Advodad

Why did Obama criticize personal ambition in his State of the Union speech?

Sometimes the questions from Quora can be downright strange. The quote the asker is referring to:

“These achievements are a testament to the courage, selflessness, and teamwork of America’s Armed Forces. At a time when too many of our institutions have let us down, they exceed all expectations. They’re not consumed with personal ambition. They don’t obsess over their differences. They focus on the mission at hand. They work together.”

This one’s easy. When you are trying to indoctrinate people into becoming part of the socialist proletariat, you have to be careful with your words? Oh wait, Ayn Rand called and wants her insane philosophy back.


If I say you are consumed with eating pie, that does not mean I’m anti-pie, it means you are eating too much pie. It means you are hurting your health and ignoring your family for the glory of Banana Cream. Gluttony in any form is bad for you, no matter how delicious it is.

Personal ambition, like all good things, must be used in moderation. 

See There Will Be Blood or 1997-2006 United States Housing Bubble or Napoleon Bonaparte or McCarthyism or Watergate to realize why all consuming personal ambition can be a detriment.  

Also look at Martin Luther King, Jr. or Mahatma Gandhi or Winston Churchill or Bill Gates or Steve Jobs or Entrepreneurship or Conscious Capitalism or Free Marketsto see how it can be a good thing. 

(Not that any of those people or concepts could or should be compared to each other individually, other than to say they all were outcomes of great personal ambition.)

He wasn’t criticizing personal ambition, he was simply stating that one of the things that makes America great is our ability to work together to make things better. This isn’t some subtle promotion of socialism, it’s a way of talking about how awesome things can be accomplished when people team up for a greater purpose. (See Amish barns, Community Service, The Moon Landing, WWII, Democracy, Etc…)

No man is an island. If anything, it was a subtle dig at the banking industry who put self interest ahead of the entire economy. That’s a stretch though.

Personal ambition is great, and you can get really far with it, but $20 says no matter how far you go on your own, there were people along the way who helped.

He wasn’t busting out his communist flag.

He was praising the shared sacrifice of our men and women in uniform.

He’s not a cartoon villain out to destroy America, and the sooner you get that, the more reasonable the discourse can be.

If the wealthiest 1% of Americans shouldn’t own 40% of the country’s financial wealth, what is a more appropriate breakdown?

Back before we got all scared of communism, in 1956, America didn’t use In God We Trust as its motto. Instead, it was E pluribus unum,or (if you don’t speak Latin) Out of many, one.

To me, it meant that we are stronger when we all work together than if we are on our own. Throughout our history, Americans made sacrifices for the many. Sometimes that meant forgoing personal gain. During WWII, the wealthy were taxed at astronomical rates, and they made that sacrifice to make sure the country we loved survived a world war. The top tax bracket was at 91% until 1963. It didn’t get down to 50% until 1987. Currently, for the top 400 income earners, it’s around 17%.

I think the distribution of wealth is less important to Americans than accountability, fairness, and the solvency of the bottom 80% and their growth rate.

The rich getting richer isn’t an issue, unless there’s a direct correlation to the poor getting poorer.

Looking at more of Mother Jones’s charts:
Notice that payroll tax, which even the poorest of folks pay, continues to climb upwards at the same time. Notice how the folks at the top don’t have to pay into Social Security once they hit $106,800. Here’s a look at a Helmsley Building, where some of the richest folks in America live, compared to a janitor in the same building.
Capital gains and loopholes are neat. The salary differences aren’t what offends me. The effective tax rate does.

Notice also from that chart way up above how corporate taxes collected have been on a steady decline for decades, while they simultaneously have the most influence over policy.

Take a look at General Electric for example:
They reap the rewards of lobbying and government influence (far more than any voter), yet don’t have to pay in like the rest of us.

The biggest frustration for everyone in the bottom 80% is the rising costs have not coincided with rising wages. Wages since the 1970s have been stagnant for everyone but the elite.

They are working twice as hard for barely any more pay, while everything gets significantly more expensive than the cash they are earning… at least for the people who can still get jobs.



The last time it was this bad, there was a little something called the Great Depression. Say hello to Gilded Age #2:


So, distribution of wealth is merely a symptom of a larger problem. The lower and middle classes are sliding into oblivion, getting paid less for more work, paying more for the goods to survive with less jobs available while paying more taxes, meanwhile the top 1% is paying far lower tax rates, and the politicians continue to cut the services that keep the people at the bottom from falling into oblivion.

