Slashdot Mirror

Trump is like a loose cannon on a ship. We don't know what direction he's going to fire in or what damage he'll do. The direction he's currently pointed in, however, is right at the hull of the ship and if he goes off in that direction he'll sink us all.

You may want to have an escape plan by boat

Which is why, given the opportunity to demonstrate his commitment to the American worker, Trump employed only American citizens in his hotels and casinos, right?

Yeah, I'm sure the Workers leav[ing] the site of the future Trump International Hotel here are the two white persons in the background, not the brown people posing in safety gear. And he already didn't know 25 years ago He Employed Illegal Aliens

I think what you may be talking about is the Milton Friedman principle: a company’s primary purpose, and the purpose to which the CEO should solely focus, is to maximize shareholder value. A couple of generations have now grown up never knowing anything else. But the idea only dates back to the 1970's, but yet would have profound effects on the country, including the binding of executive pay to stock performance, and would ultimately contribute to the slash and burn antics of the buy 'em, split 'em, and sell 'em off for a quick-buck mayhem of the 1980's.

Have no idea whether this goo can ever be stuffed back into the tube. But the cult of feverishly favoring shareholders over employees and customers, where shareholders care only about quarterly portfolio values (if they're paying attention at all), tends to reward short-term cost-cutting, and does not inspire employee or customer loyalty. The best CEO's shield shareholder matters from employees, so that employees can concentrate on a future with the company rather than the next wave of layoffs.

Name those accomplishments that have helped others. I'm betting that you actually do believe there are some but will find out it is a lie when you try to find them.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04...

As for her lies being a slur, it is well documented. Here is a list compiled in 2008 by a Clinton confidant (long time friend and advisory to Bill Clinton) Dick Morris.

http://www.realclearpolitics.c...

Now I did find some lists of accomplishments but I don't find them remarkable or extremely helpful to anyone in particular. In fact, some of them seem to require little more than not voting "no" while in the senate. Others are just speeches given that no noticeable follow through seems to have surfaced. Most of the so called accomplishments are subjective to opinion and ideological points of view.

Why not? You can already pay more for leg room if you want to. It's just called first class. Also they already limit the weight of luggage that can be brought on or charge you extra for taking more luggage.

There have already been some airlines considering or implementing ticket prices based on weight since it adds to fuel costs, which are a moderate portion of the flight's expenses. Just give everyone a base rate of weight between their person or luggage and adjust the cost based on the actual total weight.

I don't really see the can of worms here.

> Nothing riles up a senator than knowing that their most powerful political job pays significantly less than the most powerful corporate job. T

On the books. Federal, and state, Congresspeople get quite a few of tax benefits and professional expenses covered at taxpayer expense. And then there 's the live-in hookers, even for the most SJW of them all.

                      http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

But thank all the starts it wasn't a *woman* suffering a micro-aggression. The horror!

Totally agree. All I can do is add some supporting citations.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08...
Germany Backtracks on Tuition
By CHRISTOPHER F. SCHUETZE
Published: August 25, 2013
(German colleges are now free again, like the Scandinavian countries. Under the German constitution, the 16 state governments control finance and education. A 2005 federal court decision allowed them to charge tuition. 8 states, in former West Germany, did, but it was unpopular and they reversed their policy. Lower Saxony charged €1,000 ($1,300)/year. An economist estimated that tuition caused 20,000 potential students (6.8% of all students) to forgo enrollment in 2007. Denmark, Norway and Sweden have free tuition, although Germany, with 2.5 million students, is the largest. Britain raised its tuition caps to £9,000 ($14,000). In France, most public universities charge a few hundred euros per year, though the grandes écoles are more expensive.)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
7 countries where Americans can study at universities, in English, for free (or almost free)
By Rick Noack
October 29 2014
Since 1985, U.S. college costs have surged by about 500 percent, and tuition fees keep rising. In Germany, they've done the opposite.
The country's universities have been tuition-free since the beginning of October, when Lower Saxony became the last state to scrap the fees. Tuition rates were always low in Germany, but now the German government fully funds the education of its citizens -- and even of foreigners.
Explaining the change, Dorothee Stapelfeldt, a senator in the northern city of Hamburg, said tuition fees "discourage young people who do not have a traditional academic family background from taking up study. It is a core task of politics to ensure that young women and men can study with a high quality standard free of charge in Germany."
What might interest potential university students in the United States is that Germany offers some programs in English -- and it's not the only country. Let's take a look at the surprising -- and very cheap -- alternatives to pricey American college degrees.
Germany's higher education landscape primarily consists of internationally well-ranked public universities, some of which receive special funding because the government deems them "excellent institutions." What's more, Americans can earn a German undergraduate or graduate degree without speaking a word of German and without having to pay a single dollar of tuition fees: About 900 undergraduate or graduate degrees are offered exclusively in English, with courses ranging from engineering to social sciences. For some German degrees, you don't even have to formally apply.
In fact, the German government would be happy if you decided to make use of its higher education system. The vast degree offerings in English are intended to prepare German students to communicate in a foreign language, but also to attract foreign students, because the country needs more skilled workers.

