Slashdot Mirror

Any chance you have specifics as to what % of protestors coming from the left side of things are volunteers vs paid? How do you think that would compare to right leaning groups?

We've heard for years how the Tea Party was simply astroturfing from the Koch brothers... if true, I think I'm owed quite a bit of money for the protesting I did... yet we do have very clear evidence of quite a few left leaning groups paying street protestors... BLM being just the latest group to get millions from Soros... who only turn tail and run when met with military force ala last night in Charlotte.

Or is it that right leaning folks are better about not saying "yes, I'm paid to be here"? http://www.thegatewaypundit.co...

It was a Twitter fight between a Daily Mail reporter and the Clinton's press secretary and the National Field Director for the Democratic Party.

inciting looting / violence is okay in Twitter's book but calling people out for it isn't okay. While I respect your argument it's not point in fact, there's too many getting banned and filtered along with trending hashtags that disappear for no reason other than they may seem unpopular with Liberals. There's already been known left-leaning abuse in other social media platforms, it's documented and even good old Google being involved in it as well, I just think it's time for Twitter to come out and say "We support violence and rioting but we don't support conservative ideals." Sure there's hyperbole on both sides of it but if you're going to advocate free speech without hate at least you should proclaim your biases.

The idea, that Russians are behind this is a red herring. Put out by anonymous sources it serves only to change the topic — from the contents of the e-mails and the negligence of the Democratic officials (including their Presidential nominee).

According to Assange, for example, Wikileaks got their data from DNC-sources including the misteriously murdered Seth Conrad Rich.

Maybe, Russians were involved too, maybe not. But the facts remain: DNC officials (including Hillary Clinton herself) are incompetent in computer security and dishonest.

A Russian cyberattack that targeted Democratic politicians was bigger than it first appeared and breached private email accounts of more than 100 party officials and groups (could be paywalled; alternate source), reports The New York Times, citing officials with knowledge of the case. From the report:

New York times: invested majority stake by Carlos Slim with ties to obama and the Clinton foundation

The widening scope of the attack has prompted the F.B.I. to broaden its investigation, and agents have begun notifying a long list of Democratic officials that the Russians may have breached their personal accounts. The main targets appear to have been the personal email accounts of Hillary Clinton's campaign officials and party operatives, along with a number of party organizations. Officials have acknowledged that the Russian hackers gained access to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which is the fund-raising arm for House Democrats, and to the Democratic National Committee, including a D.N.C. voter analytics program used by Mrs. Clinton's presidential campaign.

DNC analytics is Groundworks from GOOGLE

Still trying blame the russians when its clear wikileaks is telling you something here.

This whole story is a political hit job written by a fully compromised media outlet. Gerbil and Stalin would be proud of the American Media at this point.

Feel Free to visit independent media and see whats going on. Youtube:

Drudge Report

Redacted tonight

infowars.com

The Jimmy Dore show

Paul Joseph Watson

The Young Turks are going all in for Hillary, avoid them till they get their heads out of their behinds.

A Russian cyberattack that targeted Democratic politicians was bigger than it first appeared and breached private email accounts of more than 100 party officials and groups (could be paywalled; alternate source), reports The New York Times, citing officials with knowledge of the case. From the report:

New York times: invested majority stake by Carlos Slim with ties to obama and the Clinton foundation

The widening scope of the attack has prompted the F.B.I. to broaden its investigation, and agents have begun notifying a long list of Democratic officials that the Russians may have breached their personal accounts. The main targets appear to have been the personal email accounts of Hillary Clinton's campaign officials and party operatives, along with a number of party organizations. Officials have acknowledged that the Russian hackers gained access to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which is the fund-raising arm for House Democrats, and to the Democratic National Committee, including a D.N.C. voter analytics program used by Mrs. Clinton's presidential campaign.

DNC analytics is Groundworks from GOOGLE

Still trying blame the russians when its clear wikileaks is telling you something here.

This whole story is a political hit job written by a fully compromised media outlet. Gerbil and Stalin would be proud of the American Media at this point.

Feel Free to visit independent media and see whats going on. Youtube:

Drudge Report

Redacted tonight

infowars.com

The Jimmy Dore show

Paul Joseph Watson

The Young Turks are going all in for Hillary, avoid them till they get their heads out of their behinds.

Who cares who hacked them. This is just a deflection.

It's what's IN THEM that is the story behind the curtain nobody wants you to see

The world is generally not completely simple. There can be more than one thing going on. In this instance it can both be true that the Russians want Trump to win so they hacked themselves a way to influence the outcome and members of the DNC were anti-Bernie. It can exist independently of being a deflection even though some people might be happy that it serves in that that capacity.

