Slashdot Mirror

I believe the answer is zero.

But nice try.

Sorry, but we're talking rabid insanity, which doesn't require a specific set of actions, but covers all the crazy stuff Republicans did to show how completely fucking unhinged they were. Which is important, since if you focus on a specific set of actions, you can be mislead into ignoring all sorts of craziness.

But, you remember something they did claim they'd do? Lots of other talk too. Don't deny it. Links abound.. Huh, maybe the difference is that the right-wing makes empty threats, while the left actually gets off their asses. Or maybe it's all Haymarket Square type things. Since the right is big on accusing the left of setting up false-flag operations, that means they have to admit the existence of such things. Right? You can wonder if outside agitators are leading peaceful protest rallies astray, right?

Or not. Doesn't change the craziness, it just means the right-wing is a bunch of posers. All hat and no cattle.

Which by coincidence, describes the Trump. An empty-suited bombastic sack of hot air.

with guns just askin' questions like "Who's voting for Crooked Hillary?". And you wonder why the Dems have higher rates of early & by mail voting. I'm a Dem and I won't be within 500 yards of a polling place on Tuesday if my life depended on it. In fact, I'm pretty sure it's the opposite...

You can start here

"Bruce Schneier .. points out, quite rightly, that the U.S. needs to secure its electronic voting machines, and we need to do it in a hurry lest outside interests hack the result"

Well then, you shouldn't have handed the contract to Diebold *, who ran the voting machines on Microsoft Windows with no full irrevocable paper audit, so anyone and his dog could delete ballots.

* "I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year.", Walden O'Dell CEO Diebold

How To Rig An Election In The United States

this is the same ignorance that insists on demanding that muslims denounce terrorists, claiming they don't.

here.
LMGTFY

* Graduated from Yale Law School
* Worked as staff of a U.S. Senate subcommittee
* Staff of the Presidential Impeachment Inquiry Commitee,
advising the U.S. House Judiciary Committee during the Nixon impeachment proceedings.
* Faculty, University of Arkansas Law School
* Part-time chairman of the Legal Services Corporation, appointed by President Carter.
* Member of the Rose Law Firm
* National Law Journal named her twice one of the 100 most powerful lawyers in America
* Co-founded Arkansas Advocates for Children and Family
* Chaired the Arkansas Educational Standards Committee
* First Lady of Arkansas for 12 years
* First Lady of the United States of America for 8 years
* Chaired President Clinton's National Task Force on Health Care Reform
* Elected United States Senator from New York; served for eight years
* Served for five years as President Obama's Secretary of State, fourth in line of succession of the Presidency

http://addictinginfo.org/2015/...

Even though her major initiative, the Clinton healthcare plan, failed (due to Republican obstruction), you cannot deny that it laid ground for what we have today, the Affordable Healthcare Act, something Clinton supports and would continue.
She played a leading role in the development of State Children’s Health Insurance Program, which provides the much-needed state support for children whose parents cannot afford nor provide them with adequate healthcare coverage.
She was also instrumental in the creation of the Adoption and Safe Families Act and the Foster Care Independence Act.
Successfully fought to increase research funding for prostate cancer and asthma at the National Institute of Health (NIH).
She spearheaded investigations into mental illness plaguing veterans of the Gulf War; we now have a term for it – Gulf War Syndrome.
At the Department of Justice, she helped create the office on Violence Against Women.
She was instrumental in securing over $21 billion in funding for the World Trade Center redevelopment.
Took a leading role in the investigation of health consequences of first responders and drafted the first bill to compensate and offer the health services our first responders deserve (Clinton’s successor in the Senate, Kirsten Gillibrand, passed the bill).
Was instrumental in working out a bi-partisan compromise to address civil liberty abuses for the renewal of the U.S. Patriot Act.
  Proposed a revival of the New Deal-era Home Owners’ Loan Corporation to help homeowners refinance their mortgages in the wake of the 2008 financial disaster.
Was a major proponent of sensible diplomacy which brought about a ceasefire between Hamas and Israel, and brokered human rights with Burma.
Oversaw free trade agreements with our allies such as Panama, Colombia, and South Korea.
Was the most traveled Secretary of State to date.
The Clinton Foundation, founded by her and her husband, has improved the living conditions for nearly 400 million people in over 180 countries through its Initiative program.

