Slashdot Mirror

Oups

"The Entrapment of Jesse Snodgrass"
  http://www.alternet.org/civil-...

While the Automation kick is an interesting angle, lets not forget what actually killed Hostess -- vulture capitalists. These are Mitt Romney style assholes who swooped in, loaded the company up with debt, then pawned it off after leeching all the money out. Somehow though, it's not embezzlement when an investment company does it.

But it gets worse. The unions that took the blame? They were having their workers give upwards of a THIRD of their paychecks just to try and save the company they helped build. And that just caused the vultures to trade the company around more and more.

That leaves the unions in one corner and the hedge funds and Hostess management in the other. Management ordered the company to stop contributing to the union pension funds, ignoring their obligations under collective bargaining agreements. They have demanded a new round of concessions, which would have doubled insurance premiums, negated all pension obligations, and slashed pay by 27 to 32 percent. Again, the 14-year Hostess bakery veteran: “Remember how I said I made $48,000 in 2005 and $34,000 last year? I would make $25,000 in five years if I took their offer. It will be hard to replace the job I had, but it will be easy to replace the job they were trying to give me.”

So yeah, the automation is interesting, but lets not forget what brought us to this point. Vultures bought the company, embezzeled a shitload by loading on bad debt and pawning the company of as well as flat out stealing from the pension fund, and passing the buck to the next leech until they couldn't pass it any further. And now instead of having good quality Wonder Bread and tasty, if not exactly healthy, sweets like the Twinkie, we get mass produced automated crap.

The local Hostess bakery re-branded as a Franz, and the quality is really good. They also have a direct-from-the-baker storefront that you can go in and get bread at a huge discount. Oh, and they're union and pay their workers a good wage -- around $17 an hour starting.

As I said the last time this came up, no American should EVER support Union Busting. Hostess is dead to me, and besides You can clone a twinkie pretty easily, which lets you do stuff like a fresh baked chocolate twinkie with cherry filling.

How are drug busts made? A DEA agent makes contacts... infiltrates... deep cover happens.
* * *
Its really not that hard, sport. We've been doing this for hundreds of years. Its not new. Local police to the FBI have been doing it since the old days and never stopped.

Yep, they never stopped..

Why can't YOU personally see this as an option even though it is obvious? You should be able. Why can't you?

Are you mentally blocked somehow or are you aware of the solutions and simply intentionally refuse to implement them?

But I can see it. And I am able. And I do.
Also, no, I'm not blocked; yes, I am aware; and, no, I haven't refused "to implement them."

You, on the other hand, are seemingly unaware that your "solution" for the Orlando shooter simply didn't work. You complain that "no one does anything because they don't want to appear racist" -- interesting how your own option amounts to "nothing" -- but you don't even know what was done. Or else you've simply decided that reality is too complex and too disappointing, so instead you'll complain about our failure to live up to a strawman fantasy where people born in the U.S. can "not be allowed in" and every sting op is a guaranteed success.

I'd say you're the one who is mentally blocked. Not even the Israelis can completely stop domestic terrorism.

Had they posted a sex tape of some average Joe and/or not somehow pissed off Thiel, Mr. Average Joe would just have to live with it because he wouldn't have the money to fight it in court.

Thanks to Hulk/Thiel's victory, however, all of us average Joes are a little safer from media's prying eyes. And, given the government's history of buying from commercial suppliers the data, which it is not allowed to collect itself, from the government too.

And, should some other gav-gavker find our sex-life worthy of publication, it would be easier for us to find a lawyer willing to work on contingency. The world really did become a (slightly) better place thanks to this case.

write some nonsense down on an application, take it to a judge who rubber-stamps a warrant, and then grab all of the information they can about you

Actually, no, it is not. You can challenge evidence obtained with such a warrant and avoid conviction.

There has to be checks and balances on the system.

Of course, there should be!

Once you even consider the idea, that having "too much" money is wrong, you've enabled a civil forfeiture somewhere...

It is not all lost — Nebraska, for one, has officially abolished civil forfeiture already. But it is certainly disheartening, that such an obvious injustice sprung up and continues to exist in the US, while people get fired up over complete nonsense and outright lies instead.

I used to think Scott Adams was an intelligent and insightful man.
Now I'm not so sure.

Yes, Trump has had a tremendously sexist mysoginst past.

Yes, Trump also has a racist past.

His kids have appeared on white nationalist radio.