I'm not at all surprised about the Russians. Who wouldn't want an idiot for an adversary.
I'm not at all surprised about the DNC. Bernie did untold damage to the Democrats chances in this election. He wasn't even a Democrat, he just signed up at the last minute to ride on the Democratic party's coat tails. Did you expect them to be all bending over for Bernie?

Who cares who hacked them. This is just a deflection.

It's what's IN THEM that is the story behind the curtain nobody wants you to see

Nobody in any election campaign wants you to see emails RNC, DNC, or otherwise. Lots of dodgy stuff is said and suggested, and then NOTHING COMES OF IT. Did anyone end up actually trashing Bernie's religion (or lack thereof), in anything but what was supposed to be private email?

It's what's IN THEM that is the story behind the curtain nobody wants you to see

Yes. The entire Windows 10 system runs with identical privileges and there's no such thing as privilege rings, and Microsoft run all high level data gathering and network facing telemetry right at the lowest level to thwart all efforts to stop the data collection, everyone who never took a computer class knows that.

Maybe some tinfoil body armour would be better: http://thegatewaypundit.com/wp...

I'll see your few scholarly research papers, and raise you several violent protests that you have missed. Even leftists have to worry about leftists, as I stated.

Further, I can show that leftist people and groups support the protests.

Well, one way to reply to a post calling out confirmation bias ... is to double down on the confirmation bias.

You have a funny term to refer to what would properly be labeled as 'observation of leftists, on social media and in real life'.

Apparently I get to represent all liberals now

Only if you are unable to parse my phrase, "Should I follow suit, ...", which limits the following phrase to a hypothetical question. But I guess such subtlety is wasted on leftists. (See, that is using your inability to read to claim all leftists are ignorant as well.)

(or at least the ones you don't like, with that bit of no-true-scotsman mixed in under cover of "I didn't mean everybody").

I'm not allowed to clarify my point that you have such a hard time understanding? Considering my original post was simply comparing attitudes and actions of nondescript left-wingers and right-wingers in the post I replied to. Since I wasn't the one who established the general groups under discussion, I certainly feel I have the right to make that clarification. Sorry if that upsets you.

Let's get back to your original claim, which can be distilled to 'liberals conform more than conservatives'.

Oh, wait a minute. I begin to see your problem. After writing all that above, I realize upon re-reading this line, that you simply are trying to argue the wrong claim. You think it is a discussion of whether one group or the other conforms to the expected norm. But that wasn't Ungrounded Lightning's argument, nor mine. UL said that those on the left "apply social pressure to each other to conform", and in response to (I assume) your question about right-wingers, I voiced my support of UL's argument, and provided an example.

I stand by my claim that leftists do much more to force their views on society, even on other leftists, than rightists do. That has nothing to do with whether right-wingers (AKA conservatives) by their nature want to keep things the way they are (also known as 'to conserve', funny how that is implied in the label 'conservative').

You are arguing the wrong case.

All cops are the problem though, because even if they aren't racist killers themselves they're aiding and abetting the ones who are.

This is going to get me flamed, but I'm past the point of giving a crap. Let's change out a few words here and see how it works

All blacks are the problem though, because even if they aren't gang bangers and killers themselves they're aiding and abetting the ones who are.

Let's try a less inflammatory one

All programmers are the problem though, because even if they aren't bad programmers themselves they're aiding and abetting the ones who are.

There are good people and bad people, good cops and bad cops, good programmers and bad programmers. How about we quit painting with such a broad brush?

What infuriates me is the lack of accountability. I understand that cops have a shitty job, and I understand that the use of force is probably justified the majority of the time. Even if the majority of them are justified, that leaves a percentage that aren't. Where is the accountability for those? On the other hand, where is the accountability for the citizens dancing and taunting police officers after they came to stop a local 7-11 from being looted, while the officer's brothers are laying dead?

In case you're wondering why so many people don't support outlawing hate speech, this is one of countless examples. Not a damn thing done to the perp because he is in the "right group." And countless people will come out of the woodwork to declare him a "marginalized person of color" or some shit that excuses why he gets to beat up a random person at another party's rally and brag on Twitter and not even get his account banned, let alone prosecuted.

Actually they are taking responsibility for the bombing. Maybe the reporting of such is being delayed by Western media so as not to appear "racist"?

http://www.thegatewaypundit.co...