These are not all of her accomplishments. Her activism on behalf of women a children across the world is renowned. Her activism for raising the minimum wage and combating climate change is stellar. You do not have to support what she does or stands for. But do not say she doesn’t have any accomplishments. The conservatives who say this are the ones who are pushing for Ted Cruz – who brought on a $24 billion shut down. That, to them, is an accomplishment?

Yes, Hillary Clinton has accomplishments. You don’t have to like them, but they do, in fact, exist.

Besides, after the abomination of Bush the Lesser...now you're worried about qualifications?

It's all fun and games until women are literally subjugated.

http://addictinginfo.org/2014/...

no real accomplishments

http://addictinginfo.org/2015/...

You don’t have to like Hillary Clinton or her ideas. I get it. She’s a Democrat, a progressive (in most eyes), and conservatives don’t like that. However, you cannot say she does not have any accomplishments. Here are just a few:
Even though her major initiative, the Clinton healthcare plan, failed (due to Republican obstruction), you cannot deny that it laid ground for what we have today, the Affordable Healthcare Act, something Clinton supports and would continue.
She played a leading role in the development of State Children’s Health Insurance Program, which provides the much-needed state support for children whose parents cannot afford nor provide them with adequate healthcare coverage.
She was also instrumental in the creation of the Adoption and Safe Families Act and the Foster Care Independence Act.
Successfully fought to increase research funding for prostate cancer and asthma at the National Institute of Health (NIH).
She spearheaded investigations into mental illness plaguing veterans of the Gulf War; we now have a term for it – Gulf War Syndrome.
At the Department of Justice, she helped create the office on Violence Against Women.
She was instrumental in securing over $21 billion in funding for the World Trade Center redevelopment.
Took a leading role in the investigation of health consequences of first responders and drafted the first bill to compensate and offer the health services our first responders deserve (Clinton’s successor in the Senate, Kirsten Gillibrand, passed the bill).
Was instrumental in working out a bi-partisan compromise to address civil liberty abuses for the renewal of the U.S. Patriot Act.
  Proposed a revival of the New Deal-era Home Owners’ Loan Corporation to help homeowners refinance their mortgages in the wake of the 2008 financial disaster.
Was a major proponent of sensible diplomacy which brought about a ceasefire between Hamas and Israel, and brokered human rights with Burma.
Oversaw free trade agreements with our allies such as Panama, Colombia, and South Korea.
Was the most traveled Secretary of State to date.
The Clinton Foundation, founded by her and her husband, has improved the living conditions for nearly 400 million people in over 180 countries through its Initiative program.

These are not all of her accomplishments. Her activism on behalf of women a children across the world is renowned. Her activism for raising the minimum wage and combating climate change is stellar. You do not have to support what she does or stands for. But do not say she doesn’t have any accomplishments. The conservatives who say this are the ones who are pushing for Ted Cruz – who brought on a $24 billion shut down. That, to them, is an accomplishment?

Yes, Hillary Clinton has accomplishments. You don’t have to like them, but they do, in fact, exist.

If the leaders of the government are the leaders of the official state religion, then that's theocracy, and that describes Denmark and Iceland, where the legislatures control the religion. For instance, in America you can't pass a law requiring a church to perform same-sex marriages, but in Denmark you can, as this American pastor was aghast to find out

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2...

That's because in Denmark they have civilian control over the state Church. That's a theocracy.

I should have added this to the list of retorts I hear every single time:

"Especially if you consider that the head of Anglicanism, which is the Monarch, has no power at all."

This is plain nonsense. If the Queen has no power at all, then she isn't the Queen. Can just any old person live in her tax-supported house and do her official state duties? Yes? No, of course not. She's the queen, nobody else is the queen. She is the head of state and the head of the religion, and nobody else is. She has the power and nobody else has that power.

And no, not all European countries are monarchies. It's substantially less than half, but the quantity doesn't change how ridiculous it is to have a monarchy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Anyway, that's what I meant: theocracy is stupid, monarchy is stupid, America is neither, and that is two big ways that America is better than some other countries. And all of that is just a tangential insult to my original point, which is that saying "only one country" in reference to America is a silly way to talk about the world's and history's most important country.