Stanislaw Lec once said, “The weakest link in a chain is the strongest because it can break it.”

If we don’t do something soon, we will repeat history, and all those big profits that the top 1% love so much will go out the window since the rest of us won’t be able to afford anything they sell.

We aren’t asking for socialism—we are asking for basic taxation fairness, accountability, and actual representation that protects all Americans interests, so that everyone can rise in success, together.

What does that entail asks Aaron Ginn? Here’s some ideas:

• Tax reforms: eliminate loopholes for the wealthy and bring taxes back at Clinton levels. We do not want Reagan’s insanely high rates of 50-70%, just the mid-30s like we did when everyone was moving up in wealth and the economy was booming for everyone.
• Regulation, banking reform, lobbying reform, etc. (What would be the effects of implementing Matt Taibbi’s suggested demands for Occupy Wall Street?)
• Taxing capital gains as you would any other income (Capital Gains Tax: Why are capital gains taxed less than other incomes?)
• Removing the ceiling on Social Security taxation http://www.nathannewman.org/arch…
• Making sure this never happens again:
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?fea…
  Putting white collar criminals away for a long time, holding the people who created the housing crisis accountable. No one is being punished for one of the most dangerous long term damaging actions in our countries history. Learn more about their negligent acts here: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/…

These are just a few ideas—there are plenty of ways to do it. DC just needs the will.

Sources:

• http://motherjones.com/politics/…
• http://motherjones.com/politics/…
• http://motherjones.com/politics/…
• http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011…
• http://www.thenation.com/image/e…
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inc…

If the wealthiest 1% of Americans shouldn’t own 40% of the country’s financial wealth, what is a more appropriate breakdown?

Why are Americans so fond of presidential candidates who are crazy, uneducated, and have performed poorly in other jobs?

1. You are talking about a small percentage of Americans, the republican base. These are people who don’t care about facts. They care about what their peers have already told them (as does any base.) See Why do facts not matter to some people?
2. The vast majority of Americans don’t have the time to learn all the nuances of a candidate and without a media to do it’s job properly, they are going to fall back on their own judgement and pre-conceived notions. See What is media bias? In a perfect world, how should the media do its job?
3. People have to choose from the people crazy enough to run for office. No rational candidate is going to run against an incumbent with showmanship when they have a significantly better chance in 2016. See Chris Christie.
4. The base thinks Obama might be a secret muslim socialist, so the alternative is far less crazy in their minds. The media they watch isn’t telling them differently, so they have no reason to challenge it.
5. Their media also tells them that all the other media is biased, so they have no reason to listen to anyone else.

Essentially, without a media to really look at a candidate rationally and hold them accountable, most people don’t have the attention span to learn anything new, they only have enough time to reconfirm their existing biases. So if your choice is socialism or Bachmann Cain Perry Overdrive, you are going to go with the one that won’t bring forth the apocalypse, the non-muslims who are being persecuted by a left wing cabal of biased fact pushers that are full of lies.

Why are Americans so fond of presidential candidates who are crazy, uneducated, and have performed poorly in other jobs?

Which of the demands of Occupy Wall Street are simply the expression of a desire of something for nothing?

The questioner seems to want a specific answer, however, upon looking at pages and pages of protest signs, with almost none of them actually suggesting a free ride, I’m left to guessing which demands the questioner wanted to hear about. So I decided to stop at 10 pages of search results.

Here’s what I found that could maaaybe be considered something for nothing:
This sign doesn’t indicate the asker’s position on Healthcare for everyone, but regardless, if we do ever get universal healthcare, we’re all going to have to share the cost.

This asker also seems to want some sort of healthcare, but it also doesn’t indicate wether they want it for no work. In fact they seem to be indicating they are working, just frustrated with the broken system.

This guy seems to be either demanding, or offering free hugs, I can’t figure out which. Either way, the taxpayer shouldn’t feel the burden of those hugs.

These people seem to be anti-public urination. So they don’t want the free stuff that’s already being offered.

I can’t tell if this guy wants a free lobbyist, or simply is pointing out he can’t afford to dole out the same influence as the 1% currently can.

This was the first real demand sign I was able to find in the pile. She already got her wish on the last item, the rest of us are still anticipating the rest. None of these are free rides, so we seem to be good there.