There is nobody here that owned slaves, knows anyone that was or owned slaves, probably several more generations more.

I have relatives alive today who are in their 80s and 90s, whose grandfather or grandmother
was born a slave in the United States.

If you're going to be pedantic, at least do it according to the criteria i setup. "Here" being slashdot. and "several more generations" would definitely qualify as making your cases, if your case was against my initial statement, rather than the "probably", which would acknowledge the possibility of edge case scenario you described. My dad's father may have known owners or former slaves. I don't know, because I don't remember him. My dad, was born at a time when there were former slaves and slave owners, but I am pretty sure he didn't know any. And I am kind of young for my "generation", my dad being in his 40's when I was born.

Suffice it to say, my statements aren't false, they were emphasizing a real point. You being pedantic doesn't negate accuracy. Most people here are several generations removed from slavery. Again, quit pretending it was yesterday. With each subsequent generation that follows, the further we are removed.

At some point, you're going to have to realize that the problem isn't slavery, it is attitude. And from yours, I can tell you're not yet there. Nobody you know was a slave, or owned a slave. Your kids are likely to have the exact same experience. Are you passing your excuses on to them?

http://www.thegatewaypundit.co...

[ISIS] was, you know, pretty much decimated when US forces were there in Iraq. It had maybe 700-or-so adherents left. And then it grew quite a bit in the last several years, when it split then from al-Qaida in Syria, and set up its own organization.

Seems that Brennan claims it was basically dead when President Bush handed it over to President Obama. And it's grown since then...

http://www.thegatewaypundit.co...

Yeah, because it is hard to create a robot that cooks and serves better burgers and replaces 2 out of 3 of the people in a McDonald's.

... this Congress has been blatantly partisan in the extreme.

Ok, so what is your excuse for when the Democrats controlled congress and they could steam roll anything they wanted through. That's how we ended up with BS from the (non) affordable care act to Frank Dodd. Not even they would pass one of his budgets. Not even they could stomach it. Of course that was by design. They haven't passed a budget since GW Bush, when he bailed out GM, banks and so on. They just keep running it up and up and up, so we have a 20T debt now. Yea, where is all that money going? Answer me that.

Wake up, Obama is the worst in history. Even Jimmy Carter - the previous worst in history realized it and said so.

As for one term and so on, a guy at work said that too. I pulled up where Democrats said EXACTLY the same thing (Scheumer for the SCOTUS appt to Reid for other stuff), to Bush and others. All they could come up with is - well just because they did it too doesn't make it right. Complete capitulation on that point.

Even Bill Clinton mentioned Obama's awful legacy. Hear it from Bill himself if you don't believe it, right about 48 seconds in - http://www.thegatewaypundit.co...

Ok, now for the usual name calling? Threats? What the crazy left often does.

50+ years of watching the govt work? That was a good one. Too old to remember maybe? Clearly you forgot about Regan and even Nixon. With Nixon they tried to do a coup and failed. They got Spiro and then went after tricky Dick himself. This guy has had a cake walk. No scrutiny from the press at all. Just some token statements for a token president.

Hillary can beat Drumpf without working too hard. [...]

It may not even come to that.

A couple of years ago, Hillary fainted, fell and got a concussion.

It took her over 6 months of recovery, and...

Gave her vertigo and double vision.

Then there was the unnaturally long bathroom break, and the fact that she's always tired and speaks with a hoarse and slightly-raspy voice.

People are starting to wonder whether she will last until the election.

The threshold for profitable robotic replacement does keep dropping.

People are flawed creatures capable of manufacturing more profitable iterations of themselves for the workplace.

What jobs are safest?

There is a secondary problem that people rarely talk about. The intermediate step between humans doing the work and full automation is "almost full automation" where humans are just a cog in the machine. You can see this in mcdonald's, in amazon warehouses, in manufacturing plants, and even in things like amazon turk. These "almost full automation" plants have horrible working conditions as the steps performed by the humans are repetitive, boring, and have to be done at high speed to keep up with the rest of the machine. My guess is that although mercedes-benz might have put humans back into the loop that you still wouldn't want to work at one of those jobs.

People are flawed creatures capable of manufacturing more profitable iterations of themselves for the workplace.

What jobs are safest?

People are up in arms over Trumps statement about banning Muslims from entering the U.S.. But Jimmy Carter did the EXACT same thing but for Iranians!

So tell me how Trumps statements are bad???????

See:

http://www.infowars.com/video-...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

http://www.thegatewaypundit.co...

http://www.frontpagemag.com/po...