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazi...
How US students get a university degree for free in Germany
By Franz Strasser BBC News, Germany
3 June 2015
While the cost of college education in the US has reached record highs, Germany has abandoned tuition fees altogether for German and international students alike. An increasing number of Americans are taking advantage and saving tens of thousands of dollars to get their degrees.
More than 4,600 US students are fully enrolled at Germany universities, an increase of 20% over three years. At the same time, the total student debt in the US has reached $1.3 trillion (£850 billion).
(Hunter Bliss, South Carolina.)
Each semester, Hunter pays a

..and that's why Switzerland has such an incredibly high murder rate, right?

Which has nothing to do with gun ownership. Every time people claim the folks in Switzerland, or even Israel, have guns coming out their ears which is why they have low murder rates shows their true lack of understanding those country's gun laws.

While this article is not the one I was looking for, you will note the heavy regulation of guns in Switzerland including how much ammunition one can buy and mandatory registration with the government, both of which the NRA howls over any time either subject is brought up.

Second, as the person in the story relates, the people of Switzerland own guns to protect their country as part of the militia, the exact same thing our Founding Fathers said in the Constitution. That people deny this prima facia fact is the result of deliberate twisting by certain groups, not the least of which the NRA who originally held to the Constitutional writing (to use a Scalia-ism).

Also, as to Israel, which some people bring up, this article explains one must have a reason to own a gun. Not that you want one, a valid reason AND you have go back every six months to justify you continuing to keep your gun.

If you want to point to Switzerland you had better tell the whole story. It's not as neat and simple as you and others make out. The government has a heavy hand in regulating firearms in the country, something which people like you fight against every time the subject is brought up.

In closing, I have no problem with anyone owning a gun. I've shot them in the past and have considered owning one but can't justify the cost even though I can easily afford one. Maybe some day.

But this nonsense that using Switzerland or Israel as examples of the notion "more guns = less crime" is shown to be false because of how their respective governments control guns. One might as well use Somalia where nearly everyone owns a gun yet there is crime in abundance.

SINCE WHEN?

We're just about to discover a cure for aging.

Didn't you get the memo?

Apple CEO Tim Cook: ‘We believe deeply that everyone has a right to privacy and security.’

"History has shown us that sacrificing our right to privacy can have dire consequences -- we still live in a world where all people are not treated equally. Too many people do not feel free to practice their religion or express their opinion, or love who they choose," said Cook, who is among the highest-profile business leaders to publicly identify as gay.

"If those of us in positions of responsibility fail to do everything in our power to protect the right to privacy we risk something far more valuable than money -- we risk our way of life," Cook said. "Fortunately, technology gives us the tools to avoid these risks."

Of course, Apple will continue to do business in countries "where all people are not treated equally... [where] many people do not feel free to practice their religion or express their opinion, or love who they choose," because, hey, Apple is not going let a some silly notion of privacy and human rights get in the way of corporate profits. They got shareholders, dude!