This one is merely a prediction of the future if things don’t change. I’m not sure if she’s asking for a free Rich buffet, or merely pointing out that we may have to start a Rich plant with FDA inspection, but I don’t think she’s specifically demanding that people start cannibalizing the 1%.

The idea that these people want a free ride is a myth perpetuated by their opponents. If Americans think that these are all freeloaders looking for a hand out because they are lazy and unemployed it’s easier for the media and most of America to ignore them. If it’s actually about substantial issues, then they have to be taken more seriously, which endangers the large corporate socialism that is doled out on a regular basis to large corporations while the people who really need a helping hand starve on the free market.

If you look at the demographics of the people supporting Occupy Wall Street, you’ll find a wide swath of humanity, people who are both employed and unemployed, people of all ages, people who are tired of a system that gives hand outs like candy to large companies that take their jobs overseas and detrimentally impact the American economy.

Fast Company created a great infographic that explains those demographics:
You can see the full infographic at their website:
http://www.fastcompany.com/17920…

People are frustrated at a system that is fundamentally broken and on the verge of creating another great depression. You can call it handouts all you like, but at the end of the day, these are people with real grievances, who care deeply for their country, and want some fundamental fairness and solid governance instead of a gilded class and the end of the American middle class.

See also Economic Inequality: If the wealthiest 1% of Americans shouldn’t own 40% of the country’s financial wealth, what is a more appropriate breakdown?

Which of the demands of Occupy Wall Street are simply the expression of a desire of something for nothing?

An atheist can be “thankful to” someone or something, but can an atheist be “thankful for” without assuming a creator of what he is “thankful for”?

Atheists are often thought of as people without moral codes, simply because they do not base their judgements on religious texts. However, we too can be thankful for things, have some morals and what not, without a belief in a higher power. For example:

• I am thankful for the Bourbon distillery that spikes my delicious egg nog. I do not pray to the distillers, I merely hand them money and go on my way.
• I am thankful for the delicious turkey, coated in butter, seasoned with Beau Monde, stuffed with stuffing, baked at 325 for 6 hours, and scarfed down my gullet, but I do not worship my mother, I merely appreciate and admire her.
• I am thankful for the game of Settlers of Catan in which I pwn my enemies on holidays, but I do not perform any rituals each time I defeat my wife and friends, I merely gloat in various and arbitrary styles until they beat me and I vow revenge.
• I’m thankful for the non-dysfunctional happy fun times we all have together, but I do not create an altar in my friends visages upon a successful Thanksgiving.
• I’m thankful for the epic pumpkin cheesecake that I will wow all my friends and family with, however, I will not write a 500 page text about the recipe’s creator, I will merely take credit and link people to the recipe.
• I’m thankful for my new daughter and my existing son, shown gratuitously here to pander for upvotes trying to eat her burrito style. However aside from getting a place as my homescreen on my phone, and treating them with respect, and doing nice things for them on a whim, and being a good partner, I will not create a church devoted to my wife, as she might find that sort of creepy, even if she did play the lead role in the creation of my kids.

Thankfulness doesn’t need to have anything to do with a higher power. To me, it has everything to do with appreciating those who impact your life. Just as religious folk can find faith in a higher power as a thing to be thankful for, we too can be thankful. We just skip a middle man.

You are welcome.

An atheist can be “thankful to” someone or something, but can an atheist be “thankful for” without assuming a creator of what he is “thankful for”?

Why do people persecute atheists?

TL;DR version: Persecution, not so much. However, we are losing a PR war to Religious and political leaders associating Atheism with Godless morality-free evil doers, because no one is defending our side.

Long version:

For persecution to occur, you’d need an organized group to persecute. Atheists aren’t getting singled out for hate crimes, or lynched, they are simply considered the bastard children of the United States, godless, morality free, heathens. People would vote for a Gay-Muslim before an Atheist, but they aren’t actively targeted and singled out for individual persecution, they are simply regularly insulted as a community.

Say you are an Atheist. A uninformed Christian (not all Christians mind you, just a small segment) asks you if you’ve accepted Christ into your heart. You say to that person who isn’t well informed about Atheism, “I’m an atheist.”

What said Christian hears, thanks to politicians (Including the previous president of the United States), pundits and snake oil salesmen, is not “He doesn’t have a preponderance of evidence indicating the existence of God, to each their own” but rather, “He hates God, might be moral-less, probably hates freedom, wants to destroy my religion and is attacking my core beliefs.”

