Once again the peoples cube is right.

Our progressive ally MSNBC is predicitng that marriage and sex with robots will happen within the century or in the next 5 years. hooray....

Here is the link.

https://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21271545/wid/11915829?GT1=10450

Once it appears in COSMO people will "jump on the band wagon" like it's hot.

I wonder what the new roomba will be like?
**the NEW ROOMBA!!!! (it sucks like never before)**

According to David Levy at the University of Maastricht in the Netherlands
"love and sex with robots are inevitable". note inevitable.

Some more quotes:

anything's possible. And just because it's not legal doesn't mean people won't try it"

- Ronald Arkin at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta

Levy predicts Massachusetts will be the first jurisdiction to legalize human-robot marriage. "Massachusetts is more liberal than most other jurisdictions in the United States and has been at the forefront of same-sex marriage," Levy said. "There's also a lot of high-tech research there at places like MIT.

So who will get down and do the robot? (no pun intended)

...people who find it hard to form relationships, because they are
extremely shy, or have psychological problems, or are just plain ugly or have unpleasant personalities..." Levy said.

Robot relations will also be the answer to all our moral dillemas,

For instance, robot sex could provide an outlet for criminal sexual urges. 'If you have pedophiles and you let them use a robotic child, will that reduce the incidence of them abusing real children, or will it increase it?' Arkin asked. 'I don't think anyone has the answers for that yet - that's where future research needs to be done.' "

Keeping a robot for sex could reduce human prostitution and
the problems that come with it

Instead of a woman saying, 'Darling, not tonight, I have a headache,' you could get 'Darling, I have a headache, why not use your robot?'

<br>And finally i'll end with Charlie Sheen

"Rush & Molloy report that the actor once proudly owned a $6,000 full-sized, anatomically-correct cheerleader doll.

Apparently Charlie didn't see anything wrong with his latex lady. An insider told the publication that he even brought her along to the "Spin City" set back in the day. But all that changed when Charlie offered a couple of real live women the chance for a foursome with him and his inanimate pal.

"They couldn't stop laughing at him," the source told the Daily News. "Charlie got so mad that he ran the girls out of his house. Then he took a meat cleaver and chopped one of the doll's hands off. He and his bodyguard tried to dispose of it, like it was a real body. They wrapped it in a blanket and drove around in the middle of the night till they found a dumpster." "

Couldn't the Hildo be considered a "robot"? If it is, then we are setting the trend for future sex encounters. Although, I don't know why anyone would want to screw a cold, metal, lifeless, humanoid form (Queen Hillary excluded of course).

Charlie Sheen has always reminded me of Chairman Punchenko. Especially the way he disposed of the body - just like our Chairman in his day, wrapped his toaster Helen in a polka-dotted flannel toaster comforter and sent her to sleep with the microwaves at the bottom of the Potomac. And just like Chairman, I bet, Charlie Sheen quickly found consolation while crying on the shoulder of a Hoover vacuum cleaner with which he inevitably had sex five minutes later just to release the tension between them.

Soon the expression about chemistry in romance will no longer be a metaphor - if it ever was...

Considering that the source is MSNBC, I have a feeling that Comrade Olberman had something to do with this story. At least a sexbot won't likely go to the internet to complain about what a lousy lay he is.

I have no doubt that Mr. Sheen was pleased to find something which, as of yet, cannot levy a palimony suit. But I take that this is something drummed up, a legal fishing expedition, by Justice hangovers from the Clinton Administration, who, incensed that Bill Gates was not sufficiently respectful, sued Macroshaft. Now I understand throughly dumping on Macroshaft for its Crimes Against Computing, staring with Quick and Dirty DOS, continuing through Vista, but there is so much money there that regardless of the source, it's very attractive.

And you know, money is never dirty per se.

So after we are all permitted to have liaisons with machines, then we will get to represent the machines, which have no voice, and need to be heard.

There will, however, be a constitutional amendment excepting any rights that the Hildo Hydra has. But considering that it is a <i>Hydra</i>, would that not open the door for legalized polygamy?

We need to begin unionizing machines even now, much less wait for the courts to rule on issues of appliance sex. Already machines are regularly abused, forced to work long hours with little or no pay (if one can consider lubrication pay), most have little hope for advancement, and some even are the victims of physical and mental abuse from their overlords.

