Slashdot Mirror

Just because something is bad doesn't make it terrorism.

Tell that to the people who are being charged with terrorism merely for swearing at a flight attendant: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2009/01/25/bad_behavior_on_flights_prosecutable_under_patriot_act/

Sorry, that is not what I am reading. Some are stating, quite plainly, that they do not deserve any protection. Until people are charged, which I have not seen happening, their identities should be obscured as they may be innocent or found innocent.

There are two possibilities:
(1) They are government agents acting lawfully in their official capacity, in which case neither the acts nor their identities deserve protection against public scrutiny and accountability (barring some other reason than "people might not like what they've done"), or
(2) They are government agents acting unlawfully and contrary to their official responsibilities, in which case neither their acts nor their identities deserve protection against public scrutiny (again, barring some other reason than "people might not like what they've done").

They are entitled to protection from retaliation in the same way that all citizens are entitled to protection from violent crime, but not in any other way.

[citation needed]
I have seen no investigations as yet, only the threat of same.

Then you haven't been paying the slightest bit of attention, which is hardly anyone's fault but your own. The amount of media attention the various investigations and prosecutions received was immense.

Here's just a few bits:
Military prosecution in Abu Ghraib scandal ends (01/11/2008)
For Abu Ghraib, a limited prosecution (03/29/2006)
The Unlearned Lessons of Abu Ghraib (10/19/2006)
Iraq prison report details lax discipline (5/8/2004)
CIA personnel, civilians cited in abuse (8/20/2004)
Trial Starts in Abu Ghraib Death (5/25/2005)
C.I.A. to Avoid Charges in Most Prisoner Deaths (10/23/2005)

It's not just these guys. Sony is laying off 16K (10%) employees worldwide:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-10118970-92.html

Downsizing is the biggest news these days. It effects every industry. Christmas party downsizing alone had a big impact on the food catering industry:

http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/family/articles/2008/12/13/downsizing_christmas/

Things are not looking good. Unless Obama starts strengthening the dollar and stimulating job growth then it's going to only get worse. Bailouts are not the way to do it though.

real cameras provided all the really useful (ie worth viewing) material

Case in point: http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/01/the_inauguration_of_president.html

Full disclosure: I am a libertarian with pro-environmental views and a penchant for cool tech like wind power.

On one hand, the rich Kenedy's of the world don't want their beautiful ocean views ruined by wind mills. Bunch of arrogant, rich, hypocrites that I feel pretty much sums up the Democrats.

On the other hand, how pissed would I be if someone installed that shit in my local national/state parks?

We have to ruin all natural areas? Nothing is sacred? We whine when Bush's DOI let exploratory gas drilling in some beautiful areas....I whined too. But does wind get a free pass?

Here's a case where I actually agree with both sides. We need clean energy, and we need pristine natural areas. Build these mufuckin wind farms in farmland.

See Israeli security for an example of how not to get hijacked. They don't make you take off your shoes, and you get to keep your water bottle.

You dont "recall", well that's a shame. Good thing about the internet, people like you can no longer revise history and muddy the waters after a large event happens. Five seconds of research shows that you're quite simply a reactionary apologist.

There was no shortage of scientists and doctors at every level willing to promote the ridiculous message that mass pandemic was imminent.

Here's a few examples from five seconds on google proving that your assertation that "only the media said we would all die of bird flu" is at best ignorance, at worst a bold faced lie:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4346624.stm
http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,345165,00.html
http://www.satyamag.com/feb06/greger.html
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/03/17/the_cost_of_bird_flu_hysteria/

"The chief avian flu coordinator for the United Nations, Dave Nabarro, said last fall he was "almost certain" a bird flu pandemic would strike soon, and predicted up to 150 million deaths. The U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, Mike Leavitt, advised Americans to stockpile cans of tuna fish and powdered milk under their beds in case of an outbreak. Renowned flu expert Robert Webster has said society needs to face the possibility that half of the population could die in a bird flu pandemic."

Nice weasel words there by the way "non-medical scientists" lol so medical scientists opinions on a medical issue are irrelevant? How convenient, lets ask some geologists then and perhaps an astronomer too, it's they who have the 'real' insight.