To them, you aren’t simply someone who has different beliefs, but thanks to a relentless PR campaign by people and leaders who should know better, you are actively waging a crusade against them. The leaders of churches preach of Godlessness and how it destroys society, and their followers translate that to “The Atheists, godless, are coming to attack us.” See Why do facts not matter to some people?

All great political organizations know how to create an enemy for their followers to fight against. Politicians have their “extreme” opponents. The Democrats had George Bush and the Christian Right, The Republicans have the Lame Stream Media, the godless, taxes and socialism. Rush Limbaugh has Feminazis and The PC police. Michelle Bachmann has HPV vaccines. Obama has the entire Republican smear machine.

Atheism, since it is a lack of belief, isn’t exactly organized as a community to counter those insane PR lies. We have no leaders, we have no lobbyists, we have very few activists out there actively campaigning to change people’s perspectives. There’s been a ton of Mormon ads as of late to help Mitt Romney defuse the idea of a Mormon being too weird to be in office. Atheists, without a church, have no one to watch their back and wage a counter offensive. We have a worthy adversary in the Christian Church, one we could rally against, even though we just want to be left alone, but we have no one to stand up and fight back.

Without someone out there regularly “preaching” an Atheism promotion campaign, it will continue to be that way. We need advocates for our side, otherwise we will continue to bare the Scarlet A on our chests.

There is no one to defend our lack of belief. Well barely anyone.

http://outcampaign.org/

The Out Campaign is a nice small start in the right direction from Richard Dawkins, but is not nearly enough to undue hundreds of years of great messaging from the other side.

They ask:

• Reach out and talk to others about atheism and help spread a positive view of atheism
• Speak out about their own beliefs and values without feeling intimidated, thus helping people realize that atheists don’t fit stereotypes and are a very diverse group
• Keep out, meaning to promote the idea that religion should be kept out of public schools and government, and that nobody’s religious agenda should be allowed to intimidate
• Stand out and become visible in their communities and become involved.

Keep in mind, nothing that the Out Campaign is advocating mentions actively attacking other people’s beliefs. There is no mention of attacking Christianity, just a mention of stopping intimidation.

But that won’t stop fundamentalist Christians from attacking my answer out of some strange belief that by standing up for myself, I’m somehow attacking them. Which I’m not.

Everyone can believe what they want to believe, and I respect their right to do so.

So when speaking to someone who is actively thinking those things, the best way to handle it is to make them understand you are just another human being with morals and a code of conduct like theirs, and have a reasonable discussion challenging their view of Atheists. You aren’t there to make them kick Jesus out of their heart, you are merely there to explain that Atheists are moral people with sound judgement and just want to live their lives.

I’ve studied the Bible, the bad parts and the good parts, so when I get into a discussion with the faithful, I can at least make them understand I want to listen, that I’m not here to judge, but to discuss. If you disarm them with friendliness, turn the other cheek, and listen, the better your chance of convincing them that Atheism isn’t evil, but rather a good thing.

Be vocal. Be friendly. Be knowledgable. Be informative. Change their expectations. Advocate. And get your other Atheist friends to speak out. Or we’ll end up proverbially burnt at the stake.

Why do people persecute atheists?

What do atheists do at Christmas?

We have a series of traditions rooted deeply in the Atheist worldview.

1. After getting their hopes up by dressing them in over-commercialized Christmas attire, we repeatedly yell at our children making them yell “Santa Clause is fake! “They have to learn early. No presents until they admit it.When they cry we know we’ve done our job.
2. Steal all the other kids presents in Whoville.
3. Profit.

Oh wait, that’s not me, actually, we are all different, but my family just rolls with the cultural norms of my childhood, and my wife’s as well. Traditions are fun things over holidays. We generally have three Christmas’ in my family depending on the travel arrangements. One with the inlaws, one with my siblings and parents, then one just the wife and kids.

So we put up a Christmas tree, replacing all the religious ornaments with witty ones referencing a significant moment in our lives over the last 30 years, one for each year (her mom started that.) Christmas eve, everyone opens one present, this years ornament picked out by the other person. (For example the year I worked for Howard Dean, I got a Donkey that had 2004 written on it.)

