On 2024-10-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> On 2024-10-22 8:45 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 20:19:57 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>
>>> On 2024-10-22 7:57 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 19:36:08 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2024-10-22 4:47 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 08:32:13 -0400, bad sector wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's time for HW manufacturing (all development AND actual
>>>>>>> production) to return to the USA/CXanada and Europe.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It went away in the first place because it could not be done cost-
>>>>>> effectively in those “first-world” countries -- basic free-market
>>>>>> capitalism in action.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To bring it back would require Government subsidies, or forcing
>>>>>> customers to pay more. Which would you prefer?
>>>>>
>>>>> Considering the largest market for those products is the West,
>>>>> particularly the United States, it would be possible to bring back
>>>>> manufacturing by blocking sales of products that don't have a presence
>>>>> in North America.
>>>>
>>>> Easy way around that: set up an empty office like those in East Texas
>>>> to get jurisdiction under the patent-friendly courts there. There’s
>>>> your “presence”. Business continues from overseas as usual.
>>>>
>>>> What’s your next move?
>>>
>>> A manufacturing presence. The company would have to produce whatever it
>>> sells on the continent it is selling to.
>>
>> How much of it? Disassembled parts? Or all the way back to raw ore?
>
> This statement demonstrates how much progressives care about the people
> being enslaved in foreign countries to produce the goods we Westerners
> purchase at low prices.

Indeed, it shows that progressives consider policy while conservatives
are only interested in rhetoric. He didn't say it was a bad plan, he
said that it was in incomplete plan.

> They have a huge heart until you tell them that
> their cell phone might cost $50 more because 'Bile in Africa is suddenly
> getting a living wage.

You post this slander without any evidence that it not actually
projection..

--
Jasen.
🇺🇦 Слава Україні

On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 21:17:45 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:

> On 2024-10-23 5:29 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 13:01:18 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>
>>> I don't even think they deserve to be called leftists anymore. They
>>> are stupid and should be called such. There is the right and the
>>> stupid.
>>
>> Have you anti-abortionists figured out yet whether you support IVF or
>> not? Does “life begin at conception” apply in a Petri dish as well, or
>> only in a woman’s body?
>
> I don't speak for all of us who don't believe in infanticide as you do.

Is IVF “infanticide” as well?

On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 09:01:24 +0100, Richard Kettlewell wrote:

> The obvious answer is attacks on weak cryptography. RSA-1024 and DH-1024
> are probably breakable by the biggest SIGINT agencies (and anyone else
> with comparable compute resources: cloud service providers for example).

Weak cryptography is easy to fix. The hard part to fix is weak random
numbers.

On 10/23/24 17:29, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 13:01:18 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>> I don't even think they deserve to be called leftists anymore. They are
>> stupid and should be called such. There is the right and the stupid.
>
> Have you anti-abortionists figured out yet whether you support IVF or not?
> Does “life begin at conception” apply in a Petri dish as well, or only in
> a woman’s body?

Humanitary exception can be made in the case of a married hetero couple
who cannot procreate otherwise, and what the left calls anti-abortion is
actually anti-UNCONDITIONAL-abortion i.e. anti
abortion-as-birth-control. That said, society should require cognitive,
IQ, and psy. testing for a permit to marry, procreate, vote, drive a car
or own guns, the last two on a yearly basis. The left is misreading and
twisting everything ever since it created the twiggy movement (to eat no
fats) because its barbie-boy neo-males with trimmed little goaties to
appear more masculine than they actually are needed a skinny less
intimidating female form promising easier access to underdeveloped
sexual organs. Unfortunately fats are needed by the brain to function.
Enter the WOKE generation: mama-molested fuckbrain zombies.

