Community > Posts By > Dragoness

 
Dragoness's photo
Fri 03/09/12 12:37 PM
Is that a spiritual moment?

Spirituality seems to me to be all about our inner selves (how we feel, treat, grow our inner selves) and well the connection we have to all else around us.

So I guess you are speaking of your relationship to all that is around you? And it being an illusion?

Are you an illusion too in this perception?

I do agree however that each person's reality is different. Having debated with so many different people about so many different things it has become very apparent that people's realities are so much different. Even being from the same place with what should be similar experiences, realities can be very different.

Background/intelligence/personality are what makes the reality different. What they are taught from their familial traditions and ideals, what they are told is right and wrong, personal experiences that either concrete those ideals or conflict and change a person's view of their surrounding or themselves or others or all of the above, etc....

So in your reality it is all an illusion that which is around you?

Making reality subjective to each person.

Dragoness's photo
Wed 03/07/12 10:58 AM
LOL, this was a pointed article, eh?

Guns are not the only way to protect oneself.

In actuality there are lots of ways to protect yourself without a gun.

People really need to use their brains a bit more and stop believing guns solve anything.

Dragoness's photo
Mon 03/05/12 09:26 PM

Rush Limbaugh wouldnt know "right" if it fell out of the sky, landed on his face and started to wiggle


Agreed.


Dragoness's photo
Mon 03/05/12 09:23 PM


If it wouldn't have been for the dipshyte Republicans dissecting the Healthcare or Congresscare as it should be called, it would have been a hell of a lot better if not the universal healthcare America deserves to have.

Excuse me and am not trying to be rude...

this is plain balderdash.

They got nothing dissected.

It was ramed down their throats by simple majority (no such far reaching law should ever require less than a full majority).

It would never have passed at the full majority that should have been held to.

If I rember my short range history right.

Every attempted Republican ammendment to the bill was set aside.

and we had to 'pass' it to read what was in it.

Did we not?


You obviously believe the rhetoric you heard about it. I read it before it was passed and so did others on this site.

Also the Repubs had their baby fits and got to remove and change all kinds of stuff from the original bill.

So yea, I am not offended, I am never offended by misinformation.

Dragoness's photo
Mon 03/05/12 09:10 PM
If it wouldn't have been for the dipshyte Republicans dissecting the Healthcare or Congresscare as it should be called, it would have been a hell of a lot better if not the universal healthcare America deserves to have.

Dragoness's photo
Mon 03/05/12 09:06 PM

"Let me get this straight . . . We're going to be "gifted" with a health care plan we are forced to purchase and fined if we don't, which purportedly covers at least ten million more people, without adding a single new doctor, but provides for 16,000 new IRS agents, written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that didn't read it but exempted themselves from it, and signed by a... President who smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes, for which we'll be taxed for four years before any benefits take effect, by a government which has already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare, all to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that's broke! What the hell could possibly go wrong?"


Donald Trump


I still haven't seen enough brain in the man to understand how he makes any money.

Trump is a dipshyte and a racist one to boot but not to hear him tell it....lolslaphead

Dragoness's photo
Mon 03/05/12 09:02 PM




IMHO birth control should be handled just like every other medication.
No special exceptions just because its a contraceptive.





I'm fine with that. I don't see why it should be handled differently.


medication is to treat illness or prevent illness

birth control is to back up those who wish to have sex but not get pregnant

few people have as much control over 'illnesses' as they do over whether they get pregnant

so, its a BIT different


There are several things that birth control helps with other than preventing pregnancy. I'm surprised even women aren't aware of that.


Their brain is too busy judging other people's sex lives to glean the knowledge

Dragoness's photo
Mon 03/05/12 09:00 PM







Kinda like calling people that disagree with oblahmas policies bigots and racists..

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh


If they just disagree, no they're not racist. If they're saying racist things, they're racist. Not quite the same.


Its exactly the same.


No it isn't.


you are exactly who I had in mind when I typed that..

no one throws around more generalized unsubstantiated slurs than you.




Batting zero here huh?

Cause that definitely ain't true either.


