StrangeSox

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Mar 11, 2015 -> 10:38 AM) It's a historically racist fraternity started at Bama. It doesnt surprise me. Many of the southern fraternities including many of the black ones were founded with segregation and racism as part of their core values. However Oklahoma and its campus arent exactly black friendly, so the deeper issue is why they felt it was ok to sing something like that in front of people at a date party. Clearly there is some accepted level of Racism at that school. It's the only existing fraternity founded in the antebellum south.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Mar 11, 2015 -> 10:26 AM) Univ of OK is a public university, it's absolutely a government agent subject to the Constitution. That's very settled law. Whether this is threatening speech is the question. I don't think generalized threats (if that's what this would be) against a race is enough. The exception of threatening speech is pretty narrow. You gotta be specific, basically inciting immediate violence. Generalized threats made in private which were filmed and released without the person's knowledge. It'd be very hard to stretch that into some sort of legitimate case for expelling students over speech.

The university has gone and expelled them, which seems like pretty clear first amendment violations.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Mar 9, 2015 -> 04:02 PM) You're white (I assume), male, employed and educated. Your opinion/experience doesn't mean anything in this argument. great post!

I don't personally care for Booker, but I supposed he is a potential option for a strong primary run against Clinton again.

Great work by Pace

Ta-Nehisi Coates on The Gangsters of Ferguson http://m.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/...erguson/386893/ Focusing on some awful emails or the findings specific to Darren Wilson obscures what really happens in Ferguson and numerous other cities across the country.

It depends on what you're cooking and how important temp control is.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Mar 5, 2015 -> 08:48 AM) Mine has increased 10+% each of the last two years.. And I have 5% co-insurance now that i never had before... What were the annual increases before that?

QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 4, 2015 -> 04:35 PM) I also remember the main argument behind Obamacare to be expanded access, but that's just me. It was a whole big bag of things, but "bend the cost curve" was definitely a major talking point.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 4, 2015 -> 04:16 PM) (If you look at this one specific, highly subsidized plan) These are the benchmark plans*, and there's actually two listed, and there's data for both pre and post-tax credit costs. I'll trust Kaiser over "I don't know nobody who's saving money with that Obamacare!" *each state has a specific benchmark plan. Kaiser Family Foundation has decades of strong, non-partisan health care policy analysis here, this wasn't a link to some HuffPo piece.

well some googling found a report from Kaiser from January on health insurance premium changes year-over-year. A bunch of states/counties actually have negative premium growth rates, so that's a moot point anyway. http://kff.org/health-reform/issue-brief/a...e-marketplaces/

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Mar 4, 2015 -> 04:03 PM) In Government speak, sure. Hey we only raised you taxes 6% this year instead of 8%, so we cut your taxes by 2%!!!!! They touted this whole program as a cost cutting move. Not a rate increase cutting move. "The Government" is not raising insurance premiums. I'm sure your insurance company would be happy to take the extra premiums since it's obviously not even worthwhile to you. The program was touted as many things because it's a huge, complex bill that does many things. But a core element was "bend the curve," not "immediately make the curve go negative." Just google "bend the cost curve."

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Mar 4, 2015 -> 03:48 PM) By hyper-liberal you mean 'correct'. If you mean it, you put it in the law. Maybe if they would have actually, you know, READ the damn bill first, had a lengthy debate on it and stuff instead of ramming down our throats, they might have caught this little 'oversight'. Kennedy's federalism complaints were over what he feared the Feds would try and do to the states to make them set up exchanges if the subsidies are struck down. No, by hyper-literal I mean four or five words without regard to how that reading would function with the rest of the statute. People had read the damn bill first. It was debated for months and months, and a lot of effort went in to drafting it. This wasn't an "oversight." At worst, it was imprecise language, which leaves it right back with Chevron statutory interpretation. Kennedy's concerns were over what actually happens if the petitioners' claims are accepted. What he feared the Feds "would" do is what the statute requires if you accept King et. al, and what King et. al argues that Congress explicitly and intentionally attempted to do.

Man it sure is nice to be in the Bay Area every other week lately.

Electric ovens are better (more consistent temperature), which is why many (all?) of the higher end ranges are dual fuel. On the stove top side, though, you don't have that instant temperature control that you get with gas or induction.

On average, year-over-year premium increases have slowed since the law was passed. The talk was about "bending the cost curve," not pointing it in the other direction. Using some hypothetical numbers to illustrate, before Obamcare policies rose 10% every year, now they rise 7%. So they're lower than they otherwise would have been.

Oral arguments in King v Burwell, the case that could potentially eliminate subsidies for millions of Americans based on a hyper-literal reading of one clause, were held today. Transcript. Notably, Kennedy raised several federalism concerns that indicate how he might rule against the petitioners.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Mar 4, 2015 -> 11:31 AM) I haven't...I'll look into it... I was confused enough by Wolf's "infrared" charbroiler and griddle. The one caveat with induction is that you need pans with high ferrous content e.g. cast iron, some stainless steel. There's a coil underneath the cooktop that has current passing through it, which induces a magnetic field in the pot above. Since it's an AC current, the magnetic field switches back and forth and heats the pot through induced electrical resistance in the pot itself. So the pot warms up rapidly, but the glass cooktop itself stays cool. Plus, since it's one single, smooth cooking surface, it's super easy to clean. From an engineering standpoint, it's pretty cool.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Mar 4, 2015 -> 11:29 AM) Agreed. I've been on craigslist and ebay looking every day. lol, looking back through the thread he posted about it on another forum, he was looking for four years. Might not want to wait that long to find that kind of deal.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Mar 4, 2015 -> 11:09 AM) Yeah, a lot of times the "professional" models utilize normal residential-rated electric and gas, but the commercial grades require upgrades beyond that. I want to get her a really nice setup, because she really does love to cook and bake, but jesus, some of the Wolf ranges are $11-15k...that's crazy. Abt had some ridiculous range that was $50k! It was a 60" or something like that but looked vintage. edit: here it is, looks awesome in the right home but jesus that price I've got a friend who found a "broken" Viking 48" on Craigslist for $1000. One of the burners wasn't working, but it took a buddy of his less than an hour to fix it ( I think the ignitor had gone out). So while "used" might be a hard sell, if you can get what's essentially a $10k stove for $1k it might be worth it. edit: have you thought about induction? cooks as well as gas supposedly but the stovetop stays cool to the touch, and it can boil a pot of water in 60-90 seconds.

It's not high end but we got a fridigaire gallery gas range with four burners and a central griddle burner last year (about $900). We've been happy with it so far. Electric stoves are terrible, a propane camp stove would be an upgrade over that.

Ferguson Police Routinely Violate Rights of Blacks, Justice Dept. Finds

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Mar 3, 2015 -> 04:50 PM) It's still the law in Illinois: edit: Where in Heller did it address this? I thought the decision was pretty broad - we recognize the right to bear arms, but we also recognize there are common sense restrictions. It was the first ruling to find an individual right (both the majority and the dissent played amateur historian), but the trigger lock/unloaded requirement was also essential to the ruling. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of...umbia_v._Heller Many of the more...ardent gun supporters argue that you need to have your weapon ready at all times.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Mar 3, 2015 -> 04:26 PM) It's not really a question of laziness, it's just another requirement that would replace an existing requirement that should be preventing the (rare) tragedies you're seeking to prevent. If you're worried about kids, only moronic, irresponsible and criminal parents let their kids get to their guns. They should locked up and unloaded. That's the law. No, it isn't. Heller explicitly rejected the DC requirements to keep a gun unloaded or with a trigger lock. Plenty of people keep guns unlocked, loaded or both.