The CIA isn't a terrorist organization. They are the ones protecting your rights to say stupid things on the Internet and allowing Allu Akbar from chopping your head off for belonging to the wrong religious group.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/...
Mapped: The 7 Governments the U.S. Has Overthrown. Yes, we now have confirmation that the CIA was behind Iran's 1953 coup. But the agency hardly stopped there.
By J. Dana Stuster
August 20, 2013

Iran, 1953

Guatemala, 1954

Congo, 1960

Dominican Republic, 1961

South Vietnam, 1963

Brazil, 1964

Chile, 1973

http://www.alternet.org/world/...

  “I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves.” -- Henry Kissinger

Interesting how all the examples above are not only from the last millennium, but also from the Communist period. Has any US government - (D) or (R) - ousted any regime since 1992? Aside from Afghanistan, Iraq & Libya?

The CIA isn't a terrorist organization. They are the ones protecting your rights to say stupid things on the Internet and allowing Allu Akbar from chopping your head off for belonging to the wrong religious group.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/...
Mapped: The 7 Governments the U.S. Has Overthrown. Yes, we now have confirmation that the CIA was behind Iran's 1953 coup. But the agency hardly stopped there.
By J. Dana Stuster
August 20, 2013

Iran, 1953

Guatemala, 1954

Congo, 1960

Dominican Republic, 1961

South Vietnam, 1963

Brazil, 1964

Chile, 1973

http://www.alternet.org/world/...

  “I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves.” -- Henry Kissinger

To be fair, Holder isn't going to work for the same banks .. not directly anyway. He's returning to the same law firm he left to take the Attorney General job:

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

The fact that the law firm has those same banks as clients might perhaps explain how and why he got the Attorney General job in the first place, ne?

His replacement, Loretta Lynch, is no better:

http://www.theatlantic.com/mag...

They give lip service to opposing deceptive business practices.

But the practical result of their ideology is enable them. Just look at all those libertarians who got scammed with the Galt's Gulch land fraud.

Well, the "expensive" part is correct. But claiming it "can't fly, can't fight" is just not true.

A lot of people disagree:

Pentagon’s big budget F-35 fighter ‘can’t turn, can’t climb, can’t run’
http://blogs.reuters.com/great...

The F-35 may have big problems fighting at long range
http://www.businessinsider.com...

The $400 Billion Military Jet That Can't Fly in Cloudy Weather
http://www.alternet.org/fail-4...

RAND Corp: F35 Can’t Turn, Can’t Climb, Can’t Run
http://www.stopthef35.com/rand...

Air Force Admits: Our New Stealth Fighter Can’t Fight
http://www.thedailybeast.com/a...

The F-35 Can't Beat The Plane It's Replacing In A Dogfight: Report
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.c... ...and so on.

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

"CIA ... trashing the constitution"

Secret U.S. government agencies do whatever they want. There is very little oversight. Those who want to kill people have no need to take a chance on getting arrested for murder. They join one of the many secret or semi-secret agencies.

Those who want to play video games that kill real people could work for the U.S. government in 19 countries. Now only 18 countries since the Uzbek government evicted the CIA killing organization.

Those in the U.S. who want to mistreat other people don't need to risk going to prison.

Those who want easy money that can be wasted in crazy schemes have no need to face bankruptcy. They can join a secret agency and use taxpayer money for things like a $43 million compressed natural gas station that serves only about 100 taxi drivers.

Those who want to find investment opportunities can join the many secret U.S. government agencies like No Sense in America, NSA, and listen to phone calls. Think the NSA is one organization? No, the NSA has contracting companies: How Private Contractors Have Created a Shadow NSA.

There is little democracy in the U.S. The U.S. government helps the rich get richer.

If LGBT is a choice or a lifestyle and thus not deserving of any protected status, then nor is religion

Religion is spelled out as protected in the constitution; this is similar to the rights to your beliefs.

Religion is protected, Specific religious beliefs beliefs are not.

But let's say that it is well and good and God's will that the Good Christian people of North Carolina not be forced to do business with teh LGTB abomination in Gawds eyes.

Now it is set forth that good Christians are allowed to invoke their will.

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-...

God is pleased. his people are now fulfilling his will by not renting to Arabs. Apparently

The same with Palestinians to Jews.