Funny how it was proudly called Obamacare, by the DNC, and passed with out a SINGLE GOP vote for it.

You're overlooking to 200+ amendments that the Republicans sponsored or cosponsored. In fact, they wrote one-third of the bill. The only reason they didn't vote for the final bill was that the Democrats had enough votes. In short, they had their cake and ate it too. Now that's what I call crony capitalism.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/11/10/obamacare-study-republican-contribution/

But now that it is the absolute failure and killer of the middle class and that has become obvious you claim the GOP wrote and passed it.

Before ObamaCare passed, my health insurance was was $500 per month. The exchange had it slightly cheaper for $350 per month. My employer just switched to a new HR provider and my healthcare plan is now $150. Woo-hoo! Thanks, Obama!

Do you realize everyone here is laughing at you?

Do I care? Nope.

[...] you probably lose every political debate you ever have and have to resort to name calling so you can feel better about yourself after you are ridiculed by everyone else.

You mean like Donald Trump? Sorry, I don't stoop that low.

Didn't we see what happened the last time someone tried to build Galt's Gulch?

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2...

Corporate tax avoidance is a very big problem which is robbing citizens, but Cook should feel no shame for it. Everyone does it. Well, everything big and rich does it. It's because of the sociopath "companies are people" and "we must act in the best interests of our shareholders" mantras. If citizens do not like it, they should pressure their elected representatives to stop it, but if citizens vote for elected representatives that allow it, then those citizens deserve to be fucked over.

What The Founding Fathers Thought About Corporations http://www.addictinginfo.org/2...
10 Founding Fathers Quotes That Will Make Conservatives’ Heads Explode http://aattp.org/9-founding-fa...
What the Founding Fathers Really Thought About Corporations https://hbr.org/2010/04/what-t...
Why did our founding fathers hate corporations? http://www.justplainpolitics.c...

It's easy to write them off, but the fact is that we already have an affirmative action infrastructure in the USA, which could easily be adapted for every conceivable "protected class".

Somehow I doubt the microagression folks will gain much of a toehold. Way too far to the left, and catering to a demographic that I fear might have some basic human genetic parts missing. If they cannot handle any disagreement without calling it aggression against them, they are doomed to failure.

It's roughly the same thing as the far right's litmus tests. You could be the most charismatic, most competent leader possible, but unless you toe the line. as in you must be anti-abortion, pro certain middle east countries (always in flux) anti Obamacare (despite it being a Republican invention) and all the other touchstones, you won't make it through the primaries.

I have a dream.

Barry Goldwater rises from the grave, smiting the kooks, and returning conservatism to it's rightful place.

This is what a conservative sounds like:

https://www.brainyquote.com/qu...

He was prophetic:

“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they’re sure trying to do so, it’s going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can’t and won’t compromise. I know, I’ve tried to deal with them.”

~Barry Goldwater

More good Goldwater reading:

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2...

So perhaps I err in trying to compare the kooky lef to the religious right, but only in magnitude. The religious right have firm control of their party.

the founding fathers were extremely skeptical of religion

you will remember (if you are educated) that much of the 1600s in europe were spent with catholics murdering protestants and protestants murdering catholics and many perturbations in between. because "it came from god" as you say meant different things to different violent bigots, and they were therefore entitled to murder those who did not believe as they did. much like the reason daesh (ISIS) gives for murdering shias today

most of the first europeans to come to these shores were in fact fleeing such religious persecution. which is not a cute word for "tut tutting and walking by sternly" but mass murder

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

this is why the very first amendment, the establishment clause states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...

essentially, your thinking and your words are anathema to the foundation of this country

the historical lesson was very clear to the founding fathers of what you have when religion dictates government: mass murdering hell

btw, i mean it when i say the founding fathers were extremely skeptical of religion:

http://hwarmstrong.com/christi...

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2...

http://freethought.mbdojo.com/...

http://www.liberalamerica.org/...

You cluelessness about libertarians is typical of those who don't want to understand personal responsibility because it scares them.

