Karl Marx

Iceland

Granted, but you lose your rights as outlined in the constitution, cannot use govt.-built roads, use govt. courts, etc. I wish some competent people would run for my state's legislature...

The number of stories in Philadelphia's tallest building

Anorexic, I hate vomiting. Would you rather, without being able to prevent it from happening, know the date of your death or the cause of your death?

What if the threat of orbital annihilation spurred Russia or China into responding with nuclear weapons? What if they had their own cannon, and decided to threaten your country with it? After all, don't assume you'd be the only nation to have them. The only winning move is not to play. Also, it would violate the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, and your country is probably a signatory. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty

Nigeria

The maximum determinant in an 8 by 8 matrix of zeroes and ones

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man By assuming that Adama opposed domestic drilling, gun bans, and border security, you transformed an idea to pacify and stabilize the Middle East into a sinister Democrat plot to destroy the United States. This is absurd because: 1. These may not necessarily be Adama's views. 2. Our major parties will lead to our ultimate downfall regardless of what we do in the Middle East.

The code for international direct dial phone calls to Cuba

Ontario

I could get behind that. Why don't we try the current one as well? After all: Anywhere from 250 to 2,400, to be exact. http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2014/01/23/more-than-2400-dead-as-obamas-drone-campaign-marks-five-years/

Number of states in the U.S.

Greenland

Popular Kalashnikov model number

Damascus

Equatorial Guinea

The fourth term in Sylvester's Sequence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvester%27s_sequence

Software

sum of the first three powers of 3 (31+32+33)

airplane

No, they should not be allowed to use the "Tax the Rich" video. A teacher's job is to present information, not their opinion. On one hand, I agree with the idea of the rich being more heavily taxed (but have my reservations about it, as the government does a lot of wasteful spending), but on the other hand, what they're doing is politically indoctrinating children. At the end of the day, it's not a teacher's job to tell their students what is right and wrong. I mean, can you imagine the backlash that would occur if the video was called "Abortion Should be On Demand" or "Abortion Should be Illegal"? People should be left to form their own opinions based on facts, not a mediocre cartoon with an agenda.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/03/living/slenderman-stabbing-questions-for-parents/ http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2014/06/what_is_slender_man_internet_h.html Well, it seems news outlets like CNN are keen on telling me that internet fiction can turn children into killers. I mean, they can't even tell what's real or not, especially at twelve years old. God knows they didn't know what they were doing, either. I mean, cause and effect is a very difficult concept to master; it should take about 25 years for most people to get it down if I'm to believe the news. Of course mental disturbance only played a minimal role. Everyone knows that perfectly normal people are liable to try to kill somebody to appease a make-believe monster. Heck, my friends and I did it all the time when we were kids. No doubt about it, the maximum-possible sentence is appropriate here. After all, the justice system isn't about justice. It's about "what is the worst possible thing we can do to these mentally disturbed children". On a more serious note, it's time for the media to stop finding outrageous scapegoats for tragedies and to start to take a serious look at the real problem: mental illness. Thoughts?

In L.A. (and other blue states), the law was proposed by Democrats, who no doubt have a brilliant welfare solution to drain the state's budget and raise taxes in order to win poor people's votes without actually getting them jobs or long-term benefits. They'll perpetuate a multigenerational cycle of poverty with an empty promise of a transition into better days, thus ensuring that they will always have masses of poor, loyal voters who feel like their choice between Democrat and Republican actually matters. So don't worry, poor people will have all the access to systemized poverty and political servitude to Democrats for themselves and their children welfare they can get. Republicans are no better, but for different reasons.

0:23-1:04 is the mentality that creates these kinds of laws. After reading through all the previous posts it feels so... off-topic to be on-topic.

It looks like the topic may have shifted... But here are my results anyway. "You are a Trotskyist. 3 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 13 percent are more extremist than you."