Or is this story about people dumb enough to read and react to what this guy says?

Curiously, a lot of hay has been made about Trump's support from uneducated voters, largely from this poll, page 36, which puts percent of supporters with "college degree" at 46%.

The press, of course, is quick to point out that 46% is less than half, so they proclaim far and wide that his supporters are "mostly uneducated".

What the press doesn't note, however, is that 70 % of Americans don't have a degree.

Trumps supporters are more educated than the population average.

Feel free to call us dumb, it helps us change our vote to $your candidate!

(Oh, hey! Want to go out behind the trailer and shoot at beer cans with my .22?)

who is 'you' in this case? Apple? The programmers? Tim Cook?

You could always ask Qwest's former CEO his opinion.

Yea, good one. Like we can trust the FBI and CIA with a one off. We all knew this was the goal. If you say yes to one you have to say say to all. Now...when is the public going to stand up and say "NO"? Or do we want cases like the the one just posted today: http://yro.slashdot.org/story/... This is when the data was unprotected. Which in essence will be the effect if the FBI has it's way. (some in the FBI has said we should ban encryption so the government has full unfettered access).

Or another case that came to light today as well: https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Where the government OPM database was breached in 2014 and 2015, partially by foreign (the Chinese..of course...).

If you create a key, everyone will want to use it. And everybody will...especially private/foreign hackers. And when it come to hacking, the international hacking community will find any backdoor created. (rumor has it Apple already has one may be patching it before they strong armed into disclosing it). Put the word out (as this case will if Apple complies) that there is such a key, and watch the effort redouble to find/exploit. The public needs to say, "enough is enough" before everything becomes the data "wild, wild west". Benjamin Franklin was so insightful: We truly deserve neither. and that is what we appear to be getting.

Insurance companies care about this kind of shit, which has nothing to do with hurricanes: https://www.washingtonpost.com...

So it was rising faster 3000 years ago?

it’s not that seas rose faster before that – they probably didn’t – but merely that the ability to say as much with the same level of confidence declines. - https://www.washingtonpost.com...

I hope you're right, but SCOTUS says money is speech and people are still compelled to pay money.

The issue of compelled speech is not completely settled either. The courts have ruled both that it can be and that it can't be depending on circumstances.

http://www.firstamendmentcente...

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

https://www.researchgate.net/p...

Well we could always have common sense added to the common core curriculum

Already tried that. It caused some problems:

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

It wasn't a bribe. He was just invited over for drinks. And free room and board. And free hunting and fishing. But definitely not a bribe. You can read Scalia's own explanation of why these things aren't a cause for concern when he took a trip with Cheney WHILE CHENEY HAD A CASE BEFORE THE COURT.

I wonder who is paying Snowden's bills?

A fair question. This might suggest where to check for at least a few of the receipts. "Interesting" timeline.

It's really hard to take Snowden seriously when he resides in a country run by a Russian version of Donald Trump who assassinates people for talking trash about the him online. Russia is the definition of a totalitarian police state.

Just to be clear, you do know that President Obama ordered the assasination of an American citizen who was outside the arena of war, yes?

And you do know that the his cited legal authority was a secret law (a memo, actually) that the public couldn't access at the time, right?

And his 16-year old son, also a US citizen, and with no connection to terrorism, was killed 2 weeks later by a separate drone strike. In a country we were not at war with, in an outdoor restaurant, killing 8 others as well.

And you do know that all this happened without trial, and without the victim having a chance to defend himself against charges, right?

And you're worried about Donald Trump?

Worry about us. Worry about our children.

We are talking about a iPhone 5c. You should read this for more about the actual reason FBI is asking Apple to perform the decryption of the iPhone.

I wonder what brought that on.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

I wonder part of the motivation for this plan is to get all of the older "hackable" iPhone models off the market before Apple is asked to break into another one.

That's an interesting thought. To be honest, while I prefer to hold onto hardware for as long as it does the job - I've been considering whether I should try getting my wife to upgrade her iPhone 5 for this very reason (since the 5 doesn't have the secure enclave and TouchID). Given the US government's demonstrated inability to keep important information secure, I am assuming criminals will have the master iPhone unlock tool in short order - should Apple lose their court fight.