If anyone is clueless it is the libertarians. Name one country with a libertarian government that actually works. You can't because none exist.

This is what happens when Ayn Rand fanbois decide to start a community based on their "ideals":

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/09/15/libertarian-utopia-styled-after-ayn-rand-book-spectacularly-falls-apart-almost-immediately/

Selfishness is NOT a virtue...

Sounds like Drew will fit right in with Congress, where we have senators who never sent email sitting on the technology committee. http://www.addictinginfo.org/2...

So, this "Drew" guy knows about technology... cool!

While I'm saddened that Drew has had to "clean up" Fark of its foobies and more aggressively moderate racist photoshop themes and pics, I applaud more tech geeks taking the plunge into politics.

So, this "Drew" guy knows about technology and how to censor people... not cool dude...

Here's hoping for a campaign that's more transparently data-driven by the people being represented than money-driven by shadow financiers.

This "Drew" guy just had his "transparent" Slashvertisement represented like "Interviews: Ask Fark Founder Drew Curtis a Question", when it's about his political campaign actually:

For many, the day would not be complete without checking Fark.com for the latest funny or weird news. Inspired by the numerous links to interesting news stories he'd send to friends every morning, Drew Curtis created Fark in 1999. By 2009 it was one of the top 100 English language websites with 3-4 million unique visitors, and 60 million page views per month. Recently Drew has been in the news after he announced that he was running for governor in his home state of Kentucky with his wife Heather as his running mate. Calling himself an independent "citizen candidate," the campaign website says: "We have a theory that we’re about to see a huge change in how elections and politics work. Across the country, we have seen regular citizens stepping up and challenging the status quo built by political parties and career politicians. They have been getting closer and closer to victory and, here in Kentucky, we believe we have a chance to win and break the political party stronghold for good." We'll be checking back in with Drew as the race heats up, but for now he's agreed to answer any questions you may have. As usual, ask as many as you'd like, but please, one per post.

Sounds like Drew will fit right in with Congress, where we have senators who never sent email sitting on the technology committee.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2...

While I'm saddened that Drew has had to "clean up" Fark of its foobies and more aggressively moderate racist photoshop themes and pics, I applaud more tech geeks taking the plunge into politics. Here's hoping for a campaign that's more transparently data-driven by the people being represented than money-driven by shadow financiers.

Jon Stewart has a thoughtful response to your comments http://www.addictinginfo.org/2...

-1, Flamebait? Obviously someone with mod points has no sense of humor. This is why people jokingly refer to Fox News as "Faux news:"

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2...

http://www.businessinsider.com...

http://www.alternet.org/news-a...

http://mathbabe.org/2012/04/21...

http://foxnewsboycott.com/fox-...

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t...

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t...

http://www.salon.com/2013/10/1...

So? Are they getting enough hours to make a living wage? Wanna make a bet of what percentage of those cashiers are on some form of assistance?

"Walmart workers make, on average, $8.81 per hour, which, according to MIT’s “Living Wage Calculator,” does not qualify as a living wage for a single person in much of the country, and is not a living wage for a single parent with one child anywhere, including Bentonville, Arkansas, the home of Walmart."

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2...

"Walmart jobs are poverty-level jobs.
Walmart’s average sale Associate makes $8.81 per hour, according to IBISWorld, an independent market research group. This translates to annual pay of $15,576, based upon Walmart’s full-time status of 34 hours per week. This is significantly below the 2010 Federal Poverty Level of $22,050 for a family of four."

http://makingchangeatwalmart.o...

Your San Antonio example, if true, is a huge exception to the rule. Imagine what the national average for Wal-Mart would be without it.

It always cracks me up when the Republicans are whining about how much the Federal government spends on social welfare completely ignoring the "welfare states" like this one. Just take a look at this list

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2...

Sorry for reposting, but I thought this infographic on highest paid public employee per state was interesting (if somewhat ranty and oversimplified).

The parent post is factual. Republicans did reject their own measures once Obama adopted them. See for example:

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/06/08/24-policies-that-republicans-supported/

yet, it gets modded Troll. It seems that the "bipartisan" thing to do is to blame both parties equally regardless of the facts.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/05/19/mississippi-2/

Care to apologize?