On 24/10/2024 12:31, bad sector wrote:
> On 10/23/24 17:29, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 13:01:18 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>
>>> I don't even think they deserve to be called leftists anymore. They are
>>> stupid and should be called such. There is the right and the stupid.
>>
>> Have you anti-abortionists figured out yet whether you support IVF or
>> not?
>> Does “life begin at conception” apply in a Petri dish as well, or only in
>> a woman’s body?
>
> Humanitary exception can be made in the case of a married hetero couple
> who cannot procreate otherwise, and what the left calls anti-abortion is
> actually anti-UNCONDITIONAL-abortion i.e. anti
> abortion-as-birth-control. That said, society should require cognitive,
> IQ, and psy. testing for a permit to marry, procreate, vote, drive a car
> or own guns, the last two on a yearly basis. The left is misreading and
> twisting everything ever since it created the twiggy movement (to eat no
> fats) because its barbie-boy neo-males with trimmed little goaties to
> appear more masculine than they actually are needed a skinny less
> intimidating female form promising easier access to underdeveloped
> sexual organs. Unfortunately fats are needed by the brain to function.
> Enter the WOKE generation: mama-molested fuckbrain zombies.
>
>

Christ on a bike.

In the end women wanting to rid themselves of a child always find a way.
Half of the argument to legalise it was to get rid of 'back street'
abortionists feeding poisons to or sticking knitting needles in the mother.

Many of whom died.

Having different laws to a next door country simply encourages abortion
tourism. Plenty of nice Irish catholic girls took a trip to London...

...if it was outlawed in Montana, they would doubtless find a short trip
to California of use...

But the whole mess is all part of people taking up *moral* positions.

Buying into to socialists 'fairness' and 'justice' or religious 'right
to life' and other such hand wavery bollocks.

The fact is that legalisation brought no more abortions, just less
deaths of mothers.

--
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit
atrocities.”

― Voltaire, Questions sur les Miracles à M. Claparede, Professeur de
Théologie à Genève, par un Proposant: Ou Extrait de Diverses Lettres de
M. de Voltaire

On 2024-10-23 11:25 p.m., Jasen Betts wrote:
> On 2024-10-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>> On 2024-10-22 8:45 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 20:19:57 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2024-10-22 7:57 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 19:36:08 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2024-10-22 4:47 p.m., Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 08:32:13 -0400, bad sector wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's time for HW manufacturing (all development AND actual
>>>>>>>> production) to return to the USA/CXanada and Europe.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It went away in the first place because it could not be done cost-
>>>>>>> effectively in those “first-world” countries -- basic free-market
>>>>>>> capitalism in action.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To bring it back would require Government subsidies, or forcing
>>>>>>> customers to pay more. Which would you prefer?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Considering the largest market for those products is the West,
>>>>>> particularly the United States, it would be possible to bring back
>>>>>> manufacturing by blocking sales of products that don't have a presence
>>>>>> in North America.
>>>>>
>>>>> Easy way around that: set up an empty office like those in East Texas
>>>>> to get jurisdiction under the patent-friendly courts there. There’s
>>>>> your “presence”. Business continues from overseas as usual.
>>>>>
>>>>> What’s your next move?
>>>>
>>>> A manufacturing presence. The company would have to produce whatever it
>>>> sells on the continent it is selling to.
>>>
>>> How much of it? Disassembled parts? Or all the way back to raw ore?
>>
>> This statement demonstrates how much progressives care about the people
>> being enslaved in foreign countries to produce the goods we Westerners
>> purchase at low prices.
>
> Indeed, it shows that progressives consider policy while conservatives
> are only interested in rhetoric.

Complete bullshit.

--
CrudeSausage
Paleoconservative, Catholic, Christ is king.