Many folks would argue about his "legacy" being thin, and they would be right.

Oh really?

Obama pulled all the troops out of Iraq before Iraq was ready to defend itself, and he publicly announced the date on which Iraq would be defenceless. Result: ISIS overrunning major cities, looting banks to buy weapons, murdering and raping. I lay this death toll squarely at Obama's feet... he inherited a pacified situation from Bush and managed to screw it all to hell. Then he denied it.

Obama signed the ironically named "Affordable Care Act" but didn't write it. He did stump for it, famously promising that "if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor", promising that a family of 4 would save $2500 per year. Result: people found they couldn't keep their doctor, people found that premiums went up for everyone, and now the ACA is entering a death spiral.

Obama's "recovery" is the worst recovery since 1932.

Obama mocked Romney for identifying Russia as a strategic threat, and now Russia is making a shambles of US policy in the middle east. Obama actually started this, when he gratefully let Putin rescue him from having to actually do something when Syria crossed his "red line".

On Obama's watch, an embassy was successfully attacked and the ambassador killed, the first death of an ambassador in the line of duty in three decades. Maybe we should blame that on Hillary Clinton, the Secretary of State? But she was Obama's Secretary of State. "The buck stops here."

How has the Democratic Party done with Obama as President? Not well.

I don't think Obama's "legacy" is thin at all. I think it's thick, but it's a thick legacy of failure and disaster.

Me and Rush Limbaugh are both wondering, just how is the American flag any better? It, likewise, flew over slavery, the subsequent racism, and was (still is!) used in imperialist wars. It covered — still does at times — sexism and parochial bigotry.

Whatever you can say against the Confederate flag, can also be said about the American. Yeah, the latter may have been used for some good, but the sheer period of its usage (over 2 centuries and counting), makes it much worse than the former, whose country only existed for what, four years? Five?

Can it get any worse? Yes it can! A recent study has shown, that simply seeing the flag can cause a hitherto innocent victim to vote Republican! And even a single exposure can last for up to 8 months!

As soon as we are done with KKKonfederate rag, we must turn our energies onto the AmeriKKKan one.

In fact, why wait? Let's act NOW!! .

Maybe, those misunderstood ISIS warriors destroying the symbols of defunct states that practiced slave-ownership are onto something, huh? I for one have always doubted Pythagorean Theorem — what can a long-dead White slave-owner possibly know about any hypotenuse?

http://www.thegatewaypundit.co...

At this point I think you need to provide us with an example where it failed with paired links so we have a better idea of what you're looking for.

I am not a particularly involved student of this field, so my links would be of the popular kind, for which I apologize in advance. But here it is:

1. In 2000 Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia, predicted that "Children just aren't going to know what snow is". It is now 2015 and there has not been a snow-free winter in the UK since. Some were particularly snowy: 2014-15, 20122010-11.
2. In 2004 there was a prediction, that "Scottish ski industry will cease to exist within 20 years". We are now half-way through that prediction, so it might still come to pass. But in 2014 Scotland had its snowiest winter in 69 years and the skiing industry is striving.
3. In 2007 BBC published a prediction of ice-free Arctic on or before 2013 by an American climate scientist stating (repeated by Al Gore in 2008). 2013 came and went, but there has not been a single ice-free summer in the Arctic ocean.

Now, I'm not prepared to argue the validity of the above claims — all you asked for were samples of what I'm looking for.

Of course, your samples would have to be valid — because you want me (and the rest of humanity) to change our way of life. The burden of proof is thus on you.

The NRA has a problem with those kooks in Texas.

These kooks even try to intimidate people who may disagree with them.

And their premise that it is safe is wrong.

And as someone who goes to the shooting range(s) once in a while, I can tell that most of those folks seem to think that they are living an action movie. Aside from the few hunters and target/skeet shooters (me), the rest of them think the "bad guys" are just itching to break into their home, rape their women, take their big screen TVs and their Arnold, Steven Segal, Chuck Norris DVD collections. Those are the guys with the military styled guns on the range - with their fetish for .223 and .40. They are the ones who talk about "stopping power" and "penetration" and other ballistic shit.

We normal guys try to stay away from them and cringed when we see those redneck morons in Texas acting like jackasses.