Allah is pleased that the rules are being followed. Apparently

Finally, and as god or Allah wills, perhaps the good Christians shall set upon these abominations? After all, it is his will, and his direct command as per Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

Preposterous you say?

http://www.alternet.org/story/...

The only reason why the religious right isn't killing them here is because we don't allow them to kill them.

And if you wonder why people are opposed to you folks - don't wonder.

Most prostitutes these days are virtually, or literally, slaves. They are often kidnapped or trafficked into the US.

Tony, that's just not true.

http://www.alternet.org/story/...

Thank you for helping me make my point. We are saying the same thing, which is, you can't associate these types of actions with a religion because a) these lunatics are not representative of said religion, regardless of what religion that is and b) there are so many different interpretations of each religion, it's impossible to group them as a whole.

Unfortunately, you go on to completely contradict yourself by talking about your understanding of Christians in America to be such that they wouldn't do such things. Guessing you're unfamiliar with the KKK or the Westboro Baptist Church, huh? What about Eric Rudolph, remember him? He was a Christian, and he bombed a huge crowd there's plenty more. Yes, I cited a source with a particularly "on the nose" domain name, sorry it was too much for you. If you had been brave enough to click, you'd see that it's actually a well organized site with good navigation illustrating the hundreds if not thousands of incitements to violence in the Bible. Perhaps this link is more to your liking?

No, the media is a corporate creature, owned by corporations that lean overwhelmingly to conservatism.

It's a conservatism that doesn't care about social issues like abortion, gay rights, etc, because they aren't stupid, and can see which way the culture is eventually going to go. but on all else (fiscal, environmental, regulatory, etc) they are solidly conservative, but more importantly, pro-corporate. even MSNBC rarely covers things that matter like campaign financing or lobbying. one of the biggest conservative apologists on TV is on MSNBC.

15 Things Americans Would Know if There Were a 'Liberal Media'

--

Again: peace with honor was a lie.
The final solution reached at the Paris Peace Talks was we withdraw, and the North waits a few months before reinvading.
That was our "Peace With Honor", ie, "pretty please don't make us look bad by reinvading right away".
And it was a defeat. Everyone knew what would happen once we left. We had not defeated the North militarily, and we couldn't because they were being supported by Russia and China, so to truly do so would mean ultimately open conflict with Russia and China, and nobody wanted that. That's how proxy wars work, and they are not winnable in the classic sense unless you move into open conflict with the sponsor nations. They did it to us in Vietnam, and we returned the favor in Afghanistan.

--

And as long as we're judging entire political theories based on one country (that wasn't even socialist) actions, then I guess since the People Democratic Republic of Korea is a terrible place with no freedom, democracy must truly suck, eh?

And again:
N Vietnam = Communist
Communist != Socialist

Moron.

a physical store with cash

What are you trying to hide, citizen? You have been flagged for closer surveillance.

(Already not having a "social media profile" is seen as a bit deviant and can easily hurt your career prospects, and use of encrypted communications is considered suspicious. It's not going to be long at this rate).

Hardly worth the effort. When they put up a reward matching a years pay for an average Google employee I might be interested.

When you include the 3rd-party maintenance crew that gets paid $15 an hour, it probably does average out to $100k.

Apple makes so much money yet has such an ugly history of mistreating the people with whom they do business in a variety of ways large and small: Mistreatment of workers who build their products (continuing in 2015 only changing due to activist and journalists compelling them to), copyright infringement, ebooks that won't work on jailbroken iThings, turning a blind eye to environmental degradation, making it needlessly hard for owners to take apart their products, teaching store staff twisted psychological manipulation, avoiding US corporate tax (which is already quite low), and more. Now we can add conspiring to fix prices. Hardly surprising given how unethical, illegal, and pernicious Apple has been.

>Republicans want for us all.

And Democrat presidents passed TPP and NAFTA ... Google outsources and uses contractors that outsource, and Google isn't right wing, not even close.

http://www.alternet.org/labor/...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

How about we stop spreading lies that is a republican issue when both parties are fucking everyone over for profits. Voting for a democrat or republican isn't going to fix the corporate cronies who own both parties. Lets not excuse corruption and bad behavior for whatever party you belong too, because they are your party.

Until we start holding our own accountable, nothing will ever change.

How did this get +5?

There is no such thing as "Federal authorities" in Sweden. The only authorities are agents of the National government, which is not a Federation. There has been no evidence provided by anyone that US Authorities are involved.

