Slashdot Mirror

https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com] Does the fact that washpost gives credence to this source, while acknowledging who they are, help?

https://www.washingtonpost.com... Does the fact that washpost gives credence to this source, while acknowledging who they are, help?

When police officers are no longer fired for de-escalation, then you can say that excessive force is not the status quo. I hope to live long enough to see that world.

Are you trying to make a sick joke?

Thousands of employees who review patents for the federal government cheated taxpayers out of at least $18.3 million as they billed the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for almost 300,000 hours they never worked, according to a new investigation by the agency’s watchdog.

The report released Wednesday determined that the full scale of fraud is probably double those numbers. Investigators said they interpreted the data they gathered conservatively, often giving employees the benefit of the doubt for the time they reportedly worked.

...

Patent office workers bilked the government of millions by playing hooky, watchdog finds

I've not seen any evidence that the right wing is for low wages.

The right is rabidly anti-union. Unions raise wages for both union members and non-union workers.

They're are also against immigration, which if actually implemented would push wages up.

Only if the economy is zero sum. But a bedrock principle of conservative economics is that healthy economies are not zero sum. Also there has only been one study to find that immigration lowered wages for any class of workers - it found that only those who dropped out of high-school were harmed, everybody else's wages went up. And even that study turned out to be nothing more than cherry-picking from a larger trend-line that was independent from immigration.

Income tax cuts are also effectively increasing wages

Only in isolation. Cutting income taxes also cuts social services that then must be paid for out of pocket on an individual basis in which negotiating leverage is reduced to one person at a time so total costs go up.

And lets not forget the moronic fallacy of trickle-down & supply-side economics.

Here's the thing - you might argue that any one policy plank of the right supports higher wages if you look at it from a certain perspective. But when you aggregate all of their policies together a very clear pattern emerges of fucking the working man. It should be no surprise that the majority of trump voters were affluent, not working-class they know which side their bread is buttered on.

When I saw Elon's tweet I thought it was a joke. 420? Really? I just thought he was stoned. Then I saw his Joe Rogan interview and realized that when it comes to pot Elon doesn't know the difference between his ass and a hole in the ground, which is rather endearing for a smart uber-geek. Joe offered, Elon was just being polite.

I honestly think that so much effort has been put into bringing down Tesla and denigrating Elon as a fraud, that he is justified in harassing the short sellers. I also suspect that the real motives of the Securities and Exchange folks are to prop up their pro-Trump big business buddies - and for that they all need some mob justice.

I really hate it when people bring Trump into every argument even when it's not relevant, but in light of current events with this administration it is very likely that government forces are busy at work to protect their establish big business buddies. After all, despite the major calamity of global warming, Trump still wants to roll back environmental protections. So, this securities and exchange bullshit is just what you'd expect...

Next up: Corey Booker, admitted groper! Why is he even allowed to sit in judgment of Kavanaugh in the first place? Maybe the Democrats believe it "takes one to know one"?

> As far as Trump and his supporters are concerned, this isn't a bug, it's a feature.

I wish I could blame Trump, but in my home state the DEMOCRATS are in control (75% majority). It was the Democrats that pushed to phase-out paper ballots (which worked perfectly) and replace them with computers (which can be hacked/miscounted).

It was also the Democrats that turned my home state into the most gerrymandered state in the country: https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Well, yeah. Whichever party is in power will pretty much do anything and everything to stay that way. So of course they want election systems that can be tampered with, and want to ensure that their people are in charge of deploying them, just in case the need arises. And of course they want things to be as gerrymandered as possible in their favor. Both parties are only against those things when the other party is in power.

And it isn't just things that affect the balance of power directly. They also pay lip service to — and occasionally pretend to try to change — certain laws only when they know they will fail — for example, the whole Roe v. Wade thing. I don't think for one minute that the Republicans will actually get the Supreme Court to overturn Roe, nor limit it meaningfully, because that brings in the evangelical Christian vote. If they ever succeed in changing that in any semi-permanent way (like rebalancing a court that changes very slowly), they lose most of their leverage. This is also why they only pass laws to ban abortion when the other party has too much power to make them actually pass.