You put you finger on what concerns me- that a smaller number can control the larger population. In that sense, even the moderate muslims could be considered "sleepers"; because if their community goes radical, they either aren't likely to buck the trend, or have much of an option. Many, due to their intense religious upbringing, might be shamed, bullied, or guilted into believing they aren't truly faithful muslims unless they follow the words of their cleric or imam, and judging by the numbers of psychos out there, ostensibly it's not all that difficult to (re)interpret many parts of the Qu'ran as a call to Jihad. When a small immigrated muslim community grows in population (and thus representation and power), they often start stirring the pot and calling for Sharia law, from London to Dearborn, Michigan. Here are just a few examples.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.co...
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-...
and this is really worth a watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

That is disturbing.

We are regularly told that advanced Western nations shouldn't worry about Ebola, because we have advanced Western medicine, and aren't like those poor and primitive African nations. And then things like this happen. Or the recent CDC biohazard scandals. Or the hospital in Texas, just trained about Ebola, sends a recent arrival from Liberia who is showing symptoms back to his relatives with some antibiotics. And then, after he vomits on the sidewalk on the way back to the hospital, people without protective gear "clean it up" with a pressure hose, while a sandal-wearing woman walks by . And they reuse the ambulance before they decontaminate it. And the family violates their quarantine.

So when Top Men tell us there's no danger of an outbreak here, I am not reassured.

I vacillated between providing a link and telling you that you were an idiot.

Well, here's is the the link. Now, the first thing to pop into your tiny little brain is going to be "Denier site!". But if you open you tine mind long enough to look, you will find links to video straight for the jackasses mouth.

That's said, I'm going to call you an idiot anyway because this is all pretty common knowledge... unless you've only been hanging out at Skeptical Science, where embarrassing stuff like this is banned.

But don't let me stop you from making things up, just because your ideology demands that the science be wrong, thus imagining acting on the science is wrong, thus twisting your mind to invent new and interesting ways of stating the opposite of reality.

Speaking of making shit up.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.co...

Seems that there has been no "global warming" occurring since at least as far back as the *1930s*. Whenever real, actual historical temperature measurements have conflicted with the religion of AGW, those actual temperature measurements have been replaced by temperature data from the True Belivers' computer models.

It's a fraud. The entire AGW movement is designed to redistribute wealth and expand government powers and centralize them while impoverishing the people and destroying Western individual liberties and standards of living.

It's simply another power and wealth grab by governments and their cronies.

Are you a willing and cognizant co-conspirator with these criminals or just another oblivious useful idiot?

Sounds like the next time we'll hear about mh370, the plane will be on its way to a building near you...

There is a claim that would seem to open the door for that.

BREAKING: Lt. Gen. McInerney Says #MH370 Is In Pakistan – ‘I Got A Source That Confirmed It Yesterday’

Hopefully it is just another conspiracy theory.

They are like foolish children compared to educated Westerners who didn't grow up immersed in violent fundamentalist nutjobbery. Or perhaps they're closer to mentally ill.

Lets see how sensible the Christianists are after their lives, land and countries have been fucked with for a century by Muslim Imperialism. After the state-run oil companies in Venezuela and Iran get together and overthrow the governments of the U.K. and the United States. After the Revolutionary Guard spends 15 years threatening the United States with total obliteration if it made use of a nuclear weapons program that it says does not exist. And says crippling sanctions that killed 5,000,000 kids in the U.S. (adjusted for population) was worth it.

But I don't expect that partial list to make a dent in the cognitive dissonance in all the Bill Maher's running around in the comments.

Russia annexed the province by use of force. Any and all counter-arguments like "but they voted" are meaningless: first, the voting took place under the "gentle" guidance of Russian military. Then, even if you think, it is legitimate for a referendum on whether to join a foreign power to take place while under occupation by that same power, the vote was fraudulent. For example, in Sevastopol the number of people showing up for vote was 123% of the eligible voters.

And, finally, even without the above two arguments, would Russia accept a referendum by residents of the Kuril Island, for example, on breaking away from the Motherland and joining Japan? Would the US accept the results of Southern California (or Southern Texas) voting to break away and join Mexico?

Neither would, of course. The Crimean referendum is a joke. A sad joke perpetrated by Russia-the-bully on Ukraine weakened by internal strife and years of mismanagement (to which Russia heartily contributed just for this purpose, BTW).

God knows it can't be worse than what the US has, even Cuba trounces the US.

Not so much.

Cholera reportedly kills 15, sickens hundreds in eastern Cuba

Cuba’s once-vaunted public health system has slipped significantly since the end of Moscow’s massive subsidies in the early 1990s. During one 24-hour period in January, three flights from Cuba to Toronto arrived with groups of passengers suffering from nausea, vomiting and fever.