As far as the "it's not rape outside of Sweden" claim, here's what Assange's own lawyer said in British Court:
"Assange had stopped her from doing by holding her arms and bending her legs open and trying to penetrate her with his penis without using a condom. [She] says that she felt about to cry since she was held down and could not reach a condom and felt this could end badly."

So he admitted to fucking a woman who was fighting him so hard he had to hold her arms back, and physically force her legs open.

I don'; know about not leaking, but not having sex with woman you have to start "holding her arms and bending her legs open and trying to penetrate her" would be a pretty good start at avoiding legal problems.

It is not a One-true-scottsman argument. There's absolutely nothing ad-hoc about my statement,
You can simply check the facts for yourself. Just the September Paris attacks accounted for 129 innocent deaths, and there are radical islaimic suicide bombings and opther attacks happening around the world daily.
Can you remember any redical christian attacks that caused equivalent numbers of deaths? You've basically got to go back and total up at least 20 years worth to get a number of deaths even close to just one day's worth of Islaimc attacks: http://www.alternet.org/tea-pa...

All your comebacks so far have all been based on emotional outbursts, attempts to sidetrack the issue, pruposeful misunderstandings, and lame attempts to incorrectly label. Its the only approach you acn make because you have no valid position that you can back up with actual facts or citations, since your emphasis is clearly entirely on enforcing political corerctness rather than having to deal with whats really going on.

If you want further responses from me, stay on track, stop with the emotional/personal attacks, and use facts and references to back up your argument.

We see it happening in America, too. Lately there have been a small number of cases of black youth violently attacking police officers, typically after being confronted for some crime these youth had committed, and then the police officers do the only reasonable thing and defend themselves using their guns. Not wanting to be falsely accused of being "racist" by the "social justice" supporters

The recent outrage is about police shooting unarmed black youths. In many cases, shooting them in the back.

Here's the video of the one in Chicago that everybody's upset about. As you can see, the teenager was shot in the back while running AWAY from the police. He was unarmed.
https://www.dnainfo.com/chicag...

Here's another one: the guy had a gun... but the police had already taken it away and had him face down on the ground. Then shot him when he was face down on the ground and unresisting:
http://www.courthousenews.com/...

And here's one where the video shows that they shot an unarmed man who was face down with his hands handcuffed behind him... then the video shows them planting a gun on him.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3367933/Shocking-video-shows-cops-planting-gun-shooting-handcuffed-man-23-dead-execution.html
http://www.alternet.org/civil-...

I doubt she would have done this effort for a conservative administration.

Oh, she definitely wouldn't do the effort. Do the effort of coming out to let us know and apologize for it, that is.

See, we didn't find out about this by brave investigative journalists or courageous insider leaks catching her red handed. Lerner herself planted a question to be asked in a meeting so she could let people know and apologize for it. And she only did it after discussing it (read: ordered to) with her superior, the acting IRS Commissioner at the time.

Before that, she served under IRS Commissioners appointed by Bush, and we didn't hear them being so diligent and getting their employees to come out and apologize for wrongdoing. Maybe they were ignorant that she was acting badly, or maybe they were too incompetent to realize that she was acting badly, or they were simply too corrupt and think acting badly is ok when it's their side doing it.

An ironic choice of author.

Indeed, a much broader net than you seem to think. For this to be at all effective you would need to cut off not only "unfriendly" parts of the world, but also anyone who doesn't go along with your plan and cut themselves off from places you consider "unfriendly".

I think Trump's plan, and am almost certain that Cruz's plan is to ignite World War 3. Because as you note, "cutting off" whatever nations we decide need to be cut off is not throwing a swich in the majick Internet input house at the entrance to each country, we would have to completely destroy each country's cummunication infrastructure.

Oh, and satellites https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Trump wouldn't care as long as his ass was safe http://www.thesmokinggun.com/d...

But from what I know about far right evangelical conservatives, Cruz would be getting exactly what he wants. As a dominionist, End times are an essential part of their religion

http://www.alternet.org/speake...

And they consider Ted to be a "King" who will go to war to bring the money of those they consider wicked, and give it to.............

themselves!!! Gawd, you just can't make this stuff up. Here's a fun video to watch.

http://www.talk2action.org/sto...

" including execution-style killings"

Now something like this just demands a cite. Otherwise, you're just making shit up.

It does need a citation.