Kids and spouse get presents from Santa. Christmas morning, kids aren’t allowed to come downstairs at the in-laws house (that includes us) until they determine they are ready by the coffee and sausage balls preparation. We then head downstairs in order from oldest to youngest. Then we open presents in order, from oldest to youngest, one at a time, in rotation. Then we watch whatever DVD that was gifted inevitably that everyone likes most.

Now that we are having our own Christmas as well, Oatmeal Raisin cookies and Baileys and egg nog are set out for Santa the night before. We do Cinnabons Christmas morning, and then open presents youngest to oldest, one at a time. Then the kids play with the boxes and ignore their toys.

My siblings Chrismikah party (date set arbitrarily sometime in December), since half the fam is Jewish, is sans Christmas tree. We each do a lottery pick to see who gets who a presents, and instead of getting something for everyone, each person gets one big thing. Cuts down on clutter, bigger bang for the buck. We gorge and open presents. Inevitably, little kids get spoiled with multiple presents they weren’t supposed to get. Generally too many. Some get donated.

All of these events are a celebration of family enjoying each other’s company. While there are no prayers, there is much to be thankful for, and plenty of cheer and dysfunction to go around just like at Christian houses.

What do atheists do at Christmas?

How should football fans who do not support the Denver Broncos take their revenge on Jesus Christ?

Quora asks the most fun questions…

You are making a big assumption that God chose Tim Tebow. Let’s get old testament. There could be another factor at play:

1. God hates Bears fans? (very probable, he also hates Baseball in general, how Michael Jordan was allowed to go there is a mystery.)
2. God hates Chief fans? (as he should, as should everyone.)
3. God hates the debauchery of Miami? (thongs on men are gross.)
4. God likes Detroit more? (we lost 45-10 with Tebow.)
5. God is teaching Mark Sanchez a lesson? (He didn’t pray hard enough.)
6. God wanted to win a bet against Loki? (The Vikings suck anyways, easy bet.)
7. God felt bad for Denver, what with our horrible last few years, and decided to give us an easy schedule against mediocre teams for the first batch of games.

If we win against the Patriots, then maybe, I might think there’s devine intervention. In the interim, I’m going with “QB who chokes when there is no pressure, thrives when he is forced to show up and play in the 4th quarter and gets lucky when other teams make rookie mistakes, inspiring his teammates with his devotion and leadership to think they can achieve anything.”

Tebow was 3-16 in the first 3 quarters against the Bears. Didn’t see God helping make any touchdowns then.

When the opposing team is up 28 points, my guess is we won’t see any miracles.

In the interim, its clear that Jesus has chosen Matt Prater as his man. Over half of our wins are from his last minute FGs.

Either that or Marion Barber took the Lord’s name in vain.

So in answer to your question, fans of other teams, regardless of their faith, should obtain a holy water blessed lead pipe, and should not spare the force of the rod on the blessed legs of Matthew Prater. Or just wait till we play a good team and the hype gets crushed. Jesus will frown on that. Not because he wants the Broncos to win, but because he’s against that whole hurting others thing.

Please don’t, though, I like our win streak.

How should football fans who do not support the Denver Broncos take their revenge on Jesus Christ?

Which chicks are more fun in bed, those who are Republican or those who are Democrats?

People ask the weirdest questions on Quora.

I placed 2 chicks on my bed, one more liberal in their habits and the other more conservative. I bounced on the bed and both immediately bounced off. They both chirped then wandered back into their feed lot. Neither of them talk, what with their heritage, but both seemed to be not interested in bed bouncing, or politics for that matter (other than their penchant for enjoying free range fields more.) So I’d say both chicks aren’t very fun, due to their weighing only a couple ounces, and their inability to sustain more than a couple jumps before getting bored. And also they pooped. You were talking about jumping up and down on the bed, right?

In any case, to raise a chick properly, read this.

Which chicks are more fun in bed, those who are Republican or those who are Democrats?

Christopher Hitchens is not in Heaven

One of the four horsemen has ceased to be.