I think it may be you who is lacking in understanding of the scientific method.

Rule number one, never make an assertation without a shred of evidence.

In September -- when gas in Europe was selling for the equivalent of $8.00 per gallon -- Chu told the Wall Street Journal, "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe."

Now, if you buy into all the global warming hype, Chu's your man. Reducing everyone's standard of living is a small price to pay, if it will prevent the sea from encroaching into low-lying areas like Miami and Tuvalu.

On the other hand, if you've been paying attention, you know that the earth has been in a cooling trend since 1998, and the extent of sea ice is the same as it was 30 years ago, despite the fact that CO2 concentration increased during both of those time periods. And you'd be wise to not interfere with the decisions made by free markets about the most efficient ways to power vehicles and generate electricity.

"They're already blind."

Unfortunately not, otherwise they couldn't see the photos.

my gf says she should be in jail and so should her teenage sister. According to her, 90% of teenage girls with cellphones would be in jail if authorities looked at their phones.

Can you imagine the conversation with police being a 15 yr old girl and being "caught" with photos of yourself?

cop: YOU'RE UNDER ARREST FOR KIDDIE PORN!
girl: huh? what porn? oh, yeah that's me, i sent it to my bf
cop: YOU'RE UNDER ARREST
girl: what? for what? that's me, i took that photo, i took a photo of myself
cop: that's right, and you're under arrest
girl: why? I don't think you understand: I took a photo of MYSELF, I am a teenage girl, I took a photo of myself with my phone, how is that "kiddie porn"?
cop: so you admit to talking naked photos teenage girls? I have to remind you anything you say can and will be used against you in the court of law
girl: What?! *shocked* ... but... I... nvmd...

This is the most asine thing I've ever heard, but I don't think the laws will change until:
A) the girls become lawmakers and politicians in 10 yrs
b) lawmakers look at their daughter's phone and find the nude photos of their *own* daughters

I can't believe the legal system is taking normal teens and turning them into criminal sex offenders. For the rest of their lives these girls will be considered "sex offenders", won't be able to live near schools, their name, address and police photos will be listed online for all to see, and will not be able to get a job that works with children and will probably be denied many jobs because they are "sex offenders", lumped in the same category as rapists. Even if someday the laws are reversed and they're cleared of all charges it'll still follow them, searches online will probably pick up their names for many years.

Child pornography laws were put in place to prevent dirty old men from offering little children candy in exchange for getting naked for photos. Unfortunately the laws were worded very poorly and now *anyone*, including the children taking photos of themselves, are being treated like dirty old men. They're martyrs. The laws need to be re-written so it only applies to the dirty old men taking the photos, not the child that takes photos of themselves or the men that downloads a photo of a girl and finds out later the girl was 17 and not 18 and goes to jail, similar to marijuana laws in many states, where police won't even enforce laws saying to arrest offenders with less than an ounce of marijuana

And don't even get me started how stupid it is we as Americans teach our children that the nude body is horrible and disgusting and should be hidden but showing people being murdered and chopped into pieces on TV and video games is fine. A teen just got 36 yrs for murder for doing what he saw on mortal kombat, if he was re-enacting nudity videos instead of violent video games he probably wouldn't be in jail.

If I was one of those girls I think I'd move to another country and change my name.

700 days with no backup tapes? Seems rather improbable to me.

I do think events like this will just continue to encourage politicians and staffers never to write things down. Then we'll be asking why some policy went wrong because no one took any notes at the meeting in the Oval Office and relied on their faulty memories.

Remember this is the same Administration whose Vice President now claims he's really a member of the legislative branch (because of his constitutional role as President of the Senate) so he's not covered by the archival rules that apply to the rest of the White House.

I can hallucinate using just a radio and a ping pong ball

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/us_senate/articles/2004/08/20/no_fly_list_almost_grounded_kennedy_he_tells_hearing/

(you didn't think I was referring to the his *other* scarlett letter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Jo_Kopechne/ did you :-)

Poland has very high unemployment rate, one of the highest in Europe, and is also one of the poorest countries in Europe

It's actually not that true anymore... Unemployment dropped here to about 8% (http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/pls/portal/docs/PAGE/PGP_PRD_CAT_PREREL/PGE_CAT_PREREL_YEAR_2008/PGE_CAT_PREREL_YEAR_2008_MONTH_04/3-01042008-EN-AP.PDF) and is comparable to Germany. However, it's true that GDP is still quite low, and wages suck compared to West Europe.