In the summary, that statement was preceded by a qualifier: "according to the article in alter net." This was linked to a URL: http://www.alternet.org/israel...

The relevant sentence in the linked article stated:

  The Israeli move comes amidst escalating tension in occupied Palestine, and a large number of videos, including those showing Israeli soldiers and officers killing Palestinians execution-style after injuring them, and many videos that in general highlight the suffering of the Palestinian people, living under the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestine.

So my fact-checker rates the summary as true: the summary put the appropriate qualification on the statement (that it was "according to"), it cited and linked the source, and checking that source verifies that it said what the summary claimed it said.

Please allow me to repost this thing I wrote on the red site:

AC said:

And there's a whole one candidate who doesn't support [TPP], and he probably won't even win the primaries. No, the TPP is pretty much a done deal at this point because the neo-nobility will never allow Sanders to get elected.

The only serious candidates iirc that oppose it are Sanders and Trump.

Trump is, well, Trump. Crazy. Unelectable. That being said, if Sanders isn't in the running either as a D or I, I don't hear word of a massive write-in campaign, and Trump has the R nomination, why the fsck not. He'll have my vote. It's not like we're electing a dictator. The other two branches of government will keep his crazy at bay.

Sanders might have a good run of it, but there are two things working against him. Firstly, there's the Coronation of Clinton. If she doesn't get the D nomination, I'll be flabbergasted. So then the second thing comes into play. If Sanders stays in the running as an I, that means he no longer gets the votes from the large number of people who just mark “straight ticket D” at the polls.

I think if Sanders got D, he'd win in a landslide. If Trump gets R and Sanders is running as I, Sanders might be the first president since Fillmore (Whig) not to be a D or R, first I since Washington. If Jeb has R and Sanders stays in as I, then Jeb is the next president. Other scenarios are more of a toss-up.

You are probably correct in the end, though. There will be some reason Sanders drops out entirely. If Trump gets R, the Coronation of Clinton will be complete. If Jeb gets R, it may be an actual contest, but an entirely meaningless one since in all probability our next president is from one of the two dynasties without Sanders running as I.

I haven't keep up with the Libertarians as much as I used to, but the only other scenario that can prevent a dynasty presidency next is if Gary Johnson runs as L. Even then, that's a million in one shot. I don't think I even know his position on TPP, but I have been throwing money at the L+G(reen) initiative (Johnson is the main L for that at least and I believe Jill Stein is the main G) to open up the debates to more than just Rs and Ds.

-----

gewg_ replied:

Jill Stein (a physician), when she debated Mitt Romney during the Massachusetts gubernatorial race, was called "the only adult in the room" by the Boston Globe. So, how "serious" do you want?

Her previous stances against SOPA and PIPA (orig) give an indication that she opposes the likes of TPP.

This guy uses the past tense to acknowledge that the Big 2 parties and Lamestream Media are doing everything they can to make sure no one is aware of her.

She rejected the bootstrap philosophy of extremist free market capitalism. She believed that all people are endowed with certain unalienable rights. That these rights include life, liberty, food, shelter, education, medical care, and the pursuit of happiness.

She supported all public programs which accommodate basic human needs. Food stamps, subsidized housin

A bit off-topic, but I surprise that Slashdot not report this, Rupert Murdoch Takes Over at National Geographic, Immediately Starts Laying off Award-Winning Staff. I've read from SoylentNews.

Go fuck yourselfyou authoritarian shit bag.

http://www.alternet.org/story/...

http://www.marketwatch.com/sto...

of course germans have problems. you just don't understand america's problems are different and worse in aggregate

No he doesn't.
He is no different from every other politician.
He panders to the audience and flipflops regularly.
And hates to be called on it.

Rand Paul’s Incoherent Foreign Policy Mess :

To Time magazine he roughly declares that if he were in charge he wouldn’t let Vladimir Putin “get away with it” and on the same day he tells Brietbart.com that now is not the time for chest beating and weirdly seems to call out John McCain as a chicken hawk. It’s all very confusing.

Rand Paul, serial panderer: 5 major flip-flops that reveal his brazen hypocrisy:

Should predator drones be used against American citizens?

During his filibuster of John Brennan’s nomination as CIA chief, Paul clearly stated the following:

“I rise today to oppose the nomination of anyone who would argue that the President has the power to kill American citizens not involved in combat.
“I rise today to say that there is no legal precedent for killing American citizens not directly involved in combat and that any nominee who rubber stamps and grants such power to a President is not worthy of being placed one step away from the Supreme Court.”