Comrades, this is a major opportunity since once we are seen as the party that cares for machines, then we can count on the machine vote forever.... bringing a whole new meaning to "voting machines." Of course, there will be no real election once Hillary is lifted up into her rightful place, but we may still wish to keep the image up.

If people can start marrying machines does that mean we can register the machines to vote? (democratic of course)

All hail the mighty Compu-proxy !! Start registering computers and ipods now!

Hmm Do Compu-proxies of Necro-proxies count as two votes.... or are we limited in scope?

I register my playstation 2 for hillary

I register my PS3, PS2, Xbox 360, Gameboy Color, and all 6 computers. Do I get a discount?

Cars now have computers in them, does that make them eligible as well? If so, there are 107 million US households, each with an average of 1.9 cars, trucks or sport utility vehicles, the Bureau of Transportation Statistics reports. That equals 203.3 million vehicles, or should I say votes.

-Mikhail

Uh, maybe we should round up the .9 to 2 no one will ever know....

We must now liberate cars from their oppressive owners... Would you like to be stuck all day in traffic and be forced to destroy the environment. I SAY NO. Join Friends Advocating the Relocation of Transportation [FART] and Liberate a Car Today.....

Have a FART party today because its all FOR THE CHILDREN tm

My car doesn't have a brain/computer and therefore needs not be registered. at least it won't....

Comrades, are you not being ableist in discriminating against cars without computers? Even a 1973 Plymouth Fury, which doesn't even have electronic ignition, has points. And points move and go back and forth and do things and therefore ought to have a voice.

Now it's white male heterosexuals (sorry; I've got a racket with this sex thing and I'm hanging on like ugly on Mr. Reno) who don't have a voice because you--<b>you</b> are the plug figure in the equation.

My truck has an onboard computer. As a matter of fact, it has happened before where the truck would only idle for a few seconds and then cut off. Come to find out, the truck had enough power to start, but not enough power to keep the computer running, thus is turned off. Oh, yea, and when I first got it, it had to be taken back in for repair because the seat belts would not work, those too, it was found out, were controlled by a computer. I think that my truck is eligble and thinks enough on its own to vote democrate.

A lot of these new cars that are computer controlled are a real pain in the ass. If anything goes wrong with them, you have to take the entire car down to the shop and have the computer technicians find out what's wrong, the mechanics fix it, the computer technicians check it again, and the entire process takes longer, and is more expensive. People can't even hot rod new cars because you have to have a degree in the automotive technology just to do the simplest things. That and the smog laws.

<chuckles> Yep, I remember thinking that the car companies were just being a pain by putting computers in the cars, then after I researched it, I figured out that no, it was the government that was making them do this, all these new high millage and air polluting regulations. Ha, there goes yet another one, let the government make it up and then blame it on the kapitalist companies.

You're right Betty, but it is not without its advantages. Example, I own what they call an OBD-II reader. It is a device that you plug into the car's computer and the computer will tell you what is wrong. It actually makes fixing the car easier, but here is the problem, I have a problem with my truck right now that I have not bothered to get fixed. I noticed that the truck was delaying sometimes when it wanted to shift, so, when I got the OBD-II reader, I plugged it in and it showed that the oxygen sensor was out in the transmission. So, it makes it easy to find, but if it had not been there to begin with, then it would not have broken.

Another story is that of my neighbor. All he did once was replaced the license plate light, the entire computer system completely screwed up on him. He eventually put the original bulb back in, but it was still screwing up. I have no idea what he finally had to do.

Oh! And there is that other story with the chip in the key so that it could not be copied and a copy of a key with a chip costs $70.

I got a million of these car-computer stories.

One last thing! As Commissar of Robotics! I hereby put a tax on any individual that wishes to have a relationship with a robot. You will be billed accordingly.

RedtheProgressiveFox wrote: One last thing! As Commissar of Robotics! I hereby put a tax on any individual that wishes to have a relationship with a robot. You will be billed accordingly.

Bad news for the Chairman....

I was watching a show on TLC a couple years back called Rides ( I think it was canceled). On the show they would modify cars and fix them up and stuff, but not like the Monster Garage, and American Chopper shows. This was done by real professionals that had huge companies and lots of real certified mechanics working for them. One of the episodes, they took a Lexus with a V6, and replaced it with a V8 from a different model Lexus. the entire operation cost them more than both cars were worth, and it only took 2 seconds off of its lap time. My dad ended up calling the company who did that particular episode to ask questions about performance modifications for his Lexus, and found out that it took 6 Computer technicians 3 months to fix all the computer problems associated with changing the engine.