Democrats do the same thing with gun control, passing laws that do little to solve the real problems that exist, while pretending to do something, knowing that if they ever really passed useful laws that would meaningfully reduce the number of black market guns on the streets, such as requiring guns to be locked in a gun safe that bolted to the floor when no adult member of the household is home, requiring a monitored alarm system on all homes containing guns, etc., they would gradually lose a lot of pro-gun-control voters to apathy.

So I'm with you. Politicians make me sick. The number of Democrat politicians I respect is roughly in the single digits, and the number of Republican politicians that I respect shrank from two to one about a month ago.

I half seriously want to run for office in the hopes of maybe, just maybe having one fewer politicians in office — except, of course, for the nagging fear that by doing so, I might become one. If I ever do, my theory of governance is simple:

The purpose of government is to protect the powerless from the powerful.

Any law not deriving from that is inherently a bad law. We need to reboot American politics with that theory in mind.

For example, abortion is a hard issue because there are potentially two powerless parties: the fetus and the mother (who may fear that she won't have a job if she takes time off to give birth, who may have been gotten pregnant without her consent, or who may be too young to safely give birth).

The solution, of course, is to pour research dollars into making artificial womb technology a reality. If the fetus doesn't depend on the mother to survive, this permanently destroys the right-to-life / right-to-choose false dichotomy, and the laws become entirely obvious: simultaneously ban abortion and pay for fetus transfers so long as the mother is giving up the child for adoption or such a transfer is deemed medically necessary.

We also need to reboot Congress based on sound engineering principles:

• Limit the length of all bills (except, temporarily, the budget bill) to what can be reasonably read and understood by the congresspeople who are supposed to vote on it.
• Require eve

> As far as Trump and his supporters are concerned, this isn't a bug, it's a feature.

I wish I could blame Trump, but in my home state the DEMOCRATS are in control (75% majority). It was the Democrats that pushed to phase-out paper ballots (which worked perfectly) and replace them with computers (which can be hacked/miscounted).

It was also the Democrats that turned my home state into the most gerrymandered state in the country: https://www.washingtonpost.com...

HONESTLY:

I think both parties suck ass. I wouldn't trust any GOP or DNC politician with the key to my house.

drivers of actual real licensed taxi cabs aren't likely to stream their fares over the internet, either.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/...

and they are less likely to try to kidnap you.

https://www.wctv.tv/content/ne...

or rape you

https://money.cnn.com/2018/04/...
https://www.nbcwashington.com/...
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

because most jurisdictions have actual regulations regarding taxi cabs, their drivers, their cars, and the fares they charge... and the cab companies follow those regulations, because they lose their ability to operate if they don't.

"Capable of bearing a child" isn't a good cutoff point for pedophilia. A pedo just got sentenced this week for impregnating a 10-year-old https://www.washingtonpost.com... and as I recall some 5-year-old gave birth in Peru... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

We don't need to spend money, we can get our teeth fixed on the NHS. It's you yanks who need to pay to get them fixed because US dental health is no better than the UK.

Weren't they insider trading?

What about all the Wall Street executives that got away (except Bernie Madoff - he stole from rich people)?

Funny that VIetnam seems to know what to do with these criminals, yet the first world western nations do not.

operate for a long time undiscovered

It wasn't undiscovered. It was an open secret.

In other words, he was pushed out in line with their morals and prinicples, but this behavior ultimately benefitted democrats so it doesn't count?

Why do you strawman instead of tackling the issue? You ignored the initial pushback. You ignored the context in which he was finally pushed out. It wasn't about morals, it was about what was politically expedient.

How is that an example of hypocrisy or tribalism? Trump [..]

What does Trump have to do with the behavior of the Democrats? Not only does Ellison have multiple accusations by women against him, he's also been associated with the Nation of Islam and Louis Farrakhan and an apologist for cop killers.

So? He's a fugitive hiding from US law enforcement. Hollywood nutballs aren't politicians.

But they are liberals.

I haven't heard of this. Is this what you're talking about?

No, I'm talking about this.

How is this relevant? Should adulterers be treated the same as rapists and misogynists?

You know Good Ole' Bubba has been accused of rape, as well as being a serial sexual harasser of women, right?

your_credibility--

Oh really?

"Jeong is a great hire for the Times but her tweets appeared to be blatantly racist, whatever their intention."

