Jump to content

Our government is insane


dwar0123

Recommended Posts

We all come from a long, long line of ancestors to share the adventure of life today. How that progressed is one of the most interesting searches today.

I worthy topic in its own right, reminds me of when I read up on the actual Adam and Eve(spoiler, they never met)

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-chromosomal_Adam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe this puts the views of some Middle East leaders in perspective.

 

Simply put: Not only the Taliban have weird believes that are influencing politics.

 

Rik

:P Right, one group are killers, the others are rustic oddballs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most MP's are expected to be available to help their locals with their problems several days a week. Ministers will generally staff them with a senior aide. People will ask them to intervene in everything from problems with government departments to consumer complaints to school board elections.

In the US this tends to be done by members of the state legislatures, not federal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I worthy topic in its own right, reminds me of when I read up on the actual Adam and Eve(spoiler, they never met)

 

http://en.wikipedia....tochondrial_Eve

http://en.wikipedia....hromosomal_Adam

 

I think you need to think more about this. Matrilinear descent is pretty restrictive. For example, any woman who has sons drops out of the tree. The most recent common female ancestor=/=mitochondrial Eve. The only certain statement you can make is that the most common recent ancestor is certainly more recent than either of these limiting cases.

 

In fact probability simulations suggest that non-isolated populations (i.e. everyone except isolated amazon tribes) shares a common ancestor at around 200 BC. :)

 

It seems virtually certain that Humans share both a male and female common ancestor much more recently than mitochondrial eve or y-chromosomal adam.

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to admit when I first read this headline, I thought of this story:

 

Meshweaver

haha, a funny story. I suspect what is really going on is not that anyone with authority cares much about the spider, but rather that the right contractors (ie connected to politicians) don't have the work. So the politicians find a ruse to hold up the job, giving the general some time to rethink which subs he hires for the earthwork, paving, etc. If it goes on long enough, perhaps the whole job will get rebid. Nutty conspiracy theory? Maybe. But is the spider thing any more rational?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

haha, a funny story. I suspect what is really going on is not that anyone with authority cares much about the spider, but rather that the right contractors (ie connected to politicians) don't have the work. So the politicians find a ruse to hold up the job, giving the general some time to rethink which subs he hires for the earthwork, paving, etc. If it goes on long enough, perhaps the whole job will get rebid. Nutty conspiracy theory? Maybe. But is the spider thing any more rational?

It may not be more rational, but happens all the time in the UK, either for wildlife habitats or archaeological remains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you need to think more about this. Matrilinear descent is pretty restrictive. For example, any woman who has sons drops out of the tree. The most recent common female ancestor=/=mitochondrial Eve. The only certain statement you can make is that the most common recent ancestor is certainly more recent than either of these limiting cases.

 

In fact probability simulations suggest that non-isolated populations (i.e. everyone except isolated amazon tribes) shares a common ancestor at around 200 BC. :)

 

It seems virtually certain that Humans share both a male and female common ancestor much more recently than mitochondrial eve or y-chromosomal adam.

It's Wikipedia, if you want to fix it, go ahead. But I think you will find if you read it that it clearly mentions all your points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe this puts the views of some Middle East leaders in perspective.

 

Simply put: Not only the Taliban have weird believes that are influencing politics.

 

Rik

:P Right, one group are killers, the others are rustic oddballs.

?!? Both groups contain killers and oddballs. Some of them may be rustic.

 

Rik

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been away at the beach. Maybe I'll go back!

 

From the cited article:

 

 

Broun, a medical doctor by training, serves on the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.

[[/Quote]

 

This must make for interesting meetings. At least he is no longer dong medical diagnoses, I guess every cloud has a silver lining. Oh wait, Bill Frist did a long distance diagnosis of a Florida woman from the comfort of the Senate.

 

Of course Mike is correct. If a congressional district is filled with idiots, they are entitled to be represented by an idiot. Fair is fair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Broun isn't a senator, he's a congressman. The difference is that he isn't answerable to the broad range of citizens who might live in a state; he's only answerable to the mostly-monolithic constituents in his district. The House of Representatives includes (proportionately) many more nutjobs on both extremes of the political spectrum than the Senate does.

True, but there are some clueless characters in the Senate, too. Ted Stevens calling the Internet "a series of tubes", for instance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Translation: Gerben has a major disagreement on the government on the policy issue that matters the most to him.

 

Not too far from the truth, but majors disagreements having been piling up lately on other issues too.

 

I have a theory that the reason we have no competent politicians is that if you are competent, you would be smart enough not to become a politician.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a theory that the reason we have no competent politicians is that if you are competent, you would be smart enough not to become a politician.

 

 

I have come to consider this a very serious possibility. I have led a fairly sheltered life, but I don't want someone digging into every stupid thing I have ever said or done. Who wants to have to constantly explain oneself? I have thought perhaps one explanation for Obama's lackluster performance at the first debate was from a feeling of "Good God, if they don't know who I am by now, what's the point?". I thought this applied to Bush I in 1992 as well. Really it seems like an awful life. Flying around in Air Force 1 might be nice for a day or two. Then I'm done.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I need to vent, and this thread seems to fit my need.

 

Continuing the thread about Georgia congressional candidates, the Republican candidate for the US House in the district where I reside shuns the press and refuses to debate the incumbent Democratic candidate. Tonight, my wife and I tuned to one of the local channels, expecting something else, but instead found a news special, purportedly to meet these candidates. I was actually interested, since I thought it would be the chance to hear the Republican speak, finally. It turns out the Republican was issued an invitation, but declined. The Democrat was there, and I guess gets the full hour to himself for free. The Democrat also has a massive monetary edge, and runs ads almost daily in the local media. The ads themselves seem to be, in my opinion, fairly effective, and not even all that negative toward the Republican (the PACs and superPACs are taking care of the negative ads on both sides).

 

The punchline: the Republican is favored to win the seat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I need to vent, and this thread seems to fit my need.

 

Continuing the thread about Georgia congressional candidates, the Republican candidate for the US House in the district where I reside shuns the press and refuses to debate the incumbent Democratic candidate. Tonight, my wife and I tuned to one of the local channels, expecting something else, but instead found a news special, purportedly to meet these candidates. I was actually interested, since I thought it would be the chance to hear the Republican speak, finally. It turns out the Republican was issued an invitation, but declined. The Democrat was there, and I guess gets the full hour to himself for free. The Democrat also has a massive monetary edge, and runs ads almost daily in the local media. The ads themselves seem to be, in my opinion, fairly effective, and not even all that negative toward the Republican (the PACs and superPACs are taking care of the negative ads on both sides).

 

The punchline: the Republican is favored to win the seat.

Probably fears getting a question about rape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...