Are you not familiar with their posts? In my effort to be polite, I'll say this; They make some very strong claims from time to time and do not generally provide citations. However...

It is known, not really conjectured, that Google did, in fact, cooperate with the NSA on at least one occasion. As near as I can recall, there's at least one instance where they did so and I've gone ahead and found a link.

http://www.salon.com/2014/11/1...

Now, do not read into that what I did not say. It's important to note *how* and *why* Google assisted and cooperated with the NSA - at least in that one particular instance. If you don't want to read the link, basically some server in China was attacking Google and their users. Google traced 'em, shared the data with the NSA, and gave them technical assistance (probably).

So, you can say that Google has cooperated with the NSA and be completely factual. Except, it's not as it seems. I suspect that's the case here - and he may not even be doing it intentionally and not have actually read the story.

I've heard other accusations and traced them down - they're often just conjecture. I've read quite a bit of the Snowden stuff and, if I recall correctly, you're recounting it well enough. The NSA was grabbing the data without Google's consent or aid - so far as I know. In fact, seeing as I'm providing citations, let me find an article for that....

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

In that article (and all the others that I know of that are generally factual) it points out that the NSA was *secretly* doing so - that means that Google was not aiding them. However, if you squint just enough (and never bother to ask for citations) then you can *factually* claim that Google has cooperated with the NSA. They have. Err... It's just that it was probably the right thing to do at the time.

no that's not what it meant.
that 38% number is being taken out of context and distorted.

to explain it further, read this: https://www.washingtonpost.com...

So what’s up with this 38 percent figure, and does it really undermine the idea that 2014 was the hottest year on record?

The figure comes from slide 5 of the PowerPoint presentation mentioned above, where NASA scientists noted that there was a 38 percent chance that 2014 was the hottest year, but only a 23 percent chance that the honor goes to the next contender, 2010, and a 17 percent chance that it goes to 2005.

The same slide shows that NOAA’s scientists were even more confident in the 2014 record, ranking it as having a 48 percent probability, compared with only an 18 percent chance for 2010 and a 13 percent chance for 2005. Here is the slide: http://img.washingtonpost.com/...

so, as usual, scientists said something scientific, reasonably assuming a scientific understanding of statistics on the part of the listeners (it being intended for an audience familiar with the subject), and instead a group of ignorant people heard it, interpreted it wrongly, and ran with it, spreading misinformation in the process.

no that's not what it meant.
that 38% number is being taken out of context and distorted.

to explain it further, read this: https://www.washingtonpost.com...

So what’s up with this 38 percent figure, and does it really undermine the idea that 2014 was the hottest year on record?

The figure comes from slide 5 of the PowerPoint presentation mentioned above, where NASA scientists noted that there was a 38 percent chance that 2014 was the hottest year, but only a 23 percent chance that the honor goes to the next contender, 2010, and a 17 percent chance that it goes to 2005.

The same slide shows that NOAA’s scientists were even more confident in the 2014 record, ranking it as having a 48 percent probability, compared with only an 18 percent chance for 2010 and a 13 percent chance for 2005. Here is the slide: http://img.washingtonpost.com/...

so, as usual, scientists said something scientific, reasonably assuming a scientific understanding of statistics on the part of the listeners (it being intended for an audience familiar with the subject), and instead a group of ignorant people heard it, interpreted it wrongly, and ran with it, spreading misinformation in the process.

A lot of news and commentary on this one.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
http://www.usatoday.com/story/...
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyli...

Assange is a fugitive from the justice process. He jumped bail, and *that* is why the British legal system wants a word.

No, that is the excuse of the British legal system. The reason they want a word is because they want to ship him speedily to the US.

Except there is no evidence that this is the case.

Assange says that this is the case... but unlike, say, Snowden-- who actually is facing charges-- there aren't any US charges against Assange, and it's unlikely that the US would press charges.

