Mahollinder's Waterfall
You correctly answered 11 out of the 12 possible questions, which means you did better on the quiz than 92% of the general public.
Mmm. Yummy. A Jamaican knows more about these things than 92% of Americans. Some of those demographics are actually quite appalling, though.
18-29 year olds got a mean score of ~4. Men 6. Women ~5. 30-50+ ~6.
Hitler was for nationalized heath care.
Bismark instituted nationalized healthcare in the late 19th century through three major pieces of legislation. Hitler attempted to revoke the health insurance bills of 1883, 84 and 89. However, the German people rebuffed him for it and he had to back down and keep the institution intact. And both Bismarck and Hitler were avid German conservatives.
Name one thing that Hitler promoted that is now being promoted by conservatives.
I could: Nationalism and criticism of sexual permissiveness, to name a few, but why would I? American conservatism isn't German conservatism and German conservatism wasn't American conservatism in the middle of the 20th century. Equally, Liberal policies don't, in any way mimic the policies of Hitler and the Nazi party--not in the middle 20th century and not now.
And clearly you didn't read what I wrote. Let me repeat myself, since you missed it. "Fascism in both Italy and Germany were right-wing in their respective countries, and bore little (superficial at best) resemblance to the liberalism of the day." Furthermore, in both Italy and Germany, Fascists ran on an anti-liberalism platform, and in Germany the Nazi party purposefully positioned itself to the right of the DNVP, the original right-wing party of Germany in the 20th century. A simple look at the political framework and the platforms the parties themselves drew and founded would tell you that.
Below is the political spectrum of Germany in the time of Hitler.
Far left <---Communist Party (KPD)---><---Social Democrats (SPD)---><---Catholic Center party (Zentrum)---><---German Nationalist People's Party (DNVP)---><---Nationalist Socialist Party (NSDAP)---> Far Right
Furthermore, Nazi ideology was one of mythology: volk, one of anti-liberalism, anti-socialism and anti-communism, and lebensraum to name a few. Hitler was a German conservative, a radical European right-winger.
Fascism in both Italy and Germany were right-wing in their respective countries, and bore little (superficial at best) resemblance to the liberalism of the day. End of story.
Outside of Medicare/aid, there is no "nationalized health care" in America. And while I'm not sure what you're referencing with drug companies, unions are only exempt from, most recently, the "Cadillac Tax".
at least for teens... love is only in their jeans...wait.... ;)
So do I. But the "entitlement" in entitlement program ain't got nothing to do with whether people feel like they're owed anything. That's not how the term is used. It's from the classical usage, not the modern one. That is, it's about assurance that citizens and some legal-aliens are guaranteed benefits that they otherwise wouldn't receive in the absence of certain resources.
I have a terminological disagreement. Though federal entitlement programs might appear (and might be "charitable"), they are not charities. To represent them as such, and to disagree with their utility as such, is to misrepresent an entitlement program. Federal apportioning of tax dollars isn't charity.
I think people need to stop deifying the contemporary politicians, pointing to them as if they are some infallible god heads.
Shame on anyone who deifies anyone or anything. But, with respect to opinions on contemporary issues, I'm sticking with contemporary politicians. And I will actively agree or disagree with their opinions. I nor anyone else can do that with a bunch of people whose opinions on things that didn't even exist when they were alive are static and only relevant to constrained and particular issues 300 years-ago.
FCC regulations when it comes to speech is an attack on freedom of speech.
What are those regulations that are deemed tyrannical?
And property being our money. Our money is our property, and if the government is to cease it for the benefit of a select few (welfare recipients) it would be considered tyrannical (mainly from the Libertarian viewpoint, following Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin, possibly not John Adams or Alexander Hamilton).
Money isn't property, though.
I think you should watch the video. It's just more unsubstantiated rhetoric. There's no evidence brought to the front that shows that the government in question is tyrannical. It's just assumed.
...it's on the ceasing of property.
Whose property, and what makes the event tyrannical?
Left and Right, censorship is supported by politicians and this is tyrannical.
Ejemplos por favor. Who is being censored?
And people need to stop deifying the founding fathers, pointing to them as if they are some infallible godheads. They lived in a social and political atmosphere that was fundamentally different from the one most people in the world lives in now. Their 18th century opinion isn't necessarily or universally relevant, or even applicable in any case of modern considerations.
One day a nurse at an insane asylum entered a room to discover that everyone inside of it had been decapitated. The man who did it was standing in the room with a head in his hand. The nurse called the authorities, and when they arrived the man was still there with the head in hand. When asked why he did it, he said "I wanted to see the expression on their faces when they woke up"....
Go to http://www.newegg.com or http://www.tigerdirect.com, they are the two most popular, and probably best distributors around for electronics. And yes, they have netbook sections just for you, Joe. Netbooks are meant to be slipstreamed laptops. They're good for office work and the like. Most won't come with anything over 1GB and about 200Gb harddrive. The processor will probably be around 2ghz at best. So, the specs you mentioned are typical. And yes and no the numbers are indicative of a superior product. Though there are subspecs that are needed to make a better assessment that most people don't care about.
For instance, while there is a processor speed (eg. 1.5ghz) a single core 3.0ghz might be faster than a dualcore at 2.13ghz if the cache is larger on the single core. Memory is similar. If things like throughput are higher on a higher-end memory stick, 1gb of a higher-end memory might outperform 2gb of lower-end memory.
