I think you need to think about that question. If the democrats were bad, then the republicans were better.
I don't have any grand illusions of hope and change, I just can't stand the rationalizing by the left. What happened? Oops. We fucked up. No, it was the smart planning by republicans? No! It was anything besides Obama.
It was Obama and his administration that gave it away. Blame him for once.
Just the government does that? Liberals on separation of church and state. Rednecks on freedom of religion. Everyone is using the bits that shine for them.
I agree. Don't forget the auto-pilot on the RV. It's too bad we can't remove the stupid from the equation. Responsibility is not taught as much as it should be these days. Until it is, we need something for the interim to keep the kids from killing me.
If we didn't need laws to tell us not to do stupid things, we would have no laws at all. It's human nature to do stupid things. We are not all 40 somethings with a good grasp of our own mortality. We don't all think that the consequences of our distraction might be the death of someone else.
I am the type that you can't discern, yet I know I am not paying as much attention to the road when I'm talking to someone else. On the cell phone or otherwise. The group that is in the most danger is young people with less driving experience. When you add to that, trying to navigate a keypad or touchscreen to dial a number...
Before cell phones and based only on my personal observations, there were fewer distracted people on the road. It's a daily occurrence now to see someone on their cell phone wandering across the median. I know the first RE will be about my personal observations compared to studies, but it is obvious to me that cell phones have made the road more dangerous. I have a hands free set-up in my car. Even with that I find myself paying less attention to traffic when I'm conversing. We need fewer distractions, we need laws to deal with all distractions, we need car companies to have hands free in all cars.
35% of households earning less than $25,000 have broadband access to the Internet. That's 35% more poor that can now afford to take courses. If the number was 10%... it's still a positive number.
Re: Re: Bias much?
I think you need to think about that question. If the democrats were bad, then the republicans were better.
I don't have any grand illusions of hope and change, I just can't stand the rationalizing by the left. What happened? Oops. We fucked up. No, it was the smart planning by republicans? No! It was anything besides Obama.
It was Obama and his administration that gave it away. Blame him for once.
Re: Re: Bias much?
Both
Re: Religious leaders?
All religious leaders use the bible, right? I don't know how you rate so high on insightful.
Re: Who doesn't?
Just the government does that? Liberals on separation of church and state. Rednecks on freedom of religion. Everyone is using the bits that shine for them.
Re: Re: Re: Not so odd after all
Taliban types? Those crazy ideologues...
Democrats and their unicorns. Washington was a taliban type.
1 face, 2 parties.
Bias much?
The democrats lost for a reason. Get over it.
Re: I'm going with Snowden being CIA to take a shot at NSA.
Google man fights the google wherever he can.
http://www.zdnet.com/how-did-mainstream-media-get-the-nsa-prism-story-so-hopelessly-wrong-7000016822/
Re: Re:
Why can't the studios try the tactics that might work? Make all movies available, make them convenient to access and price them to sell in volume?
Re: Re: Re: Re: This time I don't agree
I agree. Don't forget the auto-pilot on the RV. It's too bad we can't remove the stupid from the equation. Responsibility is not taught as much as it should be these days. Until it is, we need something for the interim to keep the kids from killing me.
Re: Re: This time I don't agree
If we didn't need laws to tell us not to do stupid things, we would have no laws at all. It's human nature to do stupid things. We are not all 40 somethings with a good grasp of our own mortality. We don't all think that the consequences of our distraction might be the death of someone else.
Re:
I am the type that you can't discern, yet I know I am not paying as much attention to the road when I'm talking to someone else. On the cell phone or otherwise. The group that is in the most danger is young people with less driving experience. When you add to that, trying to navigate a keypad or touchscreen to dial a number...
Re: Disabling cel phones in cars a stupid idea
Requiring technology that restrains you from flying through the windshield in a frontal collision. I see all kinds of bad scenarios from this.
Re: Disabling cel phones in cars a stupid idea
Or you're wearing a seat belt and you drown when your car flips into a ditch. Yeah. Seat belts kill too. lol
This time I don't agree
Before cell phones and based only on my personal observations, there were fewer distracted people on the road. It's a daily occurrence now to see someone on their cell phone wandering across the median. I know the first RE will be about my personal observations compared to studies, but it is obvious to me that cell phones have made the road more dangerous. I have a hands free set-up in my car. Even with that I find myself paying less attention to traffic when I'm conversing. We need fewer distractions, we need laws to deal with all distractions, we need car companies to have hands free in all cars.
Re: Re: Re:
Show us the exact text from Google where they say this. In quotes please. From Google, not Oracle.
35% more
35% of households earning less than $25,000 have broadband access to the Internet. That's 35% more poor that can now afford to take courses. If the number was 10%... it's still a positive number.
Judge Luddite
Enough said
Yep
Wishful thinking
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Is Obama republican? Cause the current administration might actually be responsible for things that have happened in the last 4 years.