Michael Moore's Wish For America.. Cuban Healthcare

The House passed the Senate bill with a 219–212 vote on March 21, 2010, with 34 Democrats and all 178 Republicans voting against it. The following day, Republicans introduced legislation to repeal the bill.

These are facts. Please cite your fact where the GOP has not tried to repeal this from the very beginning.

Since that doesn't contradict anything I've said, what's the point of this? I've never said the ACA wasn't passed and I've never said the GOP hasn't tried to repeal it. The original post I was responding to stated that they'd tried to repeal it unsuccessfully 42 times and it was insane to keep trying to repeal it in whole or in parts. I just pointed out that counted in that 42 number were successful attempts to repeal parts that were signed into law, negating the point I was actually responding to. Having a hard time following the thread?

Please read this before commenting any further as you don't seem to have any grasp of the Constitution.

I've read it. It would be more enlightening if you actually claimed that something I said contradicted it.

Harry Reid cannot defund the troops as he is a Senator. He can counter-propose any funding bill by the House but he does not generate funding. Did Harry Reid ever shutdown the government until his gets want he wanted (like a child throws a tantrum). No it doesn't and you know it.

Yes, Harry Reid tried to "shutdown" the government in the exact same way over trying to defund the already passed law authorizing the use of deadly force in Iraq. He attached it to an emergency supplemental spending bill. The only difference with Reid is that he ultimately didn't have the votes to succeed in his attempt.

You don't get to change laws because you want.

You're apparently still completely missing my original point that current law doesn't authorize discretionary spending after Sept. 30th. To change that law is what you and the Democrats want. They need a majority of the House to go along with any new law like that. It's the new law to change that which the Senate and the House haven't agreed on the contents. The House gets to be a big part of deciding what will go in that law. Sadly, the Dems refuse to negotiate, demanding that they will only consider passing a new appropriations law if its worded exactly how they want it to be.

But you never answered my question: If the GOP said that they would keep the military shutdown until DOMA is reinstated, your response is what? See you don't want to admit that if the GOP is being discriminatory then it's not OK is it?

I have answered your question, but I'll patiently summarize my answer again for you. Harry Reid himself has tried to do similar things with past appropriations bills. It's part of the process of passing a new law authorizing spending that they have to pass Congress just like any other new law. If as part of that process, the elected representatives want to make the law read whatever they want (subject to the USSC deciding to throw part out), they can. It's the way the process is designed. What's the big deal about the process proceeding like it has before? This discretionary spending "shutdown" scenario has played out 17 times since 1977 when they politicians couldn't agree on the wording of the new appropriations law. It happens. It's not the end of the world. Most people barely notice, other than in the news.

The votes could be switched in either direction, technically, but in this day and age it's "pics or it didn't happen".

Here's one with pics.

Here's one without pics.

Huh, funny that, the REAL voter fraud was only switching votes from Dem to Pub, but the claims of switching votes from Pub to Dem have no such evidence, only spurious claims. My guess it that some fucktard racist white assholes decided to lie and stir up some shit; the alternative explanation is that they were too stupid to press a button.

Beyond the fate of Private Manning as an individual, the 'aiding the enemy' charge — unprecedented in a leak case — could have significant long-term ramifications for investigative journalism in the Internet era.

Since he was acquitted of the charge, isn't that particular kind of potential ramification now less dire? It doesn't prove that the government will never be able to overreach in that manner, but the fact that they couldn't get a conviction on that charge here, even in a military court and little dispute about the underlying facts of document release, suggests that it won't be that easy.

Agreed, the summary was over-reaching.

Its almost impossible to convict Journalists in this day and age of anything related to espionage.

Still when this administration Taps Reporters phones and even taps Congressional Phones we are pretty close to a police state where you dare not even complain to your Congressman any more.

They don't go after the congressmen or the journalist, just the people they talk to. (Or so they say).

Cute, but when gun owner lists were leaked. And that data was used by criminals to target homes for firearms. Some folks argue this is justification to not allow government entities to gather such information in the first place. All it takes is one activist to leak it.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/01/journal-news-gun-map-might-have-caused-burglary.html http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/01/second-home-identified-on-journal-news-gun-map-is-burglarized-vandals-steal-gun-safe/ http://pastebin.com/DjU5Km6q

Problem with crowdsourcing is lack of accountability. Suppose I dislike a person and want their house broken into. What would stop me from tagging them as a "dangerous gun owner", that is gone from 7:30AM to 5:30 Monday through Friday, SSN is 123-45-6789, driving such and such a car, no alarm system or dogs, and is regularly visited by XYZ Pool Company which would not raise suspicion? Would UCSD Lecturer Brett Stallbaum mind if he was added to his own list with that sort of information?