Hey, look at those great standards! What morals! What adherence to principles:

"Oh man itâ(TM)s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men" --Sarah Jeong

"#CancelWhitePeople" --Sarah Jeong

"Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins?" --Sarah Jeong

Whew, that's pretty spicy! I see why she was a great hire for the New York Times.

You just call anyone you don't like "fascist".

No, professor, it is you who does that. I call Chinese "Fascist" because that is, what they are — by the very definition of the term. Unlike the Communist/Socialist China of the late 20th century, today's China is Fascist: capitalist markets exist — and move the economy — but they are tightly controlled by the government. The secondary indications — like rising nationalism and persecution of minorities (complete with ethnic cleansing) are there too. And — and this is the point most important to this discussion — neither a person nor a company can survive after displeasing the government in general and the Dear Leader in particular.

Up until Trump's election, the US was going in that same direction (and not fast enough for some people). One hopes, he'd be able to survive politically long enough to cripple the creep towards Fascism for a few generations — by nominating judges with a similar pessimism over the government's power.

But, whether he succeeds in that or not, his very attempts make him anti-Fascist. That Google's CEO dislikes Trump for his imaginary Fascism, while willingly cooperating with the actual Fascists of China is a sign of deep malaise of this country's elites — both real, like this very bright Mr. Brin, and the wannabes, like a certain much dimmer teacher who is so wanting in education.

Read: applause for the deep State. WTF dude it's not a crazy conspiracy theory. https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Obama bombed a Doctors Without Borders hospital and sent gunners in to kill the fleeing nurses and patients. Check their own website here.

"The attacks took place despite the fact that MSF had provided the GPS coordinates of the trauma hospital to the US Department of Defense, Afghan Ministry of Interior and Defense and US Army in Kabul as recently as Tuesday, 29 September. The attack continued for more than 30 minutes after we first informed Resolute Support and US military officials in Kabul and Washington that it was a hospital being hit."

This was one of the most shocking moments of the 21st Century. You will notice during Obama's last term he would often not be greeted by a senior delegation when visiting foreign countries, this was due to the hospital bombing. Oh, did your news not tell you that? Huh, I wonder why.

As for the deep state, although there's no precise or scientific definition, generally refers to the agencies in Washington that are permanent power factions. They stay and exercise power even as presidents who are elected come and go. They typically exercise their power in secret, in the dark, and so they're barely subject to democratic accountability, if they're subject to it at all. It's agencies like the CIA, the NSA and the other intelligence agencies, that are essentially designed to disseminate disinformation and deceit and propaganda, and have a long history of doing not only that, but also have a long history of the world's worst war crimes, atrocities and death squads. Remember Salvador Allende being overthrown and replace with a dictator? That was the deep state. Don't believe me? View this article in the house organ of the deep state, the Washington Post, in which the deep state is praised as a savior.

Before this harebrained and reckless administration is history, the nation will have cause to celebrate the public servants derided by Trumpists as the supposed âoedeep state.â

The term itself is propaganda, intended to cast a sinister light upon men and women whom Trump and his minions find annoyingly knowledgeable and experienced. They are not participants in any kind of dark conspiracy. Rather, they are feared and loathed by the president and his wrecking crew of know-nothings because they have spent years - often decades - mastering the details of foreign and domestic policy.

God bless them. With a supine Congress unwilling to play the role it is assigned by the Constitution, the deep state stands between us and the abyss.

A foreign policy establishment that serves its own goals instead of obeying the elected government. That's the definition of "deep state".

I reckon the same logic can be applied for taxes for this company too. It's a moral requirement for the federal government to make money.. by jacking up your corporate taxes by 400%.

The government cannot target a business for taxation....it's against the law for the government to single out a business and tax it differently than other businesses.

You should tell Trump about this "law" ... From Trump threatens Harley-Davidson with taxes ‘like never before’ ...:

President Trump on Tuesday threatened the iconic motorcycle company Harley-Davidson with severe taxes and predicted a public revolt that he said would eventually put the 115-year-old firm out of business, blasting the Wisconsin company for a plan to move some operations outside the United States as a way to avoid getting caught in the middle of an escalating trade war.

Anyhow, time to decommercialise medicine. Yes, I know it sounds pinko commie socialist. Even so.

The market is working to correct this behavior. Remember, there are intermediaries between the drug companies and the patients. They're pissed off too.