One month later, he suggested that drones could be used by the police to kill liquor store thieves on American soil:

“I’ve never argued against any technology being used when you have an imminent threat, an active crime going on. If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash, I don’t care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him If there’s a killer on the loose in a neighborhood, I’m not against drones being used to search them out, heat-seeking devices being used, I’m all for law enforcement.”

Then, in August 2014, with turmoil in Ferguson, Missouri, as the backdrop, Paul seemed to oppose the police’s use of military equipment:

“The militarization of our law enforcement is due to an unprecedented expansion of government power in this realm. It is one thing for federal officials to work in conjunction with local authorities to reduce or solve crime. It is quite another for them to subsidize it. Americans must never sacrifice their liberty for an illusive and dangerous, or false, security.”

Should we continue to spend money on aid to Israel?

In March 2011, he proposed eliminating all aid to Israel:

“While this budget proposal does eliminate foreign aid to Israel, it is not meant to hurt, negate, or single out one of America’s most important allies. This proposal eliminates all foreign aid to all countries. Israel’s ability to conduct foreign policy, regain economic dominance, and support itself without the heavy hand of U.S. interests and policies, will only strengthen the Israeli community. The elimination of all foreign aid, including provisions to Israel, is not necessarily a new idea.”

Three years later, he denied ever proposing such a plan:

“I haven’t really proposed (phasing out aid to Israel) in the past.”

Should birth control be banned?

Small-government libertarian Rand Paul introduced a so-called Personhood Amendment, which is in reality a back-door antiabortion, anti-contraception bill.

In 2013, Paul introduced the personhood amendment that would not only have banned abortions but also would have in effect banned many forms of birth control, including some forms of the pill. Paul also supported the Blunt Amendment, which would have given employers an excuse to deny contraceptive health care coverage based on their conscience.

The following year, Paul denied he s

Rand says whatever he needs to in order to appeal to the current audience.
He is a serial panderer, even for a politician.
He has flipflopped so many times...

Cruz isn't much better (actually he's not; he's worse, and a tool)

But on to Rand and why he is NOT the libertarian hero you think he is:

Rand Paul’s Incoherent Foreign Policy Mess :

To Time magazine he roughly declares that if he were in charge he wouldn’t let Vladimir Putin “get away with it” and on the same day he tells Brietbart.com that now is not the time for chest beating and weirdly seems to call out John McCain as a chicken hawk. It’s all very confusing.

Rand Paul, serial panderer: 5 major flip-flops that reveal his brazen hypocrisy:

Should predator drones be used against American citizens?

During his filibuster of John Brennan’s nomination as CIA chief, Paul clearly stated the following:

“I rise today to oppose the nomination of anyone who would argue that the President has the power to kill American citizens not involved in combat.
“I rise today to say that there is no legal precedent for killing American citizens not directly involved in combat and that any nominee who rubber stamps and grants such power to a President is not worthy of being placed one step away from the Supreme Court.”

One month later, he suggested that drones could be used by the police to kill liquor store thieves on American soil:

“I’ve never argued against any technology being used when you have an imminent threat, an active crime going on. If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash, I don’t care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him If there’s a killer on the loose in a neighborhood, I’m not against drones being used to search them out, heat-seeking devices being used, I’m all for law enforcement.”

Then, in August 2014, with turmoil in Ferguson, Missouri, as the backdrop, Paul seemed to oppose the police’s use of military equipment:

“The militarization of our law enforcement is due to an unprecedented expansion of government power in this realm. It is one thing for federal officials to work in conjunction with local authorities to reduce or solve crime. It is quite another for them to subsidize it. Americans must never sacrifice their liberty for an illusive and dangerous, or false, security.”

Should we continue to spend money on aid to Israel?

In March 2011, he proposed eliminating all aid to Israel:

“While this budget proposal does eliminate foreign aid to Israel, it is not meant to hurt, negate, or single out one of America’s most important allies. This proposal eliminates all foreign aid to all countries. Israel’s ability to conduct foreign policy, regain economic dominance, and support itself without the heavy hand of U.S. interests and policies, will only strengthen the Israeli community. The elimination of all foreign aid, including provisions to Israel, is not necessarily a new idea.”

Three years later, he denied ever proposing such a plan:

“I haven’t really proposed (phasing out aid to Israel) in the past.”