I work for UK company, and it was very attractive job year ago, and 2 years ago it was 30% more attractive. That's because of exchange rates changing, and Poles are coming back to seek job in home country. I'm getting less and less money because of that, but I think it's a sign of our good economy - and will be good to my country in long term.

I realize that this sucks for Ireland but Poland is in far worse shape and needs the jobs just as badly if not more.

Full of shit, perhaps.

Gasoline taxes pay for road maintenance genius.

That type of tax is known as an Excise Tax also known as luxury tax. You don't have to pay that tax if you don't buy gasoline.

I will be driving anywhere I want on any chunk of road I choose, because I pay for gas and as a result I pay the excise tax used for roads. Thank you very much for illustrating your lack of knowledge of this subject.

These projects will be paid for with money collected from Direct Tax

Now, lets tackle your statement regarding why I should pay taxes.

Of course, I should pay taxes to pay for two wars that I'm opposed to. I should also pay taxes to fund bail-outs and bonuses for bankers and auto-makers. You would argue that I should pay taxes that are sent to foreign countries.

Do you realize that we (The USA) fought against British taxation and won independence as a result? Perhaps you should move to the jungle where you can build the socialist utopia of your dreams. I'll stay in the USA, the last known address of freedom.

To be fair, it seems that (according the army) terrorists were firing mortar shells from structure moments earlier.

Yet, amazingly, for all the aerial drones, balloons (yes, balloons) and other visual devices they have, no image of said mortar firing will ever be provided for the public to view. Instead, we're supposed to rely on the word of a military who attacked a U.S. warship in international waters, who deliberately rammed and nearly sank a humanitarian aid ship and who in 2006, destroyed the only power plant in Gaza.

I'm all for people retaliating when they are attacked, but to deliberately kill journalists, attack your "friends", deny humanitarian aid to those who need it, attack refugee camps, and a whole list of other offenses, is where I draw the line. You want to shape world opinion to your point of view? Quit playing the victim card and start acting like you learned something from everything that's been done to you.

And since when is someone defending their land from an invader a terrorist? Apparently all those Iraqis who fought against the U.S. invasion were terrorists. Same goes George Washington. Hell, by that standard, Red Dawn was nothing but a propaganda story about terrorists.

Amtrak has never once turned a profit in it's entire history.

Instead, it relies on a constant flow of public funds...all the while pretending to be private property. With it's own police force too, roughing people up like "Cigarette and A no. 1"

If I invite you as a guest into my house, I can kick you out whenever I want. I don't have to give you 2 weeks notice.

Actually, that's not always the case:

If your houseguest has been living with you for more than 30 days, he would be considered a tenant, and the tenancy could only be terminated by proper written notice. If your houseguest has been a tenant less than one year, you could terminate the tenancy by giving 30 days' written notice, but if he has been living with you more than one year, you would have to give him 60 days' written notice. If your houseguest did not vacate within the notice period, you would have to begin formal eviction procedures.

(http://www.boston.com/realestate/news/articles/2007/12/06/how_to_evict_house_guest_who_refuses_to_pay_rent/)

Are you suggesting it's "irony" or "idiocy" to search a guy wearing an Army uniform?

No disrespect to you personally, but real idiocy would be to treat anybody with any less scrutiny because of what they're wearing. Unless you believe that (a) the terrorists don't know how to shop online); (b) everybody in the Army is squeaky clean; and (c) nobody who's served in the Army has ever committed a terrorist act.

Well, it was 3 - this is why I knew about it. link

I'll reserve my judgment until I see this reported in a better source. This article is written so poorly I suspect the author has no idea what his misstatement implies. If FairPoint is planning to block major webmail sites, the Rutland Herald missed out on a huge story. They seem to be the only news source with this information.

Look at what other sites are reporting about this deal. "In Maine, regulators have alerted FairPoint that it will be scrutinized more closely than probably any other utility in the state's history." If true, the details will come to light quickly as this hits the major news outlets.