Here ya go.

U.S. Widens Russia Sanctions Amid Calls They Don’t Go Far Enough

Russia keeps getting hit with sanctions. Do they make a difference?

Ruble Tumbles as U.S. Sets Out New Sanctions on Russia

Those sanctions are largely the work of the Obaman admin, Congress and the EU, not the Orange Emperor. Trump is itching to abolish them.

Here ya go.

U.S. Widens Russia Sanctions Amid Calls They Don’t Go Far Enough

Russia keeps getting hit with sanctions. Do they make a difference?

Ruble Tumbles as U.S. Sets Out New Sanctions on Russia

What we're really struggling over is whether this event means we should do something about greenhouse gas emissions.

Let's put it this way. The con artist doesn't believe in climate change and his next big step is to curtail methane gas emission regulations.

That said, he also used global warming (his words) as the excuse to build a sea wall for his failing Irish golf course:

"If the predictions of an increase in sea level rise as a result of global warming prove correct, however, it is likely that there will be a corresponding increase in coastal erosion rates not just in Doughmore Bay but around much of the coastline of Ireland. In our view, it could reasonably be expected that the rate of sea level rise might become twice of that presently occurring. ... As a result, we would expect the rate of dune recession to increase."

"As with other predictions of global warming and its effects, there is no universal consensus regarding changes in these events," it states. "Our advice is to assume that the recent average rate of dune recession will not alter greatly in the next few decades, perhaps as far into the future as 2050 as assumed in the [government study] but that subsequently an increase in this rate is more likely than not."

Hmmm, should I believe a daily beast article or video and high school physics class. Decisions decisions.

You've been around long enough to know that it's best not to challenge my citations. Don't like the Daily Beast article? OK.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/0...

https://q13fox.com/2018/05/02/...

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

Or, you could just look it up yourself. You can look at the court record.

That was a lot of words to argue semantics before agreeing with me, but if "his businesses" went bankrupt and he is the owner, then that is what people mean when they say he went bankrupt.

I just don't agree with the people he's a bad person because some of his companies had some bankruptcies. There are a lot of reasons to think he is a bad person, a couple of failed businesses aren't.

I'd like to see your source for that claim.

Here's a summery of the Federal Reserves' Survey of Consumer Finances: https://www.washingtonpost.com...

In 2016 the average net worth of a family who owned their own home stood at $231,400, according the Survey of Consumer Finances. Renters, by contrast, had a net worth of just $5,200.

That's nearly a 45-fold difference, and the gap is getting bigger. From 2013 to 2016, the average net worth of homeowners rose by 15 percent. For renters it actually fell, by 5 percent.

In inflation-adjusted terms, the average net worth of renters is at its lowest level since 1989.

...In fact, what they did was give Donald Trump tons of free media coverage-- about five billion dollars worth, by some estimates. http://www.mediaquant.net/2016/11/a-media-post-mortem-on-the-2016-presidential-election/
https://www.thestreet.com/stor...
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Constant attacks are worth five billion?

Getting his name in the media, the media covering his speeches, the media covering his campaign rallies (while ignoring the comparable events from other candidates), the media covering his talking points-- yep, turns out to be worth about five billion dollars worth of free publicity.

The media covered him because he was outrageous. And he used that.

He seems to be following the model of George M. Cohan: "I don't care what you say about me, as long as you say something about me, and as long as you spell my name right."

Or, to quote another luminary, "there's no such thing as bad publicity."

As stated in the summary: Facebook has grown by purchasing their competitors. The summary mentions WhatsApp and Instagram specifically.

Your comment about the problem with fragmentation is an example of why Facebook needs to be broken up by an outside entity: they have a natural monopoly, since real competition from startups would lead to fragmentation.

Facebook has grown by both natural monopoly and aquisition. Growth by natural monopoly is not prohibited by, and not fixable by, antitrust law as it currently stands. Growth by acquisition can be prohibited (Hart-Scott-Rodino), but for that very reason the government cannot simply undo previous acquisitions -- those requiring antitrust review were government pre-approved.

...real competition from startups would lead to fragmentation.

Your analysis assume that those startups provide real competition. Many startups fail because their business is inferior. Again, growth by natural monopoly is not prohibited by, and not fixable by, antitrust law as it currently stands. If one company becomes monstrously large because it is better than the alternatives, that's not a problem that needs to be fixed. It's when it uses that size to lever into other lines of business or impair competition by anticompetitive means that there's a problem.