[A]bove all, we are in need of a renewed Enlightenment, which will base itself on the proposition that the proper study of mankind is man and woman [referencing Alexander Pope]. This Enlightenment will not need to depend, like its predecessors, on the heroic breakthroughs of a few gifted and exceptionally courageous people. It is within the compass of the average person. The study of literature and poetry, both for its own sake and for the eternal ethical questions with which it deals, can now easily depose the scrutiny of sacred texts that have been found to be corrupt and confected. The pursuit of unfettered scientific inquiry, and the availability of new findings to masses of people by electronic means, will revolutionize our concepts of research and development. Very importantly, the divorce between the sexual life and fear, and the sexual life and disease, and the sexual life and tyranny, can now at last be attempted, on the sole condition that we banish all religions from the discourse. And all this and more is, for the first time in our history, within the reach if not the grasp of everyone.

Christopher Hitchens, anti-theist, one of the founders of the New Atheism movement, passed away from Esophogeal Cancer today at the age of 62.

Some of his last words at a conference before his death:

“We have the same job we always had: to say that there are no final solutions; there is no absolute truth; there is no supreme leader; there is no totalitarian solution that says if you would just give up your freedom of inquiry, if you would just give up, if you would simply abandon your critical faculties, the world of idiotic bliss can be yours.”

His biting wit and his eloquence in articulating a non-theistic worldview will be sorely missed. His ability to offend even his closest allies will be less so (he made some pretty heinous comments about women and war that didn’t endear him to the secular community that were just as significant as his attacks on religion.)


I’d say RIP Chris, however, he won’t be resting, he’ll just stop existing.

Post on Quora

Is falling in love like what it’s like in romantic comedies?

It can happen. I am a victim of this comedic nonsense.

I met my wife my freshman year of college. I was an obnoxious spaz, she was very quiet and reserved. I was making a video to send home to friends, and went around introducing everyone on camera. When I got to her, I said “this is Lennon’s roommate, Heather.” She responded with, “I’m not Lennon’s roommate, Heather. I’m Heather.” That wit struck me instantly, however I continued on my way, disregarding it, knowing she was funny, but not for me. She instantly hated me and wished I would take a valium.

That year I managed to trick someone else into being my first college girlfriend. It was an intense 5 months. I thought I was in love. When she dumped me, I crashed hard, and wrote really lame things in a journal for the next 5 months. I swore I would never date anyone I was close friends with first again, so I would never get hurt.

Over the next two years, I managed to get a reputation as drunken hookup guy. (Usually I was the drunk one, as I couldn’t muster up as much courage sober.) Our junior year, Heather, now a very close friend, came up to me, drunk at a party, and said she really liked me. I said, “I know,” then kept on partying. My douchiness did not seem to deter her.

The next party, a week later, she took another stab at it, with as much liquid courage as I usually medicated with. “I really like you.” I responded with, “Heather, I know, but I refuse to ruin another friendship by dating someone I’m such good friends with.” She stormed off, saying, “whatever.”

Finally, the next week, I realized I could be wrong. I started considering. I went to lunch. Something in said lunch made me sick. That night, at the next party, before having an ounce to drink, I ran outside, and started puking off the front porch. Heather, more determined than ever, came out, drunker than ever, walked over to me like it was her mission. “I really like you, and the friend thing is a cop out.” I responded with, “Heather, now is not a good-” and then projectile vomited some more. When I turned my head back the other direction, all I saw was her backside storming back into the house. Food poisoning explanations probably wouldn’t help that situation right then.

I resigned myself to never acting on my feelings that night.

A week later, I was making out with another girl I had a passing interest in, both of us hammered, outside her dorm. It was perhaps the worst kiss in the history of time, sloppy, awkward, drunken and empty of any meaning. Mid-makeout, I thought to myself, “What the hell am I doing with my life? This is awful. I should be with Heather.” It was like The Flying Spaghetti Monster reached out with his noodly appendage and demanded I date her. It felt like it had to happen, no matter the cost.

The next day, I asked her if she’d be game to help me with a project for class. She said, “Fine, whatever.” Before she arrived that night, I poured two fuzzy navels, turned on the Reservoir Dogs soundtrack, and set some mood lighting. After downing both fuzzy navels, I knew I was ready. She arrived, and mid working on the project, the schnapps finally disabled my edit button and I told her I liked her too. She acquiesced. We started dating, at which point about 10 of my friends, on their own volition, and without knowledge of each others actions, each cornered me at various times and said if I hurt her, they’d kill me. One of them actually slammed me against the wall to make the point.

2 years later, I proposed. She ran out of the room, yelling “NO!” (Note to self: Don’t propose in a flooded basement, when your love has just come home from work, still in her uniform, reeking of pizza.) I dragged her back in, asked again. She acquiesced. We got married, in epic fashion. There were people under tables hiding bottles of booze, bagpipes, and electric sliding.