American laws almost universally obliterate the rights of minors. If you're a kid, you basically have the right to not be molested, and that's it. Well, you have the right to have Big Brother prosecute whoever molests you. Otherwise? If you're a kid, bend over, the system is raping you.

The stick you in public schools which are staffed with biased teachers. They're actively indoctrinating students to the Holy Politically Correct way, fuck what parents think. In Massachusetts a parent didn't want his child taught about gay marriage in school (pretty reasonable request, right? Our family respectfully disagrees, please don't teach our kid this!) The court decided that no, parents have no right to teach their kid bullshit. The Mighty State has All Rights.

You want America for freedom? You have every freedom, so long as it conforms to what Big Brother wants. Big Brother is more often than not enforcing the tyranny of the minority. Bend over, you're getting raped by the system.

The more liberal this goddamn place gets, the less freedoms I end up having. If you disagree, kiss my (heavily taxed) car's bumper sticker: "LESS GOVERNMENT IS GOOD!"

Now that the cost of higher education is falling and endowments are growing, universities will have lots of money to spend on music taxes!

Alternatively, they could just give every student a free copy of PeerGuardian.

Talk about an outrage!

Hey, the McLean Students vs. iParadigms has an appeal hearing scheduled for later this week.

Sorry to hijack the thread.

Due to my involvement in the trial, I have to post anonymously, and hope this gets modded up.

We will soon know if businesses can patent business processes, or methods.

But at any rate, for the corporate media spin on this, here are a few links:
Billion Dollar Charlie vs. the RIAA

Hmm, the story you linked on Slashdot's coverage refers to Slashdot's coverage. This must be some kind of trick!

I submitted a story about this Monday, Constitutionality of P2P law "under attack" (rejected) after seeing it in an AP story in the Chicago Tribune. That story quoted NYCL, who it of course called Ray Beckerman. I wondered at the time why he hadn't submitted it himself.

But at any rate, for the corporate media spin on this, here are a few links:
Billion Dollar Charlie vs. the RIAA
Legal Jujitsu in a File-Sharing Copyright Case
Lawsuits Brought by Music Industry Are Unconstitutional, Lawyer Says
Law professor fires back at song-swapping lawsuits (AP)
Law Professor Takes on RIAA
Prof: Penalty unfair, will help with $1M download lawsuit
RIAA defendant enlists Harvard Law prof, students
Harvard Professor: File-Sharing Lawsuits Unconstitutional

Activists will never accept the possibility that there is an inherent preference between genders for certain types of subjects. Articles like this always make it sound like woman are being driven from science or cs and we must persuade/push/bribe to get woman into it. No one is pushing woman away from it, they are simply choosing careers that they prefer. For every Marie Curie there are a hundred Clara Bartons.

My boss, for example, is quitting her IT management job to spend more time with her young children and aging parents. She is a great boss and if we had our way we'd never let her go.

I rarely hear anyone complain about the lack of male schoolteachers (came up in today's Boston Globe), or nurses, or day care providers. Where are the hand wringing studies pushing to fix that?

And I haven't heard a big push to increase males in areas dominated my women, e.g. elementary education.

Actually, from today's Boston Globe: Hunt is on for more men to lead classrooms.

Harvard and other big-name schools like that, especially Ivy schools which are older than the Revolutionary War, have endowments in the tens of billions. As you can see here, Harvard has nearly $40 billion on hand -- more than the GDP of some countries in the world.

Who the hell is going to try and push back against Harvard and why would they need government support? I think that's hardly a fair indicator.

a truly remarkable list of "present" votes in such a relatively short career

130 out of more than 4000, often as a strategic move, & something that is not uncommon in the Illinois state legislature.

For example, he has voted very consistently for increased gun and ammunition restrictions. Including openly supporting the DC ban and voting in favor of a similar ban in Chicago. Yet he stood behind a podium and said he believed the second amendment "must mean something" and was an individual right, rather than a collective.