I've said this before, but if the government came along and broke up the company by splitting off Facebook's front-end from its back-end, then we could have competition on the front-end without fragmentation of the userbase.

No, you couldn't, because that doesn't address the antitrust problem that you've complained about. We've been through this before with the reversal of the Microsoft breakup order. Monopolizing behavior in the operating system market did not justify breaking up the company by category. You've complained about the acquisition of particular services. You could break off those services (if "you" are not the government attempting to reverse a specific pre-approval, but instead, for example, a private party) but you can't simply declare that the back-end is a separate company that must provide support services to all comers.
That back-end-to-front-end synergy was organically grown and not an antitrust violation.

In the case of Bernie, he lives quite the hypocritical life for a socialist.

I don't begrudge the man what amounts to slightly more expensive than a starter home (in many areas) at his stage in life. I certainly hope when/if I live that long I won't still be struggling to make ends meet on a daily basis.

But that, in a nutshell, is the real problem. I see a future for my children that looks more and more like feudalism where if your name isn't Carnegie or Rockefeller, (or substitute names from this era), then you are and will never be more than a serf destined to serve the lords. This bill, while interesting enough to cause this giant thread on slashdot, will never pass, and even if it did it would be easily skirted by high-paid tax attorneys.

No real solution will come from Washington. It will come when the young people all decide to just grow their own food and work as little as possible en masse such that the system just stops working. See: Fall of Rome.

... we might see some real change in the corporate monsters that are destroying the middle class right now

I'd like to think that the destruction of everything below the upper-class is somehow related to the top 1% of americans controlling 40% of the wealth. It allows a select group of americans to sway the outcome of elections and buy the loyalty of our elected "representatives".

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

Looks like he wasn't making a lot before - but his wife also worked a lot too. But a book deal really boosted his income in the last few years.

Two axiomatic problems with Socialism

1. Those in power that advocate socialism never live by he very rules they set for everyone else.

2. Eventually you run out of other people's money.

Number 1 is correct. The old Russian joke of a man standing on the corner expounding communism:

Man on soapbox: "Communism is great! If I have two cars, I give you one. If I have two houses, I give you one"
Man in the audience: "What about shirts? If you have two shirts, will you give me one"
Man on soapbox: "No"
Man in audience: "Why?"
Man on soapbox: "Because I have two shirts."

In the case of Bernie, he lives quite the hypocritical life for a socialist.

But onto point two:

It is straightforward to fund UBI, so long as you do it gradually (ie - not all at once).

Set aside $1 million for each UBI awarded, invested in index funds. Give out $25,000 annually from that fund, and it will still grow faster than inflation in perpetuity. Hold a lottery to pass out the UBI benefits.

Each $1 billion investment in UBI would remove 1,000 people from the workforce, which over time would greatly improve the working conditions for the remaining workers.

Over the course of a few decades, this would transition a large portion of the workforce over to UBI, while not relying on "other peoples' money".

For comparison, current welfare costs about $492 billion and serves 39 million people. Allocating $100 billion to a UBI would reduce that number by 100,000 people each year and fund them in perpetuity, reducing that particular taxpayer burden by 1/3 of one percent each year until it is no longer needed. That 1/3 of a percent reduction actually grows over time, as the $100 billion/100,000 people represents an ever larger percent of the people involved.

As opposed to costing $492 billion in taxes each year for the same number of people - in perpetuity.

Interesting fact: Anderson Cooper was a CIA spook.

He did, but not on Twitter. He called Unsworth a "child rapist" in an email. The worst he said on Twitter was "pedo guy".

So you're aware enough of the August 30, 2018 emails to discuss their content,,,

Also, for what it's worth, Musk later apologized.

But so temporally challenged that you think that a seven-week old apology is either later than the emails or somehow not revealed as utterly fake by those very same emails.

Sad.

Trump Jr. gets contacted by some lawyer (who turns out to be Russian)...
Lawyer: "I has dirt Hillary, you vaunt meet up?"
Trump Jr: "Uh, okay. Sure."
Meet up happens. There is no dirt, meeting turns out to be a worthless waste of time...