On 2024-10-24 7:31 a.m., bad sector wrote:
> On 10/23/24 17:29, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 13:01:18 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>
>>> I don't even think they deserve to be called leftists anymore. They are
>>> stupid and should be called such. There is the right and the stupid.
>>
>> Have you anti-abortionists figured out yet whether you support IVF or
>> not?
>> Does “life begin at conception” apply in a Petri dish as well, or only in
>> a woman’s body?
>
> Humanitary exception can be made in the case of a married hetero couple
> who cannot procreate otherwise, and what the left calls anti-abortion is
> actually anti-UNCONDITIONAL-abortion i.e. anti
> abortion-as-birth-control. That said, society should require cognitive,
> IQ, and psy. testing for a permit to marry, procreate, vote, drive a car
> or own guns, the last two on a yearly basis. The left is misreading and
> twisting everything ever since it created the twiggy movement (to eat no
> fats) because its barbie-boy neo-males with trimmed little goaties to
> appear more masculine than they actually are needed a skinny less
> intimidating female form promising easier access to underdeveloped
> sexual organs. Unfortunately fats are needed by the brain to function.
> Enter the WOKE generation: mama-molested fuckbrain zombies.

I agree with the entirety of the above paragraph, especially with the
idea that the stupid twist everything. I've too old to stomach it
anymore, so I would rather just filter out the stupid entirely.

--
CrudeSausage
Paleoconservative, Catholic, Christ is king.

On 2024-10-24 7:40 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 24/10/2024 12:31, bad sector wrote:
>> On 10/23/24 17:29, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 13:01:18 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't even think they deserve to be called leftists anymore. They are
>>>> stupid and should be called such. There is the right and the stupid.
>>>
>>> Have you anti-abortionists figured out yet whether you support IVF or
>>> not?
>>> Does “life begin at conception” apply in a Petri dish as well, or
>>> only in
>>> a woman’s body?
>>
>> Humanitary exception can be made in the case of a married hetero
>> couple who cannot procreate otherwise, and what the left calls
>> anti-abortion is actually anti-UNCONDITIONAL-abortion i.e. anti
>> abortion-as-birth-control. That said, society should require
>> cognitive, IQ, and psy. testing for a permit to marry, procreate,
>> vote, drive a car or own guns, the last two on a yearly basis. The
>> left is misreading and twisting everything ever since it created the
>> twiggy movement (to eat no fats) because its barbie-boy neo-males with
>> trimmed little goaties to appear more masculine than they actually are
>> needed a skinny less intimidating female form promising easier access
>> to underdeveloped sexual organs. Unfortunately fats are needed by the
>> brain to function. Enter the WOKE generation: mama-molested fuckbrain
>> zombies.
>>
>>
>
> Christ on a bike.

Heresy.

> In the end women wanting to rid themselves of a child always find a way.

So let's not even _try_ to child, right? Only stupid people can be this
pessimistic.

> Half of the argument to legalise it was to get rid of 'back street'
> abortionists feeding poisons to or sticking knitting needles in the mother.
>
> Many of whom died.
>
> Having different laws to a next door country simply encourages abortion
> tourism. Plenty of nice Irish catholic girls took a trip to London...
>
> ..if it was outlawed in Montana, they would doubtless find a short trip
> to California of use...

If the infanticide procedure itself costs them something, they shouldn't
worry about the cost of the trip to a state where such infanticide is
permitted. As long as taxpayers don't have to share the burden, I have
no issue.

> But the whole mess is all part of people taking up *moral* positions.
>
> Buying into to socialists 'fairness' and 'justice' or religious 'right
> to life' and other such hand wavery bollocks.
>
> The fact is that legalisation brought no more abortions, just less
> deaths of mothers.

I apologize for not crying over the mothers who would willingly
sacrifice both child and themselves.

--
CrudeSausage
Paleoconservative, Catholic, Christ is king.