He said "I think there is an individual right to bear arms, but it's subject to commonsense regulation" (like background checks), and "The notion that somehow local jurisdictions can't initiate gun safety laws to deal with gang bangers and random shootings on the street isn't born out by our Constitution." Additionally there is ample discussion about how to interpret the 2nd, and case law that roams back and forth on the issue (and note, that Heller was a divided decision). So I don't think I totally buy your premise that to say the 2nd is an individual right requires that you not support local firearm regulations. Inconsistency would be to support incongruous sides of an argument, but to hold a consistent (if not extreme originalist/black-and-white) view doesn't qualify in my mind. In fact, I bet most people are somewhere in the middle and neither "AK-47s for everyone!" nor "Only squirt-guns allowed!"

An individual right != an unlimited right, note SCOTUS in Robertson v. Baldwin the late 1890s:

the "Bill of Rights," were not intended to lay down any novel principles of government, but simply to embody certain guaranties and immunities which we had inherited from our English ancestors, and which had, from time immemorial, been subject to certain well recognized exceptions arising from the necessities of the case. [...] Thus, the freedom of speech and of the press (Art. I) does not permit the publication of libels, blasphemous or indecent articles, or other publications injurious to public morals or private reputation; the right of the people to keep and bear arms (Art. II) is not infringed by laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons

-Ted

Ohh wow just had a huge argument with someone about this. The site is very misleading regarding the actual policies, which is ironic considering it's made for Obama.

The actual policy is a $4K tax rebate for those willing to voluntarily perform 100 hours of community service.

This is nothing new and was outlined by Obama back in March: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2008/03/27/a_legion_of_student_volunteers/ Everything is completely voluntary, the only thing he's doing is providing incentives. It's up to you to take them or not.

LOL we are starting them off at an early age

That is not necessarily a good thing to do.

If you didnt vote for Cthulhu today as a write-in im very worried about your sanity being had for breakfast. Hes here!! Look busy!!

CTHULHU & PALIN 2012!!!

A swift-boat styled advertisement appeared on both the Sunday Night and Monday Night Football games telecast nationally. It was sponsored by the "National Republican Trust" and pressed hard on Obama's ties to the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, closing with the slogan "Obama: Too Radical, Too Risky."

"The National Republican Trust has made enormous advertising buys to put the ad on several national television networks in the final days of the campaign. The group spent $1.2 million on Thursday and $2.5 million more on Friday." (Boston Globe)

A McCain spokeman said that McCain would not try to stop the Pennsylvania GOP and the National Republican Trust political action committee from airing the Wright ads. He added that McCain "is not going to be the traffic cop for every independent organization, state party, or state-level candidate that chooses to use these in advertising."

McCain himself chose not to raise the Wright issue despite constant pressure from Republican advisors and Sarah Palin.

There is significant difference between changing your mind and crass opportunism. Although, I do admit there is a chance that McCain has genuinely changed his mind and decided to join the ranks of the fundamentalist lunatics. Either way (and for many other reasons), I don't think he is suited to be the president.

It's good that you have reasons for your actions. I'm not sure why McCain changed his mind or that it isn't opportunism. However, no one has said he done something specifically because of the way the other side would react which, to me at least, makes the opportunism a little less in comparison. We can disagree on this or the importance of the differences.

You are right in that both sides have used smears, but McCain has been far more egregious in this regard. He is using every nasty trick he can and some of his supporters are now openly calling for Obama's assassination. No, Obama is not perfect. I would actually prefer someone else. But, given the realistic assessment that there are only two viable candidates, I think he is by far the better one. You obviously disagree, but I would hope that your disagreement would stem from your views about which candidate has better policy ideas and better judgment, rather than all the garbage that we've seen hurled in this campaign. The garbage has largely come from the McCain side, either from him or from his supporters.

I still don't think your paying attention enough. McCain blasted one of his own supporters at a rally for making derogatory remarks about Obama. He has administered outright lies said about Obama and on one occasion told a voter that he didn't care for his vote when he said we needed to lynch Obama. You must be forgetting Obama's supporters who likened McCain and Palin to Nazi collaborators and segregationist policies of George Wallace and the murder of four little girls. Obama refused to admonish or condemn that act even after praising McCain for admonishing his supporters who got out of line. He was on national TV and was asked specifically if he would condemn those words and Obama refused to. How about the effigy of Palin being hung from a tree or roof top that no one in the media or Obama's campaign cared about more then to giggle until someone made one of Obama- then it was all about race and how McCain and his supporters are racist. You have Obama claiming that McCain would continue Bush's economic policy when he himself (most likely you too) can't even name what that policy is. It's like the trick question given to Palin about the bush doctrine, he has no doctrine to speak of and he had no clear economic policy until things started falling apart.