Just a casual meetup that includes Trump's son, his son-in-law, and his campaign chairman (now in prison). And the president knows nothing about it. Sure, that's the ticket.

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

Meanwhile, Hillary pays British firm to generate dirt against Trump using questionable sources from Russia.

First, it was the conservative Washington Free Beacon that got the ball rolling on the Trump dossier. Steele produced the dossier for Fusion GPS who was later hired by the Clinton campaign. They never had to deal with any Russians. It was all arms-length transactions, which makes all the difference in the world. Finally, everything in the Trump dossier has been verified except for the Russian hookers golden showers party, and given Trump's known degenerate behavior, is almost certainly true.

If anyone is going down on that one, Hillary is in deeper trouble me thinks.

I realize that's the Q fantasy. Every day that passes it gets farther out of your reach, and you have to work harder to maintain the fantasy.

In-humanness of the response aside, the risk is quite low, ships are replaceable, and crews are typically from poor countries where life is cheap. These aren't your western well paid sailors who are mourned and whose companies get sued into oblivion for providing unsafe work locations.

This is a common trope, but it's simply not true. The number of cargo ships lost at sea about equals the number of lives lost aboard those ships. That is, on average about 1 person dies for each ship that sinks.

The vast majority of people aboard a cargo ship which sinks are rescued. Life rafts are required by all shipping regulators. And satellite locator beacons have become so cheap that I suggest you get one if you do things like boating or hiking.. Their cost (a few hundred dollars, though a commercial model will run a few thousand) is much less than the liability and bad publicity of someone dying because your ship sank. When someone dies, it's usually because they were unable to reach the life raft in time (injured or blocked in due to the accident which sank the ship).

In fact, the fatality rate works out to (100 deaths) * (100,000) / (1.25 million) = 8 per 100,000. That makes it safer than a variety of jobs as mundane as taxi driver or landscaper. The fatality rate is right around the average for all jobs if you account for those people being aboard the ship 24/7, while people are at the other occupationss on average for less than 6 hours a day.

>brazenly deny the most well-known and uncontestable objective facts simply because they don't suit your narrative
>call everyone involved a nazi
>declare victory
>persuade no one

Liberals, everyone.

You never hear about mass shootings in Texas

Oh really?

"Gun-free zone."

Never hear about them?

"Gun-free zone."

Hmm. Pattern?

If you think that's what anyone cried about then you weren't paying attention to the animal speech

Trump was responding to a comment that explicitly mentioned MS13. That the libshits and you latched on to "animals" out of context is no surprise. Trump has been talking about MS13 for a long time. Maybe if you got out of your libshit media bubble you'd figure out you've been swimming in propaganda soup. Or maybe you like it that way.

But don't take my word for it. You can only hide the context for so long in the Internet age, so instead of just taking it out of context, the libshit media doubled down and then cried even after they acknowledged he was talking about MS13.

went full retard

It isn't the exact same policy, but separating families is not new. Obama initially detained families together. The courts ruled that the children couldn't be contained. So Obama just released "families" together (you know this policy just creates an incentive to traffic children, right?)

Obama also separated families, too, just not as much.

Why is the viewing of non-anonymized financial transactions legal and ostensibly tolerable? Because politicians are easy to bribe (excuse me, educate via legal financial expenditures).

Ah, I'm sure the fact that Google is the biggest spender on lobbying in the USA is completely unrelated. Because that would be evil!

it should be clear that "do no evil" is only possible when the meaning of evil is re-engineered.

Oh...

I wonder how much healthcare could be provided with the taxpayers $13 Billion?

Hmm, 330 megapeople, $13B....

That works out to about $40 per person. So, maybe one doctor's visit per person, at best?

That's a lot of doctors visits. I know it's not a great deal of money however consider it also from another perspective, the amount of money the military wastes with The Washington post exposing $125 Billion in wasted Military spending . That's roughly 10 doctors visits per person, just from the waste spending alone.

It should always be assumed that Google is spying on anything they can, that they will lie about it when feasible, and that they have no shame in doing so. This is not new. It's up to you to protect yourself.

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

https://web.archive.org/web/20...

Please provide a cite for your assertion that Democratic politicians were spreading anti-gay rhetoric as part of their platforms in the 90's and early 2000s.

Homosexuals don't deserve the same rights.

