A near collision between two self-driving cars is now raising concerns over the technology. On Tuesday, two driverless prototypes, one operated by Google and the other by Delphi Automotive, nearly collided in Palo Alto, California.
Despite the obvious benefits of driverless cars and airplanes — namely safety and reduced emissions — “people have understandable concerns about the rapid pace of technological change, and about the role which robots could play in our future society,” the study found.
The two Loudoun County supervisors who live in Sterling don’t always agree, but they are on the same page in rejecting a supervisor candidate’s call for new residential development in the district.
Longtime residents Eugene Delgaudio (R-Sterling) and Scott York (I-At Large) say the Sterling community does not need the type of redevelopment sought by Phyllis Randall, a Democratic Party nominee who lives in Lansdowne and is running for York’s position as Board chair in the November elections.
Among her suggestions for Sterling District, Randall recommended “redevelopment of some of their shopping areas to mixed use communities.”
In a newsletter earlier this week, Delgaudio said “‘redevelopment’ is the wrong word to use in Sterling.” He warned that Randall’s plan would mean density-packing of new residences, and a corresponding negative impact on schools, traffic and emergency services.
Delgaudio told FirewallNOVA that converting existing shopping areas to mixed-use “will lead to residential high-rises and apartments that will change the character of the Sterling community.”
York agreed that Randall’s suggestion to bring mixed-use developments is “very concerning.”
“Sterling doesn’t need to be redeveloped,” York said. “The shopping center needs to be revitalized. But other than that, I like the community the way it is. I’m not going to support any plan of hers to come in and try to density-pack Sterling.”
Randall’s fellow Democrat, Koran Saines, who is running against Delgaudio for the Sterling seat, sounded a similar note, saying he envisions “revitalizing” the district in a way that would “not take away from the character of Sterling Park.”
On the heels of his statement that adopted children are not members of real families, Bob Marshall has this to say about the American Civil War:
If the Supreme Court twists the Fourteenth Amendment, enacted after the shedding of blood of over a half a million Americans for equal rights for black Americans, into a mandate for same-sex “marriage,” the decision must be challenged immediately and effectively.
About 620,000 people died as a result of the Civil War, roughly 160,000 from the North, about 460,000 from the South. One can only wonder, particularly given recent events, how those who lay claim to Southern heritage feel about the suggestion that a near half-million Southerners died, “for equal rights for black Americans.” Indeed, one can only marvel at Bob Marshall’s blindness to the fact that black Americans today might also have some feelings about that claim.
Bob Marshall is the biggest embarrassment in Virginia Republican politics today.
While U.S. retailers plan to stop selling “Confederate” flags and merchandise, manufacturers in China appear to have no plans to follow suit.
“I didn’t get a chance to watch the news last week,” said Maggie Ma, of Qianxi Flag Co. in the central city of Wuhan. It was a view echoed by Jessie Liu, general manager of sales at Xiangying Textile in Shaoxing, south of Shanghai, who added with a sigh that she didn’t know much about the history of the U.S. Civil War era, because, “We’re always working and working, we don’t have any time to study these kind of things.”
As of this afternoon, hundreds of such items are available at Chinese manufacturers’ outlet Alibaba.
An audit of timesheets submitted by Amtrak workers turned up potential abuse and fraud according to the Office of Inspector General for the agency. The report shows stunning claims by some who work the rails, including employees who worked as many as 40 hours in the course of a 24-hour day.
Along with, apparently, everyone.
Remember “the adoption option,” that anti-choicers seem to think is the easy alternative to abortion? Well, Bob Marshall doesn’t. In his latest
encyclical newsletter (part of a series he is sending in anticipation of the Supreme Court undoing his greatest personal achievement by restoring freedom to the Virginia state constitution), he actually says this:
Since families come from parents, you cannot look past parents and still have a family — because there would be no family there. Homosexual acts cannot generate families; therefore, their ‘families’ cannot be the same. If there are children present, we may be sure that both parents of the children are not present in that family. That is a lot to look past.
Same-sex couples sometimes adopt children, just as mixed-sex couples do. Bob’s colossal inability to treat people equally has him oblivious to the fact that, by his “logic” above, he has declared that couples who adopt do not become parents. Bob says, “there would be no family there.”