Dragoness's photo
Mon 03/05/12 01:25 PM
As we have seen on here and in our own lives, no one can get into another person's mind and alter what they believe, so, in answer to your question in the title, yes, there is a right(by default) to believe what you want.

Now is practicing said religion in it's entirety a right, probably not if it involves hurting others.

Christianity wants to have an exception to this because they would like to ostracize and alter or break those who do not live as they would like them to. IE gays for example. If they could only get Christianity to be named the state religion of this country and get it into every institution and gathering place of people they could control the whole country. Hurting many along the way. But not to hear them tell it of course.

Dragoness's photo
Mon 03/05/12 01:13 PM
Richest 1 Percent Account For Nearly All Of U.S. Recovery's Gains: Report

The Huffington Post Alexander Eichler
First Posted: 03/ 5/2012 11:31 am Updated: 03/ 5/2012 1:11 pm


Technically, the economy has been in recovery for two years. But it turns out the rich have been doing most of the recovering.

In 2010 -- the first full year since the end of the Great Recession -- virtually all of the income growth in America took place among the country's very wealthiest people, says an economist at the University of California, Berkeley. The top 1 percent of earners took in a full 93 percent of all the income gains that year, leaving the other 7 percent of gains to be sprinkled among the vast majority of society.

Those numbers come courtesy of Emmanuel Saez, the Berkeley economist who co-created a resource known as the World Top Incomes Database. Saez and his colleagues crunched the data on income growth from 2010, the most recent year available, and found that it was shockingly lopsided.

While much of the country is simply treading water, with a growing number of people either edging toward poverty or already there, the richest of the rich seem to be coping nicely.

Saez's findings suggest that even though the recession dealt a blow to the 1 percent, it did little to push the U.S. off the path it's been on for decades -- that of a vast and growing disparity between the richest and poorest citizens.

Income for most workers has barely risen in the last 30 years, but the top 1 percent of earners have seen their income almost triple in the same amount of time. Economists and other experts say that could be the result of any number of factors, including the decline of labor unions, the explosion in capital gains during the middle part of the aughts, and tax policies put in place in recent years that favor the wealthy.

In his State of the Union address this past January, President Obama called economic fairness "the defining issue of our time," perhaps mindful of the growing number of voters who say they can't even afford basic necessities like food.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/05/1-percent-income-inequality_n_1321008.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009


We need a more fair tax rate on the rich.

I hope Obama can get congress to do it after he gets reelected.

Dragoness's photo
Mon 03/05/12 01:05 PM
Hey Creativeflowerforyou HI, are we still discussing the semantics of truth or fact? And how perception and understanding/interpretation alters those for each person making it/truth subjective? Facts being the closest to indisputable as one can get but still subject to the aforementioned issues.

I don't remember what we resolved last time so....

Dragoness's photo
Mon 03/05/12 12:55 PM
Ladies want to get together and start a petition to put salt peter in the food of any man who agrees with Rush on this one? That way they wouldn't have to worry about birth control at all, no erections for them.

J/K, I heard the stuff ruins them for life but if they can't be part of the solution maybe it would be best if they couldn't be part of the problem, hmmmmm something to think about.

Dragoness's photo
Mon 03/05/12 12:52 PM





Kinda like calling people that disagree with oblahmas policies bigots and racists..

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh


If they just disagree, no they're not racist. If they're saying racist things, they're racist. Not quite the same.


Its exactly the same.


No it isn't.

Dragoness's photo
Mon 03/05/12 12:52 PM
Edited by Dragoness on Mon 03/05/12 12:56 PM

President Obama injected himself Friday into the controversy over Rush Limbaugh's comments about a Georgetown University student who spoke to lawmakers about birth control, calling the 30-year-old woman to thank her for "exercising her right as a citizen to speak out."

But Limbaugh stood his ground, using his nationally syndicated radio show to mock Obama's call and charge Democrats with trying to exploit the controversy to make up for "failure on their decades-long abortion push."

"It just isn't the winning issue for them it used to be. ... If it were, this wouldn't be about contraception, this would be about abortion," Limbaugh said Friday.