The alternate hypothesis is that Assange is just an a**hole with an inflated opinion of himself, and doesn't want to answer questions about rape charges because that would end his story about being a lone hero and substitute another narrative that isn't quite so heroic.

http://www.bing.com/search?q=r...
http://tech.slashdot.org/story...
http://thestack.com/root-comma...
http://thestack.com/zyxeltech-...
http://threatpost.com/12-milli...
http://threatpost.com/dns-base...
http://threatpost.com/internet...
http://voices.washingtonpost.c...
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/s...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/+...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/2...
http://www.dshield.org/diary/5...
http://tools.cisco.com/securit...
http://tools.cisco.com/securit...
http://tools.cisco.com/securit...

APK

P.S.=> So much for your faith in routers alone stupid (225 in total, 15 posts with 15 items each)... apk

Reminder mods, just because you like the idiot doesn't mean she isn't a pro-authoritarian pos. This is the idiot in question. And still the idiot in question And still some more idiot in question. All along with the help of this idiot.

Consider what the effect of the ruling actually is. It makes it so that police can turn any regular warrant into a no-knock warrant - I mean, they might as well 0.1 seconds for all anyone cares. And even if it's too short, so what? The evidence is all admissible, and otherwise Scalia says that officers will receive such reprimands as issued by the police department... which, you guessed it, is none.

http://object.cato.org/sites/c...

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

And if you don't see a problem with no-knock warrants in general, I would suggest reading about some SWAT horror stories that result from that. And - since you're a Scalia supporter, and hence a purported "originalist" - look up when no-knock warrants first appeared.

If colleges limited themselves to football (or ice hockey for some universities) and whichever of men's or women's basketball was more popular, almost every athletics department would make money.

That assertion is questionable, when you look at the way athletic departments spend money. At most schools, revenue has gone up significantly in the past decade, at many places even doubling or more. Yet schools aren't making larger profits -- instead, they just increase spending.

However, the more popular sports subsidize the less popular sports (Track & Field, Baseball / Softball, etc.) that don't make much or any revenue and then Title IX requirements mean that they have to offer funding for women's sports which typically make even less revenue.

Again, that's undoubtedly true, but that doesn't explain how doubling income (mostly without expanding those programs that didn't make money and already existed) doesn't result in increased profits.

If you read the link I gave above, you'll realize that this isn't a "rational market." It's an "arms race." Athletic departments generally have discretion over spending their income, and if they don't spend it -- they lose it... it goes back into the general university budget. So, if they increase profits, the athletic departments have motivation to spend them immediately -- and by doing so, they can try to gain an edge over competition. Thus, coach salaries, facilities costs, etc. continue to skyrocket.

Throwing out the other sports would just mean that the athletic departments would spend more money on coaches and facilities in the remaining sports.

Coaches are going to get well paid, but some are probably worth it given how much money the football/basketball program can bring in for the athletics department.

Again, the logic is circular. Coaches can demand more salaries because athletic programs make more money. Athletic programs then try to make even more money to attract better coaches, so salaries get pushed higher. If head coach salaries were 1/10th or 1/20th what they are EVERYWHERE in the major conferences, the system would still work fine and there would still be incredibly talented coaches out there for these sports. But if salaries are higher everywhere, schools increase revenues to afford them. The coaches often aren't "bringing in" that money -- they're forcing the schools to find ways to RAISE that money.

A good amount does go into scholarships for the athletes, a few of whom may not be able to otherwise afford to go to college. Some don't make the most of that opportunity, but that's not any less true of the general student population itself.

Well, when you have things like outright academic fraud, fake "classes" designed for athletes, etc., I think you can argue that some schools are deliberately encouraging their athletes to AVOID education and focus instead on what they were brought there to do... i.e., play sports.

TL;DR -- Athletic departments generally try to spend as much as comes in, so streamlining programs to "money-making" sports likely won't change that. And it's pretty clear what the priorities are when academics conflict with "student athletes" at big sports schools.

Actually it was contemplated that, yes, you'd need a pilots license to fly your drone. linky

didn't come to pass but it WAS on the table.

