taks

i'm sorry to say sand, but this is utter bull****. first of all, nearly EVERYONE gets emergency healthcare, with very few exceptions. you read a news article on CNN and automatically assume this is the gospel of the way things work, rather than the exception. anybody that works full-time is offered healthcare. also, define rich. really, individual healthcare is only about $200-$300/month for something similar to what is offered by most companies. my current individual plan, btw, is $131/month for both my son and i (my wife is high risk so she's significantly more expensive). certainly i have a high deductible, but dropping the deductible to say, $1000, would only double my cost (a little more) to just under $300/month for two people. so there goes your "only the rich and those who can afford insurance" argument. certainly hospitals are concerned about how you are going to pay, they are businesses you know. however, nearly every major city has at least one public hospital that will accept anyone, and wory about the payment later. do a little research and try to rely on news articles a little less and you won't look like such the fool as you always do. taks

actually, no, there's not. the correlation is weak at best over the last 30 years, negative from 1930s to 1970s (take a look, temps dropped but CO2 was going up) and weak again prior to that. solar activity, however, correlates better, and prior to about 1800 (before temp records) we can see very good correlations between activity and guesstimated temperatures (look up the maunder minimum, for example). taks

i believe this is actually a D&D thing, not an NWN2 thing. sneak attack works automatically if there is more than one person facing you, i.e. tag teams will result in endless sneak attacks. if there is only one, i don't know how they work it (rather, do you get a free sneak attack if you are invisible?) taks

to hell there isn't... human nature is to distrust (and fear) that which is different. it is an instinct that allowed early humans to survive. it won't just go away because some rights group thinks it is politically incorrect to feel that way. that the world is primarily heterosexual certainly makes homosexual behavior "different." you are correct, however, that they have every right to object. what i object to is when companies bow to such meaningless pressure. they should take that in the same stride i think GLAAD should take the ad: as humor. taks

it works in the US because we simply spend more. also, the myth is that increased income tax actually increases tax revenues 1:1... not true. low income tax and (relatively) high sales tax would do well. plus, the US doesn't have nearly as much government benefits as denmark. taks

it would actually take in the neighborhood of 20% for a sales tax to work. people on the low-end of the tax bracket now don't really realize how much the top 10% is paying overall (the nonsense coming out of trolls such as hillary about getting rid of the "tax-breaks for the rich" is a joke... they're paying almost all of it, of course they benefit from tax breaks more than the poor). anyway, at the very least, a sales tax could not be questioned on constitutional grounds and it would certainly get rid of the irs. also, it is the only fair way to tax people, i.e. via their usage not their income. the poor would get breaks simply because they are not buying as much. if you want to pay less in taxes, spend less on non-essential items (that means no tax on food, etc.) taks

just because compassionates such as yourself (and any other holding socialist views) think this is reason enough to implement it, doesn't mean it can work. the unfortunate fact is that ideals cannot exist in the real world simply because of human will. demand is impossible to counter in a socialist system, even if it is implemented only for a single aspect, such as health care. "partial" socialism is probably feeding the health-care expansion as it is (referred to as partial because of HMOs and government restrictions). if left to its own devices, it would track with demand (as every other capitalist aspect does) and follow inflation. socialism creates its own excuse for existence, before bankrupting itself. taks

star trek is like, utopian... taks

uh, not true. first of all socialism IS an extreme. there is no such thing as "partial socialism." socialism fails, and always will. you can use capitalistic gains to support socialism, but socialism cannot survive by itself. it will ultimately always bankrupt any society that actually attempts to implement it. the less socialistic aspects a country has, the more prosperous it will be (assuming there are resources to exploit). even sweden has now decided they can no longer handle the brain drain, and 20% unemployment, and they're going to start cutting benefits... not a surprise. if you could, you'd change a different timeline, so it wouldn't matter. btw, this 100 vs. 100000 question depends upon whom you are asking. if you ask the 100 to make the decision, either you live or the 100000 live, they should choose themselves. if you ask the 100000, vice versa. self-preservation is the right, nay requirement, of any living thing. taks

ah yes, more sense from my favorite of the otherwise senseless... you speaketh the truth sand-san... i gotta give you credit sand, when you try, you are actually rather level headed. of course, in the end, i simply like to poke fun at you of all people! taks