The president called the student, Sandra Fluke, on Friday afternoon to express his disappointment in the "personal attacks" against her, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said.

Limbaugh, on his radio show earlier this week, had called Fluke a "slut" following her comments in favor of mandatory contraceptive coverage.

"The fact that our political discourse has become debased in many ways is bad enough. It is worse when it's directed at a private citizen who was simply expressing her views on a matter of public policy," Carney said.

He said Obama called Fluke to express disappointment about the attacks and "thank her" for exercising her right to speak out.

The phone call came as lawmakers across Capitol Hill were weighing in, and as the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee incorporated Limbaugh's comments into its fundraising campaign.

Limbaugh, on his show Friday, charged that Democrats were only elevating this issue because they're losing the argument on abortion.

"Now what's happening here politically, with the elevation of contraception here to such prominence in the national debate ... to me, it is evidence that the Democrats, the left have encountered utter political and moral failure on their decades-long abortion push," Limbaugh said.

Limbaugh also pointed out that Democrats had not spoken out about over-the-top comments made by other media personalities like Bill Maher, who tweeted that "Jesus just f----- Tim Tebow bad" during the Christmas Eve Broncos-Bills game and reportedly called Sarah Palin a "c---" last year.

"So I ask Jay Carney," Limbaugh said. "Will President Obama now give back the 1-million-dollar donation that Bill Maher gave his Super PAC?"

House Speaker John Boehner's office earlier in the day scolded Limbaugh. Though Boehner opposes the mandate, spokesman Michael Steel said in a statement that "the speaker obviously believes the use of those words was inappropriate" -- in reference to Limbaugh's remarks.

But Steel also said Boehner thought it was inappropriate to try to "raise money off the situation."

Carney had no comment when asked at the press briefing about efforts by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee to raise money off the issue.

A day earlier, dozens of congressional Democrats had signed a letter to Boehner urging Republicans to condemn the language.

"Mr. Limbaugh repeatedly used sexually charged, patently offensive, and obscene language to malign the character of this courageous young woman who has chosen to be the voice for many of her peers," Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., wrote in the letter signed by more than 75 other lawmakers, urging Republicans to condemn the "atrocious and hurtful words."

Georgetown University's president, John J. DeGioia, also weighed in on Friday, issuing a lengthy statement expressing concern about the remarks directed at Fluke.

"(Fluke) provided a model of civil discourse. This expression of conscience was in the tradition of the deepest values we share as a people. One need not agree with her substantive position to support her right to respectful free expression. And yet, some of those who disagreed with her position -- including Rush Limbaugh and commentators throughout the blogosphere and in various other media channels -- responded with behavior that can only be described as misogynistic, vitriolic, and a misrepresentation of the position of our student," he said.

Fluke also released a statement on Thursday saying: "No woman deserves to be disrespected in this manner."

Fluke had spoken at a forum last week pulled together by Democrats -- it was a response to a hearing held by Republicans where witnesses bashed the administration's contraceptive coverage mandate.

Fluke complained at the forum about how much she and other students pay for birth control because Georgetown, a Catholic university, won't cover it.

Limbaugh later said on his show that the student was effectively arguing that the students "must be paid to have sex."

"What does that make her? It makes her a slut, right. It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She's having so much sex, she can't afford the contraception," he said.

Limbaugh, though, was not cowed by what he described as the left's "outright conniption fit."

"Why go before a congressional committee and demand that all of us (pay)? Because they want to have sex any time. ... I mean, they're going broke having to buy contraception," he said.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/03/02/dems-urge-republicans-to-condemn-limbaugh-over-remarks-on-georgetown-student/#ixzz1o01ql7FF

:thumbsup: Way to go Rush! :thumbsup: If she wants to ge stuffed like a Thanksgiving turkey, banged like the Salvation Army Drum let her pay for it herself or keep her legs closed.



Fraudulent post here:thumbsup: because Rush hasn't been right about anything:thumbsup: other than his own drug abuse on a couple of occasions.