On 10/24/24 07:40, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 24/10/2024 12:31, bad sector wrote:
>> On 10/23/24 17:29, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 13:01:18 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't even think they deserve to be called leftists anymore. They are
>>>> stupid and should be called such. There is the right and the stupid.
>>>
>>> Have you anti-abortionists figured out yet whether you support IVF or
>>> not?
>>> Does “life begin at conception” apply in a Petri dish as well, or
>>> only in
>>> a woman’s body?
>>
>> Humanitary exception can be made in the case of a married hetero
>> couple who cannot procreate otherwise, and what the left calls anti-
>> abortion is actually anti-UNCONDITIONAL-abortion i.e. anti abortion-
>> as-birth-control. That said, society should require cognitive, IQ, and
>> psy. testing for a permit to marry, procreate, vote, drive a car or
>> own guns, the last two on a yearly basis. The left is misreading and
>> twisting everything ever since it created the twiggy movement (to eat
>> no fats) because its barbie-boy neo-males with trimmed little goaties
>> to appear more masculine than they actually are needed a skinny less
>> intimidating female form promising easier access to underdeveloped
>> sexual organs. Unfortunately fats are needed by the brain to function.
>> Enter the WOKE generation: mama-molested fuckbrain zombies.
>>
>>
>
> Christ on a bike.
>
> In the end women wanting to rid themselves of a child always find a way.
> Half of the argument to legalise it was to get rid of 'back street'
> abortionists feeding poisons to or sticking knitting needles in the mother.
>
> Many of whom died.
>
> Having different laws to a next door country simply encourages abortion
> tourism. Plenty of nice Irish catholic girls took a trip to London...
>
> ..if it was outlawed in Montana, they would doubtless find a short trip
> to California of use...
>
> But the whole mess is all part of people taking up *moral* positions.

A mother's health, not to mention risk to life, are protected *as is*
just about everywhere. Admitted that there ARE a few backwoods
hog-humping states that really belong in the movie Deliverance, which is
why I disagree _somewhat_ with the otherwise very democratic idea of
leaving it to local authorities instead of centralizing. Still, no men
should ever have a say about it, votes on this should be reserved
exclusively to mothers and representatives who are mothers from city
hall to the supreme court.

On 24/10/2024 14:45, bad sector wrote:
> till, no men should ever have a say about it

Wait till some female aborts your child without even a by your leave
--
"It is an established fact to 97% confidence limits that left wing
conspirators see right wing conspiracies everywhere"

On 2024-10-24 9:58 a.m., The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 24/10/2024 14:45, bad sector wrote:
>> till, no men should ever have a say about it
>
> Wait till some female aborts your child without even a by your leave

I have read, heard and watched a number of stories from men who were
tricked into impregnating a woman, in and out of wedlock, and then had
their lives ruined by the woman. The women would lie about being on
birth control, would lie about not wanting the father to be in the life
of the child if ever they weren't, and so on only to turn around and
demand support without even allowing them to see the child they created
or have any say in how it is raised. Even when the man did things right
and married the woman before deciding to start a family, the woman would
use the reality that courts usually side with her in making sure that
the father would not only be forced to give her most of his paycheck,
but be forced to sit back and watch this nutcase raise the child to
become a deviant, often powerless to prevent their kid from turning into
a transsexual science project with Joel Crump's body and Chris
Ahlstrom's brain.

And they wonder why men don't want to get married or even get into
relationships anymore.

--
CrudeSausage
Paleoconservative, Catholic, Christ is king.

On Wed, 10/23/2024 10:06 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:

> This statement demonstrates how much progressives care about the people being enslaved in foreign countries ...

Once you offshore, THERE IS NO TURNING BACK.

Darth Vader said it best:

"You don't know the POWER of the dark side".

Google "Don't be evil"
Google "We have a new plan"

Even if you had a national policy for a certain
thing, businessmen would work to thwart that plan.

Even in wartime, businessmen have done things going
against the country. For their own profit. And in more
than one political system.

Just keep reading your newspaper, OK ? Scumbags are everywhere.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/minister-jeremy-harrison-fired-crown-corp-board-chair-who-blew-the-whistle-on-apparent-conflicts-of-interest-1.7352049

Paul

On 10/24/24 09:58, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 24/10/2024 14:45, bad sector wrote:
>> till, no men should ever have a say about it
>
> Wait till some female aborts your child without even a by your leave

By 'say' I meant voting for/against interdicting legislation. Men
haven't got a clue about what it is to have been born a woman (and vice
versa), similarly if laws interdicting prostatectomy had to be written
(as poor an example as that may be) that vote should belong to men only.