Looking back on that time in my life, and ever since my wedding (10 years ago), I can’t imagine anyone else that I ever dated, or wanted to hook up with that I could imagine spending the rest of my life with. She gets me. She tolerates my flaws. She even embraces them on occasion. She knows me better than I do. And she still has the patience to stick around. Anyone who can tolerate me this long clearly is The One. She can’t make spoons bend with her mind, but the fact that she’s still with me is just as impressive. Also, she’s funny, smart, beautiful, and was willing to perform a couple genetic experiments by having kids with me, which is beyond impressive and borders on saintly.

Is falling in love like what it’s like in romantic comedies?

Now that Lola Violet Mordecai is one day old, what are her accomplishments?

So far, per multiple facebook comments indicating her name sounds like some sort of superhero, she’s embraced the title by working on her tan and her superhero mask. She seems to be taking the pseudonym “Ultra Violet”, which is not to be confused with Andy Warhol’s protégé, Ultra Violet, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ult… or Banarama’s album, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ult…, or the British Vampire hunter series, Ultraviolet, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ult…, or the really bad movie, Ultraviolet, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0370….

She’s an Atheist currently, which I’m excited about as I didn’t even have to tell her anything to convince her it was a morally awesome path. Someday though, she may need to join me at a Pastafarian church.

She apparently is a big Matrix fan, wearing Neo shades. Her main accomplishments so far include punching Jaundice in the face so she can go home from the hospital tomorrow (fingers crossed) and start planning global domination, and she might also have the power of narcolepsy, as she is really good at sleeping in her tanning bed.

My presumption is that a Nurses Aide will flip the wrong switch on her tanning bed, turning the dial to “11: Better Than 10 (do not use)”, which will embue her some sort of superpowers related to the sun, similar to Superman, with a dash of Neo’s hacker sensibilities which include an unabashed love of sticking it to The Man™. Hopefully, she’ll eventually lead the Occupy Movement to it’s logical conclusion, coming up with a cohesive message, taking over the media, then holding all the powers that be accountable for their active diminishing of the middle and lower classes, creating a third political party that’s without undue influence, saving the country from ruin.

After saving the country, she’ll start what’s hailed as the next Radiohead combined with Led Zeppelin with critics praising her as having the voice of Janis Joplin mixed with a mythical God. Her epic power ballads Ayn Rand Land is Bland, and Galt’s Fault, will lead to the dismantling of the Republican and Democratic parties, and lead to the rise of a fiscally responsible and reasonable Independent party that works well with Progressives, and eliminates the electoral college and the stranglehold of the two party system.

From that project she’ll move on to her opus, writing an epic soundtrack to her re-imagining of the sci-fi genre, co-created with Joss Whedon, mapped out over 3 major motion pictures that trump Star Wars in both Box Office receipts and merchandising.

Her studio will then use all the profits to unbreak the education system, and to create a new media giant that focuses on journalism over sensationalism.

Then she’ll cure cancer on a whim. Just because she can. She’s that hard core.

For now, however, she’ll tide herself over with crying, pooping, and drinking, which, when you are a baby, is a triumph.

Now that Lola Violet Mordecai is one day old, what are her accomplishments?

Is hitting or spanking effective in conditioning behavior?

Yes, it’s totally effective in conditioning behavior. Violent behavior.

In a study at Tulane University involving 2500 children, they discovered that 5 year olds who were spanked were 50% more likely to be agressive.

The study, led by community-health-sciences professor Catherine Taylor, was the first to control for a host of issues affecting the mother, such as depression, alcohol and drug use, spousal abuse and even whether she considered abortion while pregnant with the child. After controlling for all these factors — each of which can contribute to a child’s aggression — spanking remained a strong predictor of violent behavior. “The odds of a child being more aggressive at age 5 increased by 50% if he had been spanked more than twice in the month before the study began,” says Taylor.
The association remained even after her team accounted for varying levels of natural aggression in children, suggesting, she says, that “it’s not just that children who are more aggressive are more likely to be spanked.”
Among mothers surveyed in 20 cities when their children were both 3 and 5 years old, nearly half (45.6%) reported not spanking their 3-year-olds in the previous month, 27.9% reported spanking once or twice that month, and 26.5% reported spanking more than twice. As 5-year-olds, the children who had been spanked were more likely than the nonspanked to be defiant, demand immediate satisfaction of their wants and needs, become frustrated easily, have temper tantrums and lash out physically against other people or animals.