Of course if we were telling guys to tie a knot in their penises so nobody has to pay for contraceptive you can bet the government would be paying for it but it is only women after all. They deserve to get knocked up if they can't control the men's penises.slaphead

Dragoness's photo
Mon 03/05/12 12:48 PM
Edited by Dragoness on Mon 03/05/12 12:58 PM
Happy belated B-day Crimepartner of Yellowrose.

Dragoness's photo
Mon 02/27/12 08:44 PM

Are you the same in the forums as you are in person? Do you let people know what you're really like? Or, do you play a part and be who you want to be, rather than yourself?


I am pretty close to the same. I have discovered it is hard for my humor to translate over in typing. I am usually nicer when I am online than I would be in person. But I am always PC in reality because I know respect is only reciprocal, if your not willing to give it, you don't deserve it back.

Dragoness's photo
Mon 02/27/12 08:35 PM

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/24/banker-1-percent-tip-receipt_n_1299280.html

Banker Leaves 1% Tip On $133 Lunch Bill In Defiance of 'The 99%'

First Posted: 02/24/2012 5:39 pm Updated: 02/24/2012 10:50 pm

A banker left a 1% tip in defiance of 'the 99%' at a Newport Beach restaurant the other week, according to his dining companion and underling who snapped a photo of the receipt and posted it to his blog, Future Ex Banker. (Update: the blog is now offline.)



In posting the photo, the employee gave some background on his boss and the receipt:

Mention the “99%” in my boss’ presence and feel his wrath. So proudly does he wear his 1% badge of honor that he tips exactly 1% every time he feels the server doesn’t sufficiently bow down to his Holiness. Oh, and he always makes sure to include a “tip” of his own.

The "tip" of his own in this case was to tell the server to "get a real job." Pleasant.

The whistleblower's Future Ex-Banker blog (now offline) included additional background on his boss, and some insight into why he would out his gross behavior, likely resulting in an employment status of current ex-banker:

I work in the corporate office of a major bank for a boss who represents everything wrong with the financial industry: blatant disregard and outright contempt for everyone and everything he deems beneath him. On top of that, he’s a complete and utter tool. At the same time, I’m still cashing paychecks, an admittedly willing—albeit reluctant—cog in the wheel of this increasingly ugly industry, so I’ve created this blog as a confessional of sorts. It won’t entirely clear my conscience, but hopefully it’ll help. I’m sure I’ll get fired eventually. Until then, enjoy.

UPDATE: In a conversation with the Huffington Post, Mike Wilcox, the vice president of operations for True Food Kitchen, gave some insight into how the company was treating the incident since the receipt began receiving attention online. Wilcox said that the restaurant was "absolutely" treating the receipt as real, but to confirm its authenticity for certain, they were in the process of tracking down both the physical receipt at the restaurant and the computer-generated copy in their credit card system.

"The first thing we're going to do is to make sure the server is taken care of," Wilcox said, "and make sure the server wasn't treated badly or insufficiently tipped." He explained that they would be asking Breanna, the server named on the receipt, if she recalled the table and how her service was. "If her service was up to the level" they assume their employees would deliver, Wilcox said, "they would do everything they can to make it up to her somehow." Referring to online comments posted about the receipt, Wilcox remarked, "people are asking us to ban the person from the restaurant -- if more information came through on who the person is I first would love to talk to him."

UPDATE II: As many have noted, a true 1% tip correctly rounded to the nearest penny would have been $1.34, leaving this tip just shy of that threshold, mathematically speaking.




The fact that his not so nice second tip was to "get a real job" shows this dipshyte thinks the working class of this country don't mean anything to this country when in truth they could shut this country down if they stopped doing what they do. Otherwise his second tip would have spoken of the failure of service.

But this is one of the biggest problems in this country. The respect for the regular working person has gone way down and that comes from the Republican parties influence.

The Republican party couldn't give a half a cent for the working class of this country.




Dragoness's photo
Thu 02/23/12 05:57 PM
:thumbsup: laugh

Dragoness's photo
Thu 02/23/12 05:54 PM
If there were an Afghan military base in our country burning bibles, it wouldn't be pretty.