On 2024-10-24 11:56 a.m., Paul wrote:
> On Wed, 10/23/2024 10:06 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>> This statement demonstrates how much progressives care about the people being enslaved in foreign countries ...
>
> Once you offshore, THERE IS NO TURNING BACK.

Only if you don't care about your people. I am a nationalist so my own
people will always come first.

--
CrudeSausage
Paleoconservative, Catholic, Christ is king.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
> Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>> The obvious answer is attacks on weak cryptography. RSA-1024 and DH-1024
>> are probably breakable by the biggest SIGINT agencies (and anyone else
>> with comparable compute resources: cloud service providers for example).
>
> Weak cryptography is easy to fix. The hard part to fix is weak random
> numbers.

Other way round. A bad RNG can be swapped out for a better one with
little or no impact on anything else. Cryptographic choices that are
baked into a protocol or API are a lot more challenging to shift.

--
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 03:07:15 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:

>
> Yes, you can go totally overboard on "security",
> and, mostly, it won't do much good. Paranoia can
> push this to extremes where you can barely use
> the system/apps (think Vista) - and I think that's
> what Linus is concerned with.
>

You should read the comments in the Phoronix link.

Several posters indicate that there is a vast difference
between security that is relevant for a public-facing
server and for a desktop workstation. Furthermore, the
posters claim, most GNU/Linux distros are configured
for public-facing servers only.

This is totally ridiculous. As I already stated, there
should be a split between servers and workstations.
But there is not, and unless one "rolls ones own" then
one is stuck with a security-laden and crippled distro.

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 08:57:06 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:

> On 2024-10-23 11:25 p.m., Jasen Betts wrote:
>
>> Indeed, it shows that progressives consider policy while conservatives
>> are only interested in rhetoric.
>
> Complete bullshit.

Rhetoric requires some ability to compose coherent sentences. Spouting
expletives does not.

On 10/24/24 13:30, CrudeSausage wrote:
> On 2024-10-24 11:56 a.m., Paul wrote:
>> On Wed, 10/23/2024 10:06 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>
>>> This statement demonstrates how much progressives care about the
>>> people being enslaved in foreign countries ...
>>
>> Once you offshore, THERE IS NO TURNING BACK.
>
> Only if you don't care about your people. I am a nationalist so my own
> people will always come first.

You don't even have to be a nationalist, motherboards and gpu's (some
research, automated printed circuit production and little more) costing
$1000 up are well within domestic margins as it is. It's just a question
of someone taking a swipe at it and THEN (because offshore WILL start
slashing prices if challenged) sticking to a strategic PLAN.

On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 18:48:57 +0100, Richard Kettlewell wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>
>> Weak cryptography is easy to fix. The hard part to fix is weak random
>> numbers.
>
> Other way round. A bad RNG can be swapped out for a better one with
> little or no impact on anything else.

Unfortunately, you can never be sure your RNG is good.

On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 16:44:38 -0400, bad sector wrote:

> You don't even have to be a nationalist, motherboards and gpu's (some
> research, automated printed circuit production and little more) costing
> $1000 up are well within domestic margins as it is.

Why is Taiwan the world capital for computer hardware? Because the
Government had the foresight to support private investment in hardware
manufacturing back in the 1980s, which didn’t fully pay off for close to
another decade. But when it did pay off, it effectively killed off most PC
hardware manufacturing in the US and elsewhere.

Who in the US is going to take the risk of such a long-term investment?
They weren’t capable then, they’re even less capable now. You don’t even
believe in the idea that Government can be helpful to businesses, as
opposed to being an obstacle to them.

On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 12:40:59 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> But the whole mess is all part of people taking up *moral* positions.

No, the whole mess is all part of people rationalizing their moral
positions based on religion. Keep your religion out of your morality, and
things become a lot simpler.