The reason for this may be that spanking sets up a loop of bad behavior. Corporal punishment instills fear rather than understanding. Even if children stop tantrums when spanked, that doesn’t mean they get why they shouldn’t have been acting up in the first place. What’s more, spanking sets a bad example, teaching children that aggressive behavior is a solution to their parents’ problems.
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazin…

Essentially corporal punishment doesn’t make children understand why they are being punished and sets a bad example that encourages violence to solve problems. It’s a lose lose.

While you may scare your kid into not repeating a specific behavior in front of you, it doesn’t instill any sense of responsibility for the action they take.

So yes, it will be effective in stopping a behavior in your presence, but the long term effects will make it completely not worth your while. Your kid may be an outlier, but for most kids, its causing more damage than good discipline.

Is hitting or spanking effective in conditioning behavior?

What is a good way to ask your parents for permission to get a tattoo?

Not many people still think the Chip n’ Dale Patrick Swayze Centaur was a good idea.

If you have to ask their permission, whatever it is, you’ll most likely be embarrassed by it 15 years down the road. I presume you are under 18. I presume you’ve never heard of chip n dale Patrick Swayze, so whatever Unicorn, Dolphin, Flower, Cross, Tramp Stamp, Halo Character, Pop Star, Icon, Art Piece, Quote, or Album cover you are thinking about adding will not be relevant in the future.
Having to explain your The Price Is Right fetish at a job interview will be somewhat challenging when they are assessing your judgement, and the young recruiter gets confused by your explaining the game show host on your shoulder, explaining to you the host is not Bob Barker, but actually Drew Carey.

If you absolutely feel it is essential to get a tattoo, make sure it means something important to you, and get it in a place that can be hidden. Tripple check with your smarter friends that its a good idea and not just something dumb to dare each other to do. If it turns out to be a keeper, you can get the next one in a more interesting place.

As for your parents, if it’s something they’d be cool with under the right circumstances, then explain why you want it so bad. If they don’t freak out, then maybe your Ghandi face on your shoulder will be kosher.

If they are going to freak out, then wait until you get to college. College is the time when you are supposed to do things that you’ll regret 20 years later.

Showcase Source and possible organization you’ll be hiring in the future: http://www.laseraway.net/2009/04…

See also Tattoo Removal.

What is a good way to ask your parents for permission to get a tattoo?

What are possible plot lines for Season 5 of Breaking Bad?

After watching the final episode of season 4, this link was My Reaction to the Finale.

After pondering things for a while, I’ve come to the conclusion that there’s one enemy Walter will not be able to defeat. Cancer.

In one of the last episodes, he seems distracted after going to the Doctor. When he tells his family that he got an all clear, he doesn’t seem to be very genuine about it.

It will be an interesting battle, between whomever the big bad that rises from the ashes is, getting enough coin to support his family, then coming back full circle and staying alive long enough, just as he did in season 1, to make sure his family is taken care of before he dies. All the while dealing with his brother-in-law and Jesse, who is like a son to him, whom he also betrayed and felt wretched about in the finale. Presumably, his real son will have to find out the truth as well and he’ll have to contend with that. And then he’s gonna have to answer to Mike, and whomever the next boss on the ladder is.

My questions:

1. Will the Cancer get him first, or a bullet?
2. Will it all come full circle to Season 1’s dilemma?
3. Will he lose members of his family (metaphorically, or literally thanks to violence?)
4. Will he find redemption?

Other shows that I’ve loved in the past have managed to pull a couple of those feats off. The Wire brought everything full circle. Big Love managed to give a sexist polygamist redemption as he accepted a woman’s right to the priesthood and gave him a bullet.

Walt thinks he’s in the clear, which means he truly hasn’t hit rock bottom yet, if I remember anything about the arch of the Hero’s journey. The crushing disappointment and rejection by his family is what’s on tap in my mind (Hank, Walt Jr, Jesse.) On top of horrific violence. Possibly arrest. And the possible loss of his family to a blood thirsty cartel.

The possibilities are endless. I for one am excited. After it ended, this was the only face I could muster:

What are possible plot lines for Season 5 of Breaking Bad?