The reaction is as it should be.

Dragoness's photo
Thu 02/23/12 05:25 PM
Men Going Extinct? Scientists Say That's Unlikely, As Y Chromosome Not Degrading Rapidly

Male Y Sex Chromosome Not Headed for Extinction

First Posted: 02/23/2012 8:59 am Updated: 02/23/2012 2:01 pm


By: Stephanie Pappas, LiveScience Senior Writer
Published: 02/22/2012 02:37 PM EST on LiveScience

Contrary to previous belief, men may not be on the way out after all. New research reveals that the Y chromosome is not rapidly degrading and is unlikely to disappear.

The idea that the male sex chromosome and its owners would someday vanish is based on the process by which our cells form sperm and eggs. These cells each contain pairs of chromosomes, or packets of DNA. When these cells divide, their chromosome pairs swap genetic information in a process called recombination (like shuffling two decks of cards before dividing them back into two decks).

Recombination allows the cells to repair genetic mistakes and mix and match genes. But unlike the other 45 chromosomes that carry human genetic information, the male sex chromosome, the Y, does not come with a matched partner to recombine with. Instead, it gets paired with an X chromosome. That means that when it comes time for cells to divide, the Y has no one to recombine with.

"The Y never gets a chance, because there are never two Ys in a cell," said study researcher Jennifer Hughes, Whitehead Institute in Cambridge, Mass. "What we have shown time and time again is that if you don't recombine, you degenerate."

This trick of nature means that today's Y chromosome contains only 3 percent of the genes it had when it started evolving separately from the X chromosome 200 million to 300 million years ago. That finding led to speculation that the male chromosome could crumble completely within hundreds of thousands or millions of years, perhaps taking men as we know them with it.

Changing chromosomes

But Hughes' new research suggests that men can breathe easy. She and her colleagues sequenced the genome of the rhesus macaque, an Old World monkey whose lineage split from that of humans 25 million years ago. Prior to this study, researchers could only compare the human Y chromosome with that of the chimpanzee Y. Chimps split from humans 6 million years ago, giving a limited portrait of the evolution of the chromosome.

A comparison of the rhesus Y chromosome with that of modern men revealed that reports of the chromosome's decay have been exaggerated. The two sex chromosomes are remarkably similar, Hughes told LiveScience. [5 Myths About the Male Body]

"For the most part, the gene content has not changed for 25 million years," she said.

The small amount of gene loss in that timeframe all occurred in the youngest 3 percent of the Y chromosome — the section that most recently stopped mixing and matching with the X chromosome. The findings suggest that while gene loss is rapid at first, it levels off into almost nothing.

"The rate of decay appears to have just basically ceased at this point," Hughes said.

The future of men

The reason for the Y's stability likely comes down to the fact that it simply can't lose anymore genes without vanishing completely. In other words, the genes that remain on the Y chromosome are so crucial that losing them might ensure that the organism doesn't survive. Natural selection favors those who can survive to pass on their genes, so overly degraded Ys simply end up on the trash heap of evolution.

Hughes and her colleagues plan to sequence the genomes of even more distantly related mammals, including mice, rats, marmosets and opossums, in hopes of tracing the evolution of the male chromosome back even further. But for now, the future of men seems solid.

"This is clear evidence that the Y is not going anywhere," Hughes said.

We asked Dr. John McDonald, a professor at the University of Delaware's Department of Biological Sciences, to clear up a few other genetic misconceptions. Keep clicking for six of his favorites:



True or false:
Two parents with dry earwax can have a child with wet earwax.

Answer:
False
Unlike most of the human characters that are used to demonstrate simple genetics principles, wet vs. dry earwax really is controlled by one gene with two alleles.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/23/men-going-extinct-not-likely_n_1296096.html?ref=science&icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl22|sec3_lnk1%26pLid%3D137892

Well good news for the male of our species.

I wonder how women would have reproduced after that by mitosis maybe?

1 2 11 12 13 15 17 18 19 24 25