This is obviously not about dangerous objects or their owners. It's entirely ideological, and intent on pressuring folks opposed to Mr Stallbaum's opinion on a particular issue. It is interesting that pro firearms activists have not released a responding app for homes of anti firearm activists, which would obviously be easy marks for criminals. Either anti firearm activists would be easily robbed, or embarrassed in public if they used firearms to embarrass themselves. While an easy, effective tactic, it's still obviously wrong, hasn't been done and likely would be denounced by pro firearm owners. Says volumes about the moralities involved, I suppose.

So if Verizon refused to hand over the records, that would be another story.

And even if Verizon had the inclination (and the balls) to fight it, they would've suddenly found themselves the subject of scrutiny by the IRS, the SEC, the Labor Department, the FCC, and, possibly, some other friendly government agencies.

Is not it great, we have so many regulations, the Executive branch does not even need to bother the Judiciary to get its way? I, for one, do appreciate, they decided to bother this time, but, really, they did not have to...

Oh, and in only a couple of decades, as the government's control of healthcare extends further and deeper, the same benevolent Executive officials will have the power to decide, who lives, and who dies:

We regret to inform you, but upon the review of your life support system in accordance with XIXIXIXX section C part Y, it was determined, that the ongoing cost of the care outweigh the benefits. As a result, the assisted breathing/feeding tube (circle all that apply) will be turned off at 11:59pm EST, tomorrow.

That the individuals supporting the regime in power will be deemed eligible for remaining on life-support for, on average, 50% longer than the opposition, will be nothing other than a coincidence, of course.

If you open a manufacturing plant you're going to get a small number of jobs for an operation of such size and cost

That's actually fine. It takes about 300 million Chinese to make our stuff. If you offset 20 Chinese manually pick-and-placing components and assembling stuff with 1 US citizen operating a line of robots then your potential US employment is 15 million (vs a US workforce of 200 million,) any one of which is another person not going feral on food stamps, SSDI, section 8 housing, EITC, etc.

Also, the job count is always low. Those workers will buy cars and houses and put kids in school. The factory needs parts, material, energy and roads. Indirect employment is substantial.

It's also a lot better for the environment. Industry in China is an ecological disaster. The East end of that continent is seething mass of filth sliding into the Pacific. The US can produce the same products with less net damage because we have a regulatory regime with teeth, despite what lefty malcontents believe.

that nice folksy blue-collar "we're MAKING stuff!" image

Theres lots of pathetic things one can condescend to over "workers" in the US. Try this

and of course the UK actually *does* have death panels.

"The Gateway Pundit" the name pretty much makes clear this is NOT objective news. Reading just the headers of their articles confirms it. How about a reliable source to support your incredible claims. Do you seriously think UK citizens would accept such "death panels" without atleast massive protests that would have hit reliable news outlets all over the world?

Nationalized healthcare solves this problem. For-profit corporations have no business in health insurance.

You're welcome to come to Canada or take a trip to the UK anytime you want to see the "benefits" of not-for-profit healthcare. Let me know when you feel like waiting a month or so for a MRI or longer, unless it's serious. Then it might only be 3-4 days, of and of course the UK actually *does* have death panels. Though technically they're not supposed to suggest people simply die off unless they're exceptionally infirm. They also did it to infants.

It's sad to see an Inspector General get on a politicized soap box and yell "the sky is falling!" The Obama administration has gone out of its way to have every cabinet member and in fact everybody down the food chain or should I say "feeding trough" also echo a bunch of FUD over the sequestration. Just like our retarded Homeland Security Chief Napolitano, a bigger political idiot I'd be challenged to find on this planet! Wasn't it her program of "If you see something, say something?" Hey Janet, "you're a retard and a hypocrite because on one hand you tell us that because of sequestration the TSA will have to cut back and we'll have longer waits at the airport and yet you spend another $50M you didn't need toright after announcing that!" Sorry for ranting.

In the private sector, every manager usually has a few goals established that are boilerplate but still applicable.. One of them is "Reduce Costs by x%" usually x is 10. All of us in this economy has had to cut back and it's time for the US Government to stop spending every dollar they take in and a third more. $900B deficits are killing us now and will only get worse, it has to stop.