Honest question -- who wants to stream media?? Why?

Probably nobody at all. That'd explain why Netflix is such a dismal failure.

But that doesn't stop Sweden from 'losing' prisoners at the airport just about where the CIA goons with a private jet are waiting to ship the said prisoners to Egypt for some rubber hose cryptanalysis.

Why was this modded down?

It seems like a fair description of an actual event.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
https://www.hrw.org/news/2006/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

An automatic rifle (machine gun) fires as long as the trigger is held. These are very expensive to buy due to regulations, and you can only buy ones manufactured before 1934 (not sure, but what I found in Google)

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

Semiautomatic rifles fire once for every pull of the trigger, these are the type of many firearms used in mass shootings around the US. They ARE commonly used for hunting, as the ability to fire two or more shots at a deer quickly is desired as the first might not actually drop the deer.

Assault rifle is a made up term for a "scarey gun", the best and most common example of this is an AR-15. AR-15s are a semiautomatic rifle with rails that allow the mounting of accessories such as scopes, lights, lasers, grips, or frankly whatever. They also allow for larger magazines to be used with them, but most magazine weapons can use large magazines.

https://www.washingtonpost.com... (the first picture)

The problem that many US citizens have, is that according to the constitution which is the highest law of the land, ALL gun regulation is banned. Yet, a very uncommon form of death is being fought like it is the top way people die.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastat...

Murder doesn't even break the top ten, it is so rare that you are more likely to die from eating fatty/oily foods. So, lets focus on ending heart disease, fighting cancer, banning or improving help for smokers, fighting alzheimer's and diabetes, ending the flu, stopping whatever the hell Nephritis is, and maybe getting help for those considering suicide, rather than taking guns away from those who don't commit crimes, while leaving the criminals heavily armed as they can just steal guns, or buy them anywhere.

I disagree. Investigative reporting is good, but it can be sensationalized and it's really done for profit. In many cases, investigative reports don't release the documents and interviews that form the basis of the stories. There isn't a lot of transparency, and reports don't actually want the transparency. See this article complaining that once an FOIA request is made for a document, the documents are made freely available to anyone, which would be damaging to investigative reporters. In short, they want access to the documents requested under the FOIA but don't want others to have access because it would cut into their profits from reporting. Although Wikileaks can't be fully trusted because they are (necessarily) selective about what they release, it's not biased out of desire for profit and it's transparent enough in that you see the original documents.

For those calling for his removal, you'll want to ask them. But he wasn't ousted. He chose to resign, so the person you should ask first, is in fact, Tim Wolfe.

He wrote a resignation letter, and took responsibility at the time, for the mistakes he made. Mostly inaction and indifference seems to be the gist of it. Basically, silence. Which can, indeed, be a wrong way to handle many problems.

More recently, though, he emailed something else, that seems to be filled with a lot of sour grapes.

So sometimes they're the last words too.

The problem is that it's a lot of isolated incidents that are piling up. There was a famous case from several years prior where someone was found guilty of racial harassment for reading a book about the KKK because some other prat found it offensive. It wasn't even a book praising the Klan, but rather one about how people had stood up to them. You see it in plenty of other areas where campuses ban something because some group found it offensive. A Canadian university canceled a yoga class because some precious fuckwit was whining about cultural appropriation.

If someone wants to protest against something, that's their right, but it's another thing entirely to capitulate to the demands of those who seem to be looking for new ways to be offended. Look at the Mizzou professor who shoved a student journalist who was attempting to report on the protests there. It's not just the students who are participating in the idiotic ideology that makes the Tea Party look sane by comparison. The people getting offended are the kind of rabid zealots that want to shove their views on everyone else, not the type of people who will politely disagree or engage in some kind of dialog.

Sounds like you're just distraught that the son of your lord and savior just suspended his presidential campaign. Don't worry, you can still keep holding your church services, nobody is going to stop you from that.

Actually, one in 32 odds. The chance that a coin tossed one time lands with the same face up is 1 in 1. The chance that a coin tossed two times lands with the same face up is 1 in 2, etc.