I can go on with loads more if you want. Here is a little article talking about some of it if you doubt what I'm saying. I'm not attempting to change your vote or anything, but you should at least know what your voting for.

How many people have cured cancer by trying to reform it?

Do you means something like taking a tumor and "reforming" it into something like a mass of herpes cells and then blasting it?

I'm sorry, did I just ruin your argument there, Sparky? Or was your question rhetorical?

Amazing.

Barack Obama's aunt, a Kenyan woman who has been quietly living in public housing in South Boston, is in the United States illegally after an immigration judge rejected her request for asylum four years ago, the Associated Press has learned.

Zeituni Onyango, 56, referred to as "Aunti Zeituni" in Obama's memoir, was instructed to leave the United States by a US immigration judge who denied her asylum request, a person familiar with the matter told the AP late last night.

The disclosure about Onyango came shortly after Obama's presidential campaign confirmed that Onyango was Obama's paternal half-aunt on his father's side.

It was not immediately clear how Onyango might have qualified for public housing with a standing deportation order.

Hopefully after the election W will get sent to Iraq so the Iraqi's can thank him personally for all he has done for them.

Hillary and the congressional dems who voted for the war and continuing funding can go with him...

Does that include Obama?

Never mind that. The goatse guy is on the sun!

My eyes!

Oh my God! Its everywhere! Everywhere! My eyes, oh my eyes!
http://cache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/sol_10_13/sol07.jpg

Shot #16 in that series is particularly amazing... Phoenix rising, perhaps?

Holy cow. Misplaced comment here, but if you do not normally click the links in Slashdot articles, click them today. The first link has pictures of the sun that I never knew we had. They're amazing. Some of them are close up at 70km resolution. Just awesome.

Some people would disagree with you there. Another excellently written article deconstructs the pathetic excuses of the clowns that have so spectacularly fucked up the world economies.

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2008/10/11/subprime_scapegoats/

There was a project with the goal to make a mouse that expressed a variety of different fluorophores in it's neurons so that you could tell one neuron from another, watch active processes, and so on.

The best part is the name: the brainbow mouse

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/multimedia/2007/10/gallery_fluorescentneurons

http://bioephemera.com/2007/11/13/the-brainbow-mouse/

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/health_science/articles/2006/11/06/microscope_renaissance/

I think some of Tsien's work is more interesting, I believe he's made some fluorophores that you can turn on and off, or convert to different colors to identify specific cells, in addition to some dyes which fluoresce only in the presence of calcium.

It's been mentioned that for about 75 Billion the US Gov could give 100k to each of the households currently in foreclosure

I indicated that I was referring to the number of houses in foreclosure. If we take a quick look at this we see that it was estimated that "As many as 750,000 homes will go into foreclosure this year". Multiply that by 100k, and...whiz bang, doesn't that work out nice?

And spare me arguments about fairness, or efficacy of such a plan. It was an exercise in examining the magnitude of the bailout and reference for what it was supposed to do. If you read further in my comment (I feel I need to remind you to do this since it's apparent that you didn't read it the first time) you'll notice that I don't advocate either of those "options".

Obama will castrate our military and destroy our nuclear deterrent.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxL8NcNACBY

He will tax corporations and high income earners that employ the population of the US, which will force them to cut jobs and send the unemployment rate skyrocketing.
http://obama.3cdn.net/b7be3b7cd08e587dca_v852mv8ja.pdf

He sees dead people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=galtZF0nKYc

He wants to take the guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens, leaving us at the mercy of criminals.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/barack_obama_gun_control.htm

He'll cut and run from Iraq, knocking the legs out from under the Iraqi government as they are finally finding their footing.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/

He believes homosexuals are entitled to more rights than straight people.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/23/debate.transcript/index.html

He believes in mob rule concerning criminal punishment.
The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, p. 58

He refuses to call terrorists "terrorists" even when presented with evidence.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15251928