On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 09:10:34 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:

> If the infanticide procedure itself costs them something, they shouldn't
> worry about the cost of the trip to a state where such infanticide is
> permitted. As long as taxpayers don't have to share the burden, I have
> no issue.

Do you count IVF as an “infanticide procedure”?

On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 09:07:41 -0400, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge>
wrote:

>On 2024-10-24 7:31 a.m., bad sector wrote:
>> On 10/23/24 17:29, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 13:01:18 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't even think they deserve to be called leftists anymore. They are
>>>> stupid and should be called such. There is the right and the stupid.
>>>
>>> Have you anti-abortionists figured out yet whether you support IVF or
>>> not?
>>> Does “life begin at conception” apply in a Petri dish as well, or only in
>>> a woman’s body?

Do you really expect a bible-hugger to answer that?
>>
>> Humanitary exception can be made in the case of a married hetero couple
>> who cannot procreate otherwise ...<snip>

Surely that's Dog's will ?? If the all-mitey decides you can't
breed, that's that.

>>That said, society should require cognitive,
>> IQ, and psy. testing for a permit to marry, procreate, vote, drive a car
>> or own guns, the last two on a yearly basis. The left is misreading and
>> twisting everything ever since it created the twiggy movement (to eat no
>> fats) because its barbie-boy neo-males with trimmed little goaties to
>> appear more masculine than they actually are needed a skinny less
>> intimidating female form promising easier access to underdeveloped
>> sexual organs. Unfortunately fats are needed by the brain to function.
>> Enter the WOKE generation: mama-molested fuckbrain zombies.
>
>I agree with the entirety of the above paragraph, especially with the
>idea that the stupid twist everything.

LOL. You twisted EVERYTHING. The OP stated that people should
have FREQUENT cognitive tests and psychiatric evaluations to be able
to marry, procreate, drive cars, have guns and even vote.
I agree with that, and I'd add that any political wannabes
should be tested. Do you really want a president that can't remember
if he's supposed to support the Russians or not?

The OP then went on to describe his offspring. Not the best
place to do that, a Linux group.

> I've too old to stomach it anymore.

It's called dementia... Your stomach has nothing to do with
it. See a doctor.
HTH
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012
Google Fuchsia - 2021

Shadow wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 09:07:41 -0400, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge>
> wrote:
>
>>On 2024-10-24 7:31 a.m., bad sector wrote:
>>> On 10/23/24 17:29, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 13:01:18 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I don't even think they deserve to be called leftists anymore. They are
>>>>> stupid and should be called such. There is the right and the stupid.
>>>>
>>>> Have you anti-abortionists figured out yet whether you support IVF or
>>>> not?
>>>> Does “life begin at conception” apply in a Petri dish as well, or only in
>>>> a woman’s body?
>
> Do you really expect a bible-hugger to answer that?
>>>
>>> Humanitary exception can be made in the case of a married hetero couple
>>> who cannot procreate otherwise ...<snip>
>
> Surely that's Dog's will ?? If the all-mitey decides you can't
> breed, that's that.
>
>>>That said, society should require cognitive,
>>> IQ, and psy. testing for a permit to marry, procreate, vote, drive a car
>>> or own guns, the last two on a yearly basis. The left is misreading and
>>> twisting everything ever since it created the twiggy movement (to eat no
>>> fats) because its barbie-boy neo-males with trimmed little goaties to
>>> appear more masculine than they actually are needed a skinny less
>>> intimidating female form promising easier access to underdeveloped
>>> sexual organs. Unfortunately fats are needed by the brain to function.
>>> Enter the WOKE generation: mama-molested fuckbrain zombies.
>>
>>I agree with the entirety of the above paragraph, especially with the
>>idea that the stupid twist everything.
>
> LOL. You twisted EVERYTHING. The OP stated that people should
> have FREQUENT cognitive tests and psychiatric evaluations to be able
> to marry, procreate, drive cars, have guns and even vote.
> I agree with that, and I'd add that any political wannabes
> should be tested. Do you really want a president that can't remember
> if he's supposed to support the Russians or not?
>
> The OP then went on to describe his offspring. Not the best
> place to do that, a Linux group.
>
>> I've too old to stomach it anymore.
>
> It's called dementia... Your stomach has nothing to do with
> it. See a doctor.