The people who keep re-electing this man appear willing to look past this kind of cruel, heartless comment and see something they can vote for. I can’t help but wonder, though, if some of those people are, or are in families with, adopted members. Bob Marshall thinks they are in “families,” not families, and that they don’t have both their parents there. To someone in a family with an adopted member, that is a major rejection of what it means to be who that person is. That is a declaration that adoptees are parentless children. That is a claim of the most vicious sort.
That is a lot to look past.
No, really. It is. Read about it here.
Republican members of the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors are all supporting Republican candidates in the November elections, which means none of them are supporting the Independent candidate for chair, the Loudoun Times-Mirror has revealed. The only Board member who is not supporting the Republican candidate for chair is Shawn Williams, who left the GOP last month when making plans to run as an Independent and is supporting Scott York, also an Indepedent, for chair.
The Loudoun Time-Mirror labels this turn of events a “curious political dynamic.”
Since the local press, god bless’em, provide fuller coverage of retail openings and closings than of local politics, far be it from us to dampen their enthusiasm when they do venture down this weird, perplexing road. We should, however, be willing to help smooth the path when possible.
These political parties are, in some respects, mysteries wrapped in enigmas wrapped in press releases, and thus inscrutable. In other ways, however, they are simple.
Let us attempt to untangle the Case of the Curious Dynamic.
A Mystery Surfaces
The roiling controversy did not spring up ex nihilo this week, mind you. It was actually born long ago, in the faint, hazy past of earlier this month.
At the Republican “unity” event in Leesburg on June 5, during the interview portion, the Loudoun Times-Mirror reporter noted the Republican supervisors were standing in support of Republican nominee for chair, Charlie King, instead of current chair, Scott York, the Independent. The reporter asked why they have “switched gears” to support King, when in the past they have praised York’s work on the Board.
Supervisor Geary Higgins (R-Catoctin) took a stab at it: “Because we’re Republicans.”
Not so easily turned aside, the reporter pursued: “That’s it?”
After a pause of two seconds that felt like 20, Supervisor Janet Clarke (R-Blue Ridge) mercifully chimed in with a critique of York that went a bit beyond what Charlie King had covered in-depth ten minutes earlier, getting time moving again and the reporter off the hook.
How That Pledge, Such As It Is, Works
Since that lesson apparently did not sink in, we shall review the main requirement of campaigning under the Republican label.
Despite what we have already established about the overall bogosity of the LCRC pledge, one part is less bogus than the others, and that is where if you are a Republican candidate for office, you don’t publicly support non-Republicans running against Republicans. Nobody would likely go through the trouble of getting the GOP nomination if not prepared to jump through that particular hoop.
Republicans are going to support Republicans publicly, almost every time. That is not a piece of shocking news. Any Republican candidate doing otherwise would be shocking, not to mention enormously inconvenient for the candidate.
That’s what would constitute a news flash.
And anybody bothering to read this political blog is probably saying to themselves, “Well, duh.” (Except at the LTM, where I imagine the reaction is: “The hell you say!”)
To be sure, there are curious aspects to the 2015 campaign for Board of Supervisors, in that the local Republican Party was split over the sheriff primary contest last month, and one faction in that battle is tied closely to the campaign of Charlie King. Oaths were uttered, suspicions raised, charges of treason tossed around, and some say bridges might have been burned. But that is inside-inside baseball. Even in that cloudy picture, most of the GOP will be pro-GOP for public attribution. If you want to report that story, you will have to dig deep into a thicket of anonymous sources.
But the question of whether any Loudoun Republican nominee, anywhere, is going to publicly support Scott York, is about as newsworthy as mosquitoes biting in summer.
Yes, we reported last week that York is supporting several Republicans this year. But he – above all people – likely knows it would be a man-bites-dog story if any were reciprocated.
When it comes to public endorsements, the “I” also stands for “Island,” which is what Scott York is on.
TPA, or similar a law, has existed for decades. The recent vote in the U.S. Senate was a renewal of the TPA, and Senator Ted Cruz, perhaps the foremost constitutional conservative in the Senate, supported it because it created a process in which the president could be held accountable.
Read the whole column at Examiner.com.