Should birth control be banned?

Small-government libertarian Rand Paul introduced a so-called Personhood Amendment, which is in reality a back-door antiabortion, anti-contraception bill.

In 2013, Paul introduced the personhood amendment that would not only have banned abortions but also would have in effect banned many forms of birth control, including some forms of the pill. Paul also supported the Blunt Amend

Can I have my Nobel Prize in economics now?

There is no Nobel price in economics

Here's a start for you

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...
http://old.richarddawkins.net/...

You might also be interested to know that atheists commit LESS crime than their religious counterparts

http://www.salon.com/2013/06/1...

And their divorce rate is lower

http://www.alternet.org/belief...

Meanwhile shall we look at all the wars, murder and mayhem conducted in the name of religion/god? Not sure what the character limit is on /. posts, might exceed it...

"As more photovoltaic panels are installed on rooftops around the nation, an antiquated power grid is being overburdened by a bidirectional load its was never engineered to handle. The Hawaiian Electric Company, for example, said it's struggling with electricity "backflow" that could destabilize its system"

This doesn't make sense, the grid copes with bidirectional loads all the time. Where a generator is producing excessive power, it's redistributed into the surrounding grid. Where a local generator is maxed out, then more power is drawn into from the surrounding grid. I think what's really bugging the electric companies is that with more people generating their own electricity, the power companies are generating less revenue.

Yet Another State Threatens to Penalize Solar Power Users

Oklahoma Will Charge Customers Who Install Their Own Solar Panels

I don't get this whole voucher thing, because currently, there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING preventing you from putting your child in whatever school you damn well please. Schools can and do compete and try to get more students, because more students = more funding. Vouchers are a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

You apparently don't understand how education works in the USA. In the USA schools
are funded by taxpayers. Mostly by property tax. Yes, if you can afford it you can
pay to go to a private school or even sometimes pay to go to a public school outside
your district but most people can't afford that. Let me mention again that it's paid by
property tax so the rich neighborhoods get more money and have much nicer schools.
People have been thrown in jail for falsely enrolling their kids in a different district even
if it's just enrolling them under their grandparent's address. This is a separate but equal
crap that needs to end. School vouchers would help stop this segregation between the
rich and the poor. Yes, the rich can send their kids to any school they want, that's not
what the vouchers are for. The vouchers are for the lower middle class families that
can't afford to pay for private schools but would be willing to drive across town to get
their kids to a better school.
20 years in prison for using a friend's address: http://www.alternet.org/story/...
another one where it was the grandparent's address instead of the parent's: http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011... Let's lock those parents and grandparents up so they don't hurt society!!!

So, no, unless you can afford to move and/or afford to pay for private, you can't put "your child in whatever school you damn well please"

Never seen the movie. Not sure what reagan has to do with racisim...if you want a recent seriously racist president then you want nixon and johnson. Nixon pretty much thought all blacks were inferior to whites (on tape)

Do you have a source for that? Certainly there are narcs, but I've never heard of any of them enrolling in high schools undercover. Cops threatening high school kids who got caught anyway to cough up some names, sure. But when they invest an undercover agent (= lots of money), it's going to be for a big investigation, not to find out which high school kid sold a dimebag to which other high school kid.

I heard the story on NPR where a highschool kid gets a crush on a new girl. The girl asks him to get her some drugs. He isn't a dealer, nor does he even do drugs, but he talks to some people and is able to get her some where he gets busted for his reward. http://www.alternet.org/story/...

It doesn't sound like an isolated incident either. http://www.opposingviews.com/i...

Release all the nonviolent offenders who received massive sentences due to the three-strike, and mandatory sentencing rules, and you have plenty of savings to offset the far smaller number of dangerous criminals.

Many of them rot in prison for nothing else than selling pot.

Per capita the US incarcerates more of it citizens than any other industrialized nation.

But it will cause change

Well, Utah's found a way around any possible change because of the availability of lethal injection drugs. They're doing lethal injections of lead.

http://time.com/3742818/utah-f...

And you can draw a straight line from the reinstatement of firing squads to the growing militarization of police departments from big cities to small towns, and county and state police. There are already firing squads for poor people, they call them, "police". And not just unarmed black men on the street. The new trend in American law enforcement is for young black men to somehow commit suicide by firearm or being shot by police while in police custody with their hands cuffed behind their backs.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/in...

http://legalinsurrection.com/2...

