the Supreme Court ruled 5 - 4 to roll back laws against corporate political donations today. Already special interests of one sort or another have a stranglehold on nearly every representative, and this makes it easier for corporate America to achieve their own agendas more times than not at the expense of the majority. From a synical perspective one could say this is the free market in action, why shouldn't those with the most money be able to spend it however they choose? And if they can get people to vote against their own self-interest through clever ads and slogans, who is really to blame? If we elect officials willing to make back-door deals that favor corporate America, who is really to blame? On the other hand, is the ignorance of the majority really an excuse to allow the slow destruction of rule by the people? I'm guessing everyone from the most progressive liberal to the most delusional teabagger will vote People > Money, maybe not though, in either case, add what you think a solution would be. Simply complaining without any thought is below you... most of you  

wtf is going on here? writeFlash({"src":"http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/press/rsorp94pr.htm","width":"100","height":"100"});

Kids are fat. http://kidshealth.org/parent/general/body/overweight_obesity.html When I was a kid, I knew like 1 fat kid, now almost every kid is fat. That 1 fat kid was tortured mercilessly until he stopped being fat, or became very very funny (hence why fat people are usually funny according to me) But soon they're gonna be the majority. Before that happens action must be taken. I say that whenever someone sees a fat kid, they should be allowed to chase them around the block a few times with a stick, maybe tie an old rubber tire to their back first just for fun. Not only would that help childhood obesity, but it would also be absolutely hilarious.

Here's the most common definition: http://cosmology.berkeley.edu/Education/BHfaq.html#q1 (and there's a bunch of other good junk around that site, I like it because it makes things simple without dumbing it down too much, if you're interested in such things) On the one hand it's probably the most mysterious, awe inspiring, imagination igniting thing known to man right now. On the other, it destroys everything in it's path, and chances are somewhere in the center of our cluster of galaxies lies a massive black hole that will swallow all but the furthest stars (ours not being one of the furthest)

Basically who is the best. Ignore for a second you're own political views, who can win, who would run, etc. Simply, who is/would be if they were in it, the best face. Don't pick dad or grandpa, I have to know him.  ie, if you like Limbaugh, you better have a magical excuse, because he's ridiculous ie, ie, I happen to disagree funtamentally with all but a handful of "Republican" (not Conservative) policies. Yet, I'm going to make an honest choice. There ya go. Tell a friend because I only have a few Conservatives/Republicans/"Independants who are really Conservative but like saying they're "Independant" on my friend list.

First, if you're a birther, you should probably find another site because you're dumb. That said though, they're out there. New poll says almost 6 out of 10 people who identify themselves as republican either think Obama isn't a citizen, or "aren't sure." And the Republican leadership, though I'm sure 99.9% know these people are completely insane, for the most part refuse to take a stand against the nutjobs. (And the ones like McCain who have told these people they're crazy deserve credit for not caving to the lowest possible commone denominator.) The question is though, is this where the Republican party dies? Will they be relegated to the few crazies out there? Or will they find a leader to take charge, disavow the nut wing out there, and bring some sense to the other side of the political spectrum in DC?  

In prison I think you're supposed to walk up to the biggest baddest dude and punch them in the face, so that people will think you're tough and not rape you later. Do new members seek out people with a bunch of points and "punch them in the face?"

Racial profiling is a real problem, there's a million stats that show that cops of all colors target civilians of darker color. But is it racial profiling everytime a minority runs into a cop who's just kind of a d!ck? Henry Louis Gates Jr. is a well known scholar with multiple well-deserved awards. He was approached by an officer for breaking into his own home, and I guess the officer either did not like his attitude, or Mr. Gates was really making a ruckus, because even though it was his own home he eventually proved, he was arrested for disturbing the peace. This is odd, because it is extraordinarily difficult for an elderly gentleman to make enough noise to "disturb the peace," in any situation I think, but this is near a college, with frats and all. The cop was in the wrong obviously, and charges were dropped. But is this a case of racism? Or just an a-hole cop? There's no way to know for sure obviously, but I'm curious about your opinion.

An estimated 2000 photos depicting torture exist which have not been released to the public. Originally Obama had stated his wish that all things, including these sesnitive photos, be open to the public so that we can see what really happened, and presumably make sure it does not happen again. After talking with generals on the ground, he has changed his mind, agreeing with the opinion that the photos could only be used to fuel hatred, and potentially endanger soldiers. The ACLU disagrees, their belief is that the torture itself insights hatred, and the photos will not add more too that. They believe the photos being public are necessary to pursue legal action, and this is a case of justice denied. Ultimately it is not up to Obama, or the generals on the ground, or the public, but the judicial branch as to whether we will see these photos soon, after the war is complete, or never. I'm interested in hearing any insight you may have