the right of self preservation is sacrosanct. the statement "the needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few" is based purely on a socialist viewpoint of life. in general, the needs of the self should always outweigh the needs of anyone else. it seems we've had these "altruism" discussions before, probably initiated by eddoh... sheesh. taks

uh, actually, as far as i've ever heard, christ agreed to sacrifice himself so that the rest of humanity would not have to... very false analogy (and otherwise flawed logic). not that i believe in the whole christ/god thing anyway. taks

short-term, i'd agree. but rugby players probably aren't brain dead, or hawking burger grills, by the time they're 50. taks

like i said, doubtful 1/6 of the population has the game. i wouldn't doubt if less than 1/6 of the population actually owns a computer. either way, somebody used a cool number... not often you hear about exabytes. taks

i still think the bears need a better pass game to win. taks

1.468 exa-bytes. wow. that's 1 quintillion, 468 quadrillion, 611 trillion, 883 billion bytes. OMFG! they only sold what, under a couple hundred thousand, right? yet now it has been DL'd over a billion times. i'm guessing there's a lot of overlap in DLs, however. i.e. i seriously doubt 1/6 of the population of the world has a copy of FO 1/2, hehe... taks

btw, i should mention that i have upgraded, finally, to a 1280x1024 LCD without a hitch (20" dell). not sure why it does not seem to be a problem, but it is not. the 6800 is running just fine. of course, i have a 7800 GS on the way since my son's box needs a vid card. taks

then take it back if it doesn't run. neither of us made any assumptions. comments like this actually make you a prick, you don't even have the benefit of seeming like one. taks

no, she's going to stay a kitten regardless. the procedures merely prevented her kitten mind from having to deal with a cat's body. more than you can know at the moment, tough soon enough you'll see... oh, and for the record, this isn't a discussion about something that may happen in the future, it is already done. the father has posted a VERY long comment on a website somewhere that everyone should read. taks

it is referred to as "32-bit emulation mode." core 2 duo is a 64-bit processor, mr. insomniac. the problem, as noted by meta, isn't the hardware but the OS. winders just plain does not recognize more than 2GB properly. the 64-bit version does, however. there's an addressing issue with winders xp (oddly, 32 bits of address space is 4GB). taks

doesn't invalidate anything sand or i said. certainly sometimes the minimums aren't necessarily true, and you may get away with running things that shouldn't run, but purchasing any product not knowing what it's claimed capabilities are is foolish. following said purchase with another that does not meet the specs is foolish as well. taks

not true at all. there are plenty of others licensed to perform marriages. it's easy to do a google search and find out particulars, which vary from place to place. not really, buuuut... has nothing to do with the marriage itself. typically, places that require blood tests do so only to let you know before hand whether or not you can conceive without drugs. some blood types are incompatible with one another (particularly differing rh factors) unless drugs are used. not true, either. most places want some sort of "class" attendance, but it is not necessarily required, AND, not done only by a pastor. in florida, we had to file for some sort of license, and could get a discount if we did a "class" first. the money we paid to our minister guy (uh, lutheran, whatever they are), was actually applied to the license fee. however, we were not required to do this "class" nor were we required to do it with a pastor. also, it was only one hour of "counseling," hardly significant. the only true statement you've made yet. mostly religious, yes, which is where i think it should remain. 2nd true statement i suppose. next time you go off on a rant opposing something, i suggest actually finding out the truth first. failing to check your "facts" can result in arguments that are easy for others to find flaws with. taks

we went out 5 or 6 times last year. i did about a week over the 4th of july (will do that again this year). as a matter of fact, i think i posted about my 4-wheel trip over timber hill into silverton. 30-mile campground is in the least densely populated county of colorado. mostly bears down there, and mountain lions. taks

all i know is that the blues won again, with yet another shutout for legace. give him a few teammates that can actually handle a puck, and oila, goaltender. 12-4-4 since murray, btw. and two of those losses were right as he started. taks

not in colorado. you have to book campsites as soon as the website opens (i.e. starts accepting reservations) on january 1. nearly every public campsite with facilities is booked within a month of reservation acceptance, beginning season open (sometime in late may) through labor day (early september). the other family i camp with is big into camping. they have a trailer they bring full of gear, including fully packed 3-day backpacks for scattering after arriving at the main campsite. unfortunately, my son is too small to really hike (just under 4 years old, not even 4 feet tall yet) so we can't go hiking yet. with the exception of a proper tent, we could all winter camp (i.e. in the snow) as well. taks