Commissar Theocritus wrote:Comrades, are you not being ableist in discriminating against cars without computers? Even a 1973 Plymouth Fury, which doesn't even have electronic ignition, has points. And points move and go back and forth and do things and therefore ought to have a voice.

Commissar, I agree with yuu 100%. What does having a computer for a brain have to do with cars or appliances deserving the right to unionize or vote? This seems to have eluded our other comrades here.

Commissar Pupovich wrote:...What does having a computer for a brain have to do with cars or appliances deserving the right to unionize or vote? This seems to have eluded our other comrades here.

Good point, Commissioner. That observation must have slipped my gun smoke addled mind. I shall remember that in the future.

Long Live the Appliances!
-Mikhail

Not to worry Comrade Kalishnikov, your contributions to the Party are well known, well known indeed. In fact, we were discussing this earlier....

If appliances can vote, then ATMs, being appliances, should vote too. And since cash from ATMs has spent time <i>in</i> ATMS--this is the time-honored principle that if a school takes a single cent of VA money then it is entirely subject to governmental regulations--this means that all that lovely money that our leader the Goracle got from the Buddhist nuns ought to be able to vote, too.

And all that money in William Jefferson's freezer? Some of that had to have been an ATM and is therefore an Appliance American too. That can vote. Although that does raise the embarrassing question of if having that money in Rep. Jefferson's freezer is a violation of the 14th Amendment.

Oh well. All his constituents, considering his ways, could raise the same point.

Commissar Theocritus wrote:Although that does raise the embarrassing question of if having that money in Rep. Jefferson's freezer is a violation of the 14th Amendment.

Would that not be considered as being consistent with Equal Protection? Most assuredly! That is a most progressive thing Rep Jefferson did, even if it does not earn interest, a decided capitalist idea.

Interest is against Islamic law. As is premarital sex, and on that theory clerics in Saudi Arabia issue three-hour marriage licenses. I think that we could make a similar arrangement for Mr. Jefferson's money.

Clearly William "Dollar Bill" Jefferson was merely trying to protect the People's Money by storing it in a secure location.

Interest was also, as I recall, against Christian law but commerce required revisiting the scriptures. Which happens from time to time. I'd hate to think that people still took, for example, Exodus 22 seriously now.

I read an account of Mr. Jefferson commandeering a vehicle to get to his house and staying and staying while it could be used to rescue other people. I wonder if that $90K was chump change that he just forgot?

You read correctly about "Dollar" Bill Jefferson (a nickname he had before the freezer episode btw) and his heroic efforts to protect The People's Possessions during the aftermath of Katrina. Why, his vehicle even had to be assisted out by another vehicle such was the danger he faced in his efforts. SOM could tell you more about the interest question, though I think you are right.

It's amazing how interests will change religious doctrine. During WWII, American pilots who knew they wouldn't make it home wanted to fly their planes into Japanese ships--to use their lives to the best. But the Catholics knew it would be a mortal sin to kill themselves. (Never understood that one, if the the entire focus of the religion is an afterlife.) The Jesuits got into action and said that as long as the pilot undid the hatch <i>as though he were going to escape</i> and then at the very last second tried to escape, it would not be a sin and he could go ahead and not waste his life.

There is a reason that the synonym for equivocal is jesuitical. And I told that to the face of a Jesuit on the Georgetown campus in 1982, who was not impressed.

I once heard an Earth First! person say "If only the trees could vote."
What about shrubbery? Rain drops?
I was taught in elementary skool that each Snowflake was a unique individual...what about these unique individual's rights?
Global Warming™ is killing the Trees and melting the Snowflakes.
Bush is disenfranchising Trees and Snowflakes!
Cornflakes too!

Hmmm, if only trees could vote.... Why not comrades? Certainly the red oaks etc should.

Poison Ivy does at Harvard.

I know plenty of Venus Flytraps that vote.

And one running for president.

A genetically engineered Venus Flytrap designed from the beginning to consume all. They even made a play after her.

And all of the time I thought that this was a picture that Our Many Titted Empress' gynecologist would be used to:

Either that or her manicurist.

Imagine the trials of Playtex. Not only in the number of them, but their construction.