2. In capitalism, even though corporations may become powerful, they don't have the power to arrest or kill you.

Oh really? Why don't you tell it to these people, threatened with arrest, or in fact arrested for trying to close accounts at Citi and BofA.

I don't think you know what you're talking about

It's not this guy, is it?

Politics doesn't belong in the work place. Anyone who can't save it for the after work happy hours should be fired.

Unless your company (or union) tells you it's part of the workplace.

FEC Concludes Corporations And Unions May Force Workers To Campaign For Political Candidates Of Their Choice

Do you honestly think that Romney will be any better? You could pick any president that's ever been and come up with a list of bad things they've done. All presidents are human. They're not perfect. But here, let's supplement your cherry-picked actions by Obama with some of the good things he's done.

There are arguments against your seeming wisdom: http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/07/07/sociopathic/ and I, who understand her ideas, don't believe them to be a value to society.

Ah, but Rand's ideas do have value to society. In and of themselves, their social value is strictly negative. As a metaphor, they could serve as a warning of how things can be done utterly wrongly and/or wrong-headedly. In this sense, the book Atlas Shrugged is analogous to books such as 1984 or Brave New World or Fahrenheit 451 or to movies such as Dr. Strangelove or Brazil. Unfortunately, such expositions are instead often an inspiration for the sociopathic leaders of nations and corporations. It goes over their heads, in a way which would draw a Whooosh comment on Slashdot.

There are arguments against your seeming wisdom: http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/07/07/sociopathic/ and I, who understand her ideas, don't believe them to be a value to society.

Let people believe what they want as long as they aren't forcing it on others.

Therein lies the problem: they are trying to force it on others. Like my child, in biology class. Like my wife, being denied contraception.

This is not about some radical atheist activists who are going out to interrupt church services just to be dicks (although that would be hilarious). This is about not wanting to be forced to live under the rules and regulations of someone's particular brand of batshit crazy superstition. "Moderate" religionists are just as much to blame, for they create the very environment of tolerance for such crazy views that enable the extremists to climb to positions of power in the polity and support their extremist views because "as long as they believe in something" they're comfortable with that.

I do agree with the general point, although Beck does spin it.
In general, even if you usually disagree with someone, you can usually find a few things to agree on.
This from another right-wing pundit: http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/02/08/bill-oreilly-compares-pressure-to-fire-ellen-degeneres-for-being-gay-to-mccarthyism-video/

for the LULZ!!!
/insta-Goodwin'd!

Here is but a few worrying examples from this past couple of weeks alone! US wants to censor anything it doesnt like online, across the world: http://stopcensorship.org/ US wants to lock up US citizens without trial or charge: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8mPZlysCAm0 http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/11/congress-to-vote-next-week-on-explicitly-creating-a-police-state/ Wikileaks exposes secret spying industry: http://wikileaks.org/the-spyfiles.html Ron Paul tells it like it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=XeCpLcjxOq4 Shameful actions of US military: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-CpCUOygqU&list=PLB9FE42FDCEFA73B8&feature=plpp_play_all Commercialisation of TROLLING?? http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/11/13/facebook-opens-doors-to-a-new-way-of-suppressing-information-activists-constantly-banned/

The primary goal of "nanny-state" bleaters is the elimination of taxes.

There's a whole website for them:

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/11/07/102-things-not-to-do/

I need an app that will help me track abusive policemen.

At this point, it seems like there is a much greater need to track abusive policemen than sex offenders. After all, if a sex offender causes problems, you call the police and they get put away. But if you are abused by a policeman, then calling the police just gets you more abuse.

I have a much greater need to track Tony Boloney http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/10/19/tony-bologna-with-a-side-of-pepper-spray-docked-10-vacation-days-videos/ than some random kink.

Abusive police we have with us always. We can't get rid of them. Our only defense is to track them and keep our distance.

Miles

People who don't support "half of what the federal government does" usually don't have half a clue about what the government actually do for them.

Best example is the so-called tea-baggers with their keep your government hands off my medicare, showning how propaganda that "everything bad is caused by the government" makes people happy about the service provided by the same government go out and vote to end those services.