In conclusion: Unarmed black guys get killed by representatives of the government, but if a white guy threatens an officer with a weapon, of course, he's taken alive and even given back his gun. What a country.

http://www.alternet.org/civil-...

Rugby and cricket.

It reminds me of what Noam Chomsky once said:

When I'm driving, I sometimes turn on the radio and I find very often that what I'm listening to is a discussion of sports. These are telephone conversations. People call in and have long and intricate discussions, and it's plain that quite a high degree of thought and analysis is going into that. People know a tremendous amount. They know all sorts of complicated details and enter into far-reaching discussion about whether the coach made the right decision yesterday and so on. These are ordinary people, not professionals, who are applying their intelligence and analytic skills in these areas and accumulating quite a lot of knowledge and, for all I know, understanding. On the other hand, when I hear people talk about, say, international affairs or domestic problems, it's at a level of superficiality that's beyond belief.

In part, this reaction may be due to my own areas of interest, but I think it's quite accurate, basically. And I think that this concentration on such topics as sports makes a certain degree of sense. The way the system is set up, there is virtually nothing people can do anyway, without a degree of organization that's far beyond anything that exists now, to influence the real world. They might as well live in a fantasy world, and that's in fact what they do. I'm sure they are using their common sense and intellectual skills, but in an area which has no meaning and probably thrives because it has no meaning, as a displacement from the serious problems which one cannot influence and affect because the power happens to lie elsewhere....

There are also experts about football, but these people don't defer to them. The people who call in talk with complete confidence. They don't care if they disagree with the coach or whoever the local expert is. They have their own opinion and they conduct intelligent discussions. I think it's an interesting phenomenon. Now I don't think that international or domestic affairs are much more complicated. And what passes for serious intellectual discourse on these matters does not reflect any deeper level of understanding or knowledge.

“It was a scene right out of a Hollywood movie,” the Court’s ruling began. “Teams from the OCSO [Orange County Sheriff’s Office] descended... with some team members dressed in ballistic vests and masks, and with guns drawn, the deputies rushed into their target destinations, handcuffed the stunned occupants—and demanded to see their barbers’ licenses. The Orange County Sheriff’s Office was providing muscle for the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation’s [DBPR] administrative inspection of barbershops to discover licensing violations.”

http://wap.alternet.org/civil-...

as an example: http://wap.alternet.org/civil-...

of denouncing Muslims for their "barbarity."

You know, you're right. I meant the subset of Muslims who make up ISIS, and I misspoke. Next time I'll be sure to say some Muslims. Care to retract your sweeping generalizations about "The American Christians"? The act of burning someone to death is a barbaric act. Doesn't matter who does it. I feel pretty confident this is a rational and defensible position.

What is ISIS doing that isn't as barbaric as the things we do every day?

Well, kidnapping, torturing and enslaving / selling children for one. Putting people in cages and setting them alight for another. Let's not get started on their treatment of women.

Burning somebody alive. Big fucking deal.

I'm... speechless...

The American Christians burned thousands of people alive.

So here's your source article, no citations for the "thousands" figure anywhere. There are two examples given, Sam Hose in 1899 and Jesse Washington in 1916. Note that these are examples of past barbarities Americans committed and they're documented so we can learn from them and not repeat history. This is not happening today in America, and there is probably nobody alive now who was not an infant when it happened. Can you say the same about the Muslims that murdered Muadh al Kasasbeh?

Clearly for ISIS to burn a prisoner to death was [insert the same condemnation you use when Christians and Americans do the same thing].

History? Speaking as an Atheist in America, I don't think Christians (or any significant number of Americans) have tortured anyone to death by burning them in a cage in a very long time.

But be consistent. Whatever you say about the Muslims, you should say about the Christians who caused just as much or more painful suffering and death.

While Christians may well have caused as much painful suffering and death as Muslims, I'm not seeing them doing that now. Once again, I can't say the same thing about ISIS.
Also note that your ideas of what I should say are largely irrelevant to me at this time.
Please feel free to continue grinding that axe though!

"How many people were killed in the name of Christianity in the past 100 years? last 50? Last 10???"

Pretty much Zero, Nil, Nilch, Nada, None.

Except for these?

-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...

As far as I can tell, voters roundly rejected authoritarian Democrats this time around.

And this is the party's response.. Somebody is reading the numbers wrong.