A little over two standard deviations.

However, as Washington Post notes, "see the update below: there were other tosses which Sanders won."

The update states:
Update: The initial 6-for-6 report, from the Des Moines Register missed a few Sanders coin-toss wins. (There were a lot of coin tosses!) The ratio of Clinton to Sanders wins was closer to 50-50, which is what we'd expect.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

It's largely irrelevant, though. The killer will get away scott-free because the lead investigator is too busy spying on his ex.

Trump is the lesser evil. He's a bumbling buffoon versus someone who deals regularly in shady government practices.

I disagree with both statements. Trump is a proven master of media, government manipulation (subsidies, bankruptcies), and proving to be a master politician. He routinely tells flat out lies and never has to retract them. He could murder someone and his supporters would continue their support.
Meanwhile, which politician out there doesn't deal with shady government practices?

I do have to applaud the idea of supporting the lesser of the evils though. That's rational. I'd just value honesty more. The only thing Trump has going for him, imho, is he's been successful at making money. However, honest investors can actually be even more successful: https://www.washingtonpost.com...

I'd like to see links about how Hillary shut out Lessig. The idea doesn't surprise me (a Lessig supporter) at all, and I'd think that most politicians would do the same to their opponents if they could, but I'm open to hearing more about it.

Neil needs to get over himself.

Opposing Muslims or Mexicans isn't racist; neither of those terms is a race or correlates strongly with a race.

I suppose the proper term is "bigoted", but the distinction is fairly pointless in this case. The irony of your comment is most of the people who are supporting Trump's bigoted opinions don't make a distinction between Muslims and "brown people/arabs" or Mexicans and "latinos". For ample evidence of this see the many examples of random hatred and violence being perpetrated on Indians, Sikhs, and anyone else who "looks the part".

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Trying to pedantically argue this is not technically "racism" as it's against a religion serves no useful purpose. And in fact, it's pretty strong evidence that your statement "neither of these terms correlates strongly with a race" is blatantly false, as these people are being targeted because they "look like Muslims". Which doesn't seem to make sense, but that isn't stopping them as there is clearly correlation in their minds.

he hasn't so much attacked those groups as attacked their illegal presence in the U.S

I'm pretty sure his suggestion that ALL MUSLIM AMERICANS might be required to register their religion with the government and carry id cards is attacking that group specifically, and has absolutely nothing to do with illegal presence or criminality.

Yes all that cyber cash is starting to spread wide and deep.
The back part has been on the books for a while now.

"U.S. spy agencies mounted 231 offensive cyber-operations in 2011, documents show" (August 30, 2013)
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
under GENIE for "“.. covert implants,” sophisticated malware transmitted .."

For first time, US military says it would use offensive cyberweapons (Mar 14, 2013)
http://arstechnica.com/securit...
"This is an offensive team"

Okay, let's forgive the Bosnian sniper for the sake of discussion.

I'm sure this was intended as just a cute family fairy tale...
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10...
As was this...
http://www.politifact.com/trut...
And this was just a bit of hyperbole
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
And we know she was just kidding with
http://www.politifact.com/trut...
I'm sure she just forgot when she said
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/08/...

I could go on for many more lines, but it's late.

It is wrong to assume refugees represent a pure cost. And you are talking about 0.1% of the GDP of Finland here. Do some research before spreading xenophobia. https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Municipalities Profit from poverty through excessive court fees

Texas judge blows lid on speeding ticket racket

Policing and Profit

It's a modern day debtors penal system. If you're poor, the cops and courts keep fucking you over so that you never get off the court fee/fine merry-go-round. That's the system you're supporting and the "fools" complain about.

You might also want to examine the stats on deaths by murder or accident, and where a rifle fits in that list. Handguns are much higher, but still not at the top.

You are mistaken. Guns are way at the top of the list of weapons used in murders. Guns are used more than five times more often to commit murder than any other weapon.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

And here is the raw data, if you happen to believe the Washington Post is just lying to help the gun grabbers.

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/c...