He will prevent us from keeping sensitive materials confidential, which will place national security at risk.
http://www.cfr.org/publication/14356/

He would talk with terrorist countries without demanding that they cease their efforts to murder innocent people and abide by the rule of law.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3Oj7Jn9rv4

He believes we should reward people who ignore the existence of a country's sovereignty and illegally enter the country instead of forcing them to abide by the law.
http://obama.senate.gov/news/060923-sen_obama_at_to/index.php

He believes the government should regulate the internet.
http://obama.senate.gov/podcast/060608-network_neutral/index.php

He believes in making those who have money pay for the healthcare of those who do not have money.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/

He believes we should take corn, a staple food for the US, and use it for ethanol production, which will cause shortages in food supply and produce car exhaust that is more dangerous to humans than gasoline burning cars.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/01/05/new_us_congress_looks_to_boost_alternate_fuels/?p1=MEWell_Pos5

He believes that parents should have no choice but to send their children to government run schools to be indoctrinated by sub-standard teachers.
http://www-news.uchicago.edu/citations/04/041027.obama-ct.html

In short, he's an anti-American, anti-military Marxist who will destroy the US before he can be voted out of office. I don't like McCain and I have problems with many of his positions, but he will, at the very least, keep the US from crashing and burning within the next 4 years (provided the Dems don't win Congress).

And no, he's not a Muslim (as far as we know). He's not black (he's bi-racial). He's not a Christian (against everything Ch

Obama will castrate our military and destroy our nuclear deterrent.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxL8NcNACBY

He will tax corporations and high income earners that employ the population of the US, which will force them to cut jobs and send the unemployment rate skyrocketing.
http://obama.3cdn.net/b7be3b7cd08e587dca_v852mv8ja.pdf

He sees dead people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=galtZF0nKYc

He wants to take the guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens, leaving us at the mercy of criminals.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/barack_obama_gun_control.htm

He'll cut and run from Iraq, knocking the legs out from under the Iraqi government as they are finally finding their footing.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/

He believes homosexuals are entitled to more rights than straight people.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/23/debate.transcript/index.html

He believes in mob rule concerning criminal punishment.
The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, p. 58

He refuses to call terrorists "terrorists" even when presented with evidence.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15251928

He will prevent us from keeping sensitive materials confidential, which will place national security at risk.
http://www.cfr.org/publication/14356/

He would talk with terrorist countries without demanding that they cease their efforts to murder innocent people and abide by the rule of law.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3Oj7Jn9rv4

He believes we should reward people who ignore the existence of a country's sovereignty and illegally enter the country instead of forcing them to abide by the law.
http://obama.senate.gov/news/060923-sen_obama_at_to/index.php

He believes the government should regulate the internet.
http://obama.senate.gov/podcast/060608-network_neutral/index.php

He believes in making those who have money pay for the healthcare of those who do not have money.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/

He believes we should take corn, a staple food for the US, and use it for ethanol production, which will cause shortages in food supply and produce car exhaust that is more dangerous to humans than gasoline burning cars.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/01/05/new_us_congress_looks_to_boost_alternate_fuels/?p1=MEWell_Pos5

He believes that parents should have no choice but to send their children to government run schools to be indoctrinated by sub-standard teachers.
http://www-news.uchicago.edu/citations/04/041027.obama-ct.html

In short, he's an anti-American, anti-military Marxist who will destroy the US before he can be voted out of office. I don't like McCain and I have problems with many of his positions, but he will, at the very least, keep the US from crashing and burning within the next 4 years (provided the Dems don't win Congress).

And no, he's not a Muslim (as far as we know). He's not black (he's bi-racial). He's not a Christian (against everything Ch

Well, hopefully imaging can be augmented with this:

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/health_science/articles/2004/09/23/hope_seen_for_early_test_to_detect_breast_cancer/

By Robert Cooke, Globe Correspondent | September 23, 2004

Harvard researchers at Children's Hospital Boston have developed a simple urine test that appears to detect breast cancer early and accurately track tumor growth.

The findings are still preliminary, but if further research supports them, the test could be a major advance in the effort to catch breast cancer before it turns deadly. The Boston scientists are searching for similar markers in urine for other cancers.