If you look at the data for NASA the current budget while it is less than they've spent under Continuing Resolutions but in FY2009 (The last year a budget was passed by Congress) Their budget was $17,782B. in 2010 and 2011 they were allowed to spend $18,724B and $18,448B respectively. That's pretty hefty in terms of spending increases and let's not forget they were still flying the Space Shuttles during those fiscal years! It was hella expensive to launch a shuttle and it has been a drain on NASA's budget for decades. By some estimates $192B over the life of the Shuttles.
Now the IG is whining that the budget is going to cause problems? I'd submit that after the Shuttle program ended that the budget should have gone down. But no, it's now down by their latest projection for FY2012 (the current budget year) $17,770B roughly the same as in FY2009!?!? Assuming 4 launches launches per year (FY2010) @ $1.5B/launch that's $6B just for not flying the Shuttle, but yet the budget didn't go down. Granted only two shuttles flew in FY2011, I'd still submit that's $3B that went to something "else."
What ever "else" is they need to just stop doing that because it came into fruition over the last year.

This is a very very poor set of arguments from an official who is supposed to be independent and the watchdog for the American People and he's not doing his job by echoing the same BS and FUD that the administration has pushed out since February. They have eliminated the Shuttle, reducing expenses of $6B/year and they want more money? What every they're smoking they need to share it with the rest of us!

This kind of attitude clearly points out why there's such a huge vacuum of leadership in DC. From Congress to the White House, it's time to vote them all out of office, but first fire this IG!

Sure thing, but then I can say India and China disagree. So since I've pointed out hundered dieing from cold and coldest winter in China in decades I guess thats proof that AWG doesn't exist, as least by your logic.

Context is nice; for some anyways. Know your history or be someone's puppet. And before you read three lines and then search dailykos for the rebuttal: I was there and saw this firsthand:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/12/liberal-policies-are-to-blame-for-todays-mass-shooting-in-newtown-ct/

Again, I don't know how you think a reduction in the extent and power of the government is going to lead to less corruption. Your proposition is "limit the ability of the government to enforce the law".

The first way is via a reduction in complexity. The less government there is, the less there is for the citizens of that country to keep track of and the harder it is for parts of the government or private world to break the law without being noticed.

It's also getting to be impossible to keep track of the law. In the US at the federal level alone, there's 200k pages of legislative law (published in 2006). In addition, the regulatory agencies have put out a similar amount of material, almost 200k pages by my reckoning.

Second, if the government obeyed the laws as well as enforced them, then we wouldn't have to take the more abusable powers away from them in order to preserve our freedoms.

There is the recognition that while some tasks are better suited to government due to its relative neutrality (such as national defense or law enforcement), many other tasks are ill-suited to government especial a constitutionally limited central government of the sort that the US has. Many people fail to understand that the federal government has enumerated powers for a reason, because the people who created and endorsed the Constitution wanted in large part strict limits on what the central government could do, no matter how compelling a need might appear.

Finally, there are a number of natural processes that lead to bulky, overly powerful government, such as mission creep, bureaucratic growth, and the peculiar dynamics of creating public goods.

In the last case, it's very significant that any creation of a public good, for example, the entitlements such as Social Security or Medicare leads to several government expanding issues. First, the government needs the resources and authority to grant the public good. Second, when tragedy of the commons inevitably comes, the government needs the power and authority to police distribution of the public good. Often in addition, distribution of these public goods requires yet more information to be obtained about the citizens. This leads to yet another problem, that of the government simply knowing too much about you.

It's finally worth noting the unusually strong role that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or "Obamacare" has played in inspiring the tea party movement. For example, there have been estimates that Obamacare has for regulations of its Medicare insurance exchanges added about 13,000 pages of new regulation. That's in addition to the unconstitutional overreach of power, the innumerable cases of pork and political favoritism, and the built in inflation of health insurance (from higher, subsidized demand) spread through this huge law.

As a result, I see the tea party as a natural reaction to a pretty serious threat, namely, a government too complex to ever be understood or supervised, a government so powerful that it can and does turn arbitrary peoples' lives into hell for no reason at all, and a body of law and regulation so vast that no one understands it and therefore, can't obey it.

Next you'll be parading around pictures of Obama with an iPhone

Now why would we do that, since he doesn't even know how to use one?

The problem of course was the iPhone "just works" and Obama is all about putting people and things OUT of work.

Where have you been? Fucking mars?

I found those in about 5 seconds with google. Thats 100% first page results. WHAT THE FUCK DUDE? Completely fucking blind much? We've got in there convictions, tens of thousands of out-of-state residents voting, and so on? What the fuck?