@george-k said in Fired for smoking weed:

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/544039-white-house-defends-marijuana-policy-after-report-of-staffers

White House press secretary Jen Psaki on Friday defended the administration’s policy on marijuana use by employees after a report said dozens of young staffers were suspended or asked to resign because of past use of the drug.

Psaki wrote in a series of tweets that only five people who had started working at the White House had lost their jobs because of the administration’s policy on past marijuana use. She did not indicate how many had been suspended or turned away before starting work, but she pointed to the administration relaxing rules around past marijuana use earlier this year.

“We announced a few weeks ago that the White House had worked with the security service to update the policies to ensure that past marijuana use wouldn’t automatically disqualify staff from serving in the White House,” she tweeted.

From the RWEC the following questions:

Only 5 people were "fired," How many were suspended? How many who were scheduled to work were not hired?

As long as marijuana remains a Schedule 1 drug, Biden has two choices.

One is that he can continue to give pink slips to people he specifically told to be honest about their past marijuana use and not worry about it. The other is to override the background check system and order them to receive security clearances anyway. The latter would be in his power to do, but after all the griping that was done over Donald Trump using the same method to get a clearance for Jared Kushner, the hypocrisy might have been too much for even Biden to bear.

Certainly many people in high government places would lose their jobs. That is axiomatic.

There is something else going on here. I could venture a guess or two but since the media doesn’t know or doesn’t want to say I wonder what others think.

@george-k said in "One-party control of the press and media is a threat to a viable democracy.”:

The problem with the liberals in the 2nd decade of the 20th century is how illiberal they are.

"Free speech?"

Fine as long as it doesn't hurt someone's feelings.

"Free press?"

Fine, as long as it doesn't disagree with what I think, and for goodness' sake, don't you DARE publish something against my candidate.

"Freedom of speech?"

Fine, as long as what you say doesn't upset the people I support.

"Free Donald Trump"
Fine, as long as, no wait, ARGGGGGGGGHH!!!

I watched the "Darkhorse Podcast" by Bret Weinstein and his wife Heather Heying. Both are Ph.D. biologists. They raised a new fear, based upon a series of research documents, that the virus will mutate to attack the young. It wasn't that simple, but they discussed the viability given what is known in how a virus mutates, and agreed that not enough is known, and that a "perfect storm" that one author touted was premature. Guess we'll see.

Good Lord! I hadn't even thought about that, but it's absolutely true... It wasn't immediate, but old dog poop on the ground would turn white over time. Now it doesn't.

We should come up with a conspiracy theory about it.

@jon-nyc said in Any vehicles with a V6 still being made?!:

@mik said in Any vehicles with a V6 still being made?!:

The time is drawing near - what are you thinking about for him?

Car wise? He’s still 11. Got a ways. He’ll likely not get his own car in high school unless I want to use it as a convenient excuse to upgrade mine.

Don't you have a 15-year-old low mileage Corolla? That would be perfect!

The question to ask is 'why would Iran want us to think they might attack Ft. Nair?'. I suspect no attack will take place. Ever. But if the NSA takes the threat seriously it could reap benefits for the mullahs.

She basically ran on her husband's platform.

Crits gotta crit.

@mainermikebrown

Mike, have you contacted your county health department about vaccination? We got in fastest through that route. I don't know how your state is set up, but we were signed up through the state system and the county system. Our county was the winner for us. You might find you can also sign up for your county's distribution, as well as your state's.

And people wonder why Gingers are seen as soulless monsters....

@mik said in Chicken Chilindron:

Only if caught.

You are so caught, Mik. There's no getting uncaught for you. Your MFR will gar-ron-tee that!
😂

That is freakin' awesome!

Looks great on the ultra-wide monitors.

@horace said in "The Dumbest Thing I've Ever Seen":

But unfortunately the white ruling media class can only be counted on to push them further and further into retardation.

I think it is mostly just the white men.

They don't even have a men history month

White men are retards

@rainman It has been awhile!

Good to hear from you, Rainman!

For those who are not familiar with distributions visualized as in the first example:

The dots are individuals. Their x- and y-coordinates measure how handsome and how nice they are, respectively.
The "round" shape indicates that these properties are not correlated. The correlation is illustrated with the blue bar, which is computed to go through "the middle" of the dots.

This is what correlation of such dot clouds looks like:

72379f84-6549-43c5-8cff-3176ce0ae5b3-image.png

The middle shows "uncorrelated", as in our example. To the left, it shows more and more correlation. For instance, if you measure height and weight of people, you'd get a graph like the 0.8 one. To the right, we see more and more inverse correlation. For instance, if you'd measure HP vs MPG of engines, you'd get a picture like the -0.8 one.

The point of the "paradox" is that if you filter the population by two positive traits (you date men who are nice and hot), then in that subset there's an inverse correlation, as illustrated by the diagonal blue line on the right picture. It doesn't look as "clean" as the "-0.8" picture I posted above, but mathematically it is still clearly a negative correlation.

alt text

alt text

Hardly seems possible. Wonder if they taste different?