Not so fast!

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5291774/

Dementia is a comprehensive category of brain diseases that is great enough
to affect a person’s daily functioning. The most common type of dementia is
Alzheimer’s disease, which makes most of cases. New researches indicate
that gastrointestinal tract microbiota are directly linked to dementia
pathogenesis through triggering metabolic diseases and low-grade
inflammation progress.

He still needs to see a doctor anyway. :-)

--
Random, n.:
As in number, predictable. As in memory access, unpredictable.

On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 14:14:15 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom
<OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:

>Shadow wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 09:07:41 -0400, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On 2024-10-24 7:31 a.m., bad sector wrote:
>>>> On 10/23/24 17:29, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 13:01:18 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't even think they deserve to be called leftists anymore. They are
>>>>>> stupid and should be called such. There is the right and the stupid.
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you anti-abortionists figured out yet whether you support IVF or
>>>>> not?
>>>>> Does ?life begin at conception? apply in a Petri dish as well, or only in
>>>>> a woman?s body?
>>
>> Do you really expect a bible-hugger to answer that?
>>>>
>>>> Humanitary exception can be made in the case of a married hetero couple
>>>> who cannot procreate otherwise ...<snip>
>>
>> Surely that's Dog's will ?? If the all-mitey decides you can't
>> breed, that's that.
>>
>>>>That said, society should require cognitive,
>>>> IQ, and psy. testing for a permit to marry, procreate, vote, drive a car
>>>> or own guns, the last two on a yearly basis. The left is misreading and
>>>> twisting everything ever since it created the twiggy movement (to eat no
>>>> fats) because its barbie-boy neo-males with trimmed little goaties to
>>>> appear more masculine than they actually are needed a skinny less
>>>> intimidating female form promising easier access to underdeveloped
>>>> sexual organs. Unfortunately fats are needed by the brain to function.
>>>> Enter the WOKE generation: mama-molested fuckbrain zombies.
>>>
>>>I agree with the entirety of the above paragraph, especially with the
>>>idea that the stupid twist everything.
>>
>> LOL. You twisted EVERYTHING. The OP stated that people should
>> have FREQUENT cognitive tests and psychiatric evaluations to be able
>> to marry, procreate, drive cars, have guns and even vote.
>> I agree with that, and I'd add that any political wannabes
>> should be tested. Do you really want a president that can't remember
>> if he's supposed to support the Russians or not?
>>
>> The OP then went on to describe his offspring. Not the best
>> place to do that, a Linux group.
>>
>>> I've too old to stomach it anymore.
>>
>> It's called dementia... Your stomach has nothing to do with
>> it. See a doctor.
>
>Not so fast!
>
> https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5291774/
>
> Dementia is a comprehensive category of brain diseases that is great enough
> to affect a person’s daily functioning. The most common type of dementia is
> Alzheimer’s disease, which makes most of cases. New researches indicate
> that gastrointestinal tract microbiota are directly linked to dementia
> pathogenesis through triggering metabolic diseases and low-grade
> inflammation progress.
>
>He still needs to see a doctor anyway. :-)

Well, I'm sure they mean the colon when they say
"gastrointestinal tract microbiota". Very few bacteria survive the
acidity of the stomach(Helicobacter is a notable exception). I stand
by my defense of his stomach. It's not to blame.
:P
[]'s

PS "Obesity increases the risk of cognitive impairment or
mental decline" - from the article. Pretty obvious. Just go to any
McDonald's for proof of concept.
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012
Google Fuchsia - 2021