Homosexuals should be ashamed of what they are.

As a bonus:
Racism from the left.

Donald Trump approving of LGBT.

The left wanting Donald Trump to be bigoted towards LGBT.

There's enough to criticize without hiding the Democrat's bigotry and inventing bigotry from Trump. People stopped believing the boy who cried wolf and Democrats lost the last election because of it.

Stay in the real world or risk 8 years of President Donald Trump.

Please tell me again about the bedrock Western values you're talking about, because complete fucking idiots like me can't make sense of reality.

Fixed that for you.

If anything it's refreshing to see Trump's honesty.

Seriously, just what the fuck are you smoking? https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Donald Trump, king of fake news, lies again. Film at 11.

[ 4,229 false or misleading claims in 558 days ~ 7.6/day as of 2018-08-01 -- as noted and graphed ]

Donald Trump, king of fake news, lies again. Film at 11.

[ 4,229 false or misleading claims in 558 days ~ 7.6/day as of 2018-08-01 -- as noted and graphed ]

What it really amounts to is that you were mistaken. So we'll start with that.

I voted for Obama in 2008. I know what he promised and I know what he delivered. As far as I'm concerned, he lied. With Hillary, her lies were even more transparent and obvious.

Apparently you don't. Try here and here and maybe refresh those rose-tinted glasses of yours (/s in case you missed it). In 2000, when Trump stood next to Hillary and said she'd be the first woman president, my response was the only way I'd vote for her was if Trump was her opponent. Little did I know...

Obama fully approved of the ACA and took credit for it. And it's nothing more than a massive handout to corporations that does nothing to address the unsustainable cost spiral of health care.

Everyone involved knew ACA was a compromise. As for health care, the first thing they should have pushed through was posted rates. No special treatment for someone because they're with A or B, but everyone gets charged the same. That would also address transparency.

Yes, and that "de facto emergency coverage" was a better way of covering the uninsured than to force healthy, young people to subsidize unhealthy old people, which is what the ACA does.

You do realize, if god hates us, you'll be one of those old people sooner than you think? And if he really hates us, you'll live 100+ years? And that being part of society is that when everyone pays in, everyone benefits. Or should we just dump those young freeloaders down Sweeney Todd's chute?

Preventive care visit once a year costs less than a tank of gas; ditto for vaccinations. They are also provided for free at free clinics, something the US government could have expanded.

In fact, it looks like the ACA has reduced preventive care and office visits, because it has forced many people to go onto high deductible plans.

Who do you think pays for free clinics, because they're certainly not free? And why did they have to exist in the first place? Is it because health care was unaffordable? BTW, I have paid for my own healthcare, out of pocket. It's not a fun thing to pay for. I've also seen what happens when you have to hit the ER for a relatively minor emergency that turns into a $50K bill. Oh, but they'll settle it for $5K. If you have insurance. Cash? $20K. That's what's fundamentally wrong with the US health insurance industry right there.

And I did check out those ACA plans, after Trump took office. Amazing how they went up 30% and offered less. But I'm sure that's Obama's fault too.

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

The fact is that most of K Street and Congress are bought and paid for by China, and the more people see Putin hiding in their closet, the more China will be able to strengthen its economic, military and social engineering hegemony.

So where do you get your figures from? No citation, you pulled it out of your ass.

As for the "rich" families, Bill earned his wealth, so did the Waltons. They also took the risks. Most of the time they end up broke. So if they make it big, that's not good enough. Take the money and give it away to people who don't want to work, or people not even from the US. Why? Why does this make sense? Of course it doesn't because it would never be enough. No matter how much you give people. The fact that you're an American puts you in the top 1% of the world. https://www.washingtonpost.com... . So no bullshit here. Yet listen to black people, women, etc. Whine, bitch, moan. Increase whatever they make by 100% and they'll still live paycheck to paycheck. That's the way they are.

So no, UBI won't work. Can't work. Only fools think it will work. If you want something go out and earn it yourself. Stop trying to steal it from other people.

One do you have any proof of that ? Or do you think the English speaking world has no interest in the actions of the president of the U.S. especially when he is an even more polarizing figure in the U.K. than he is here ?

But lets test your premise looking at the BBC home page right now

http://www.bbc.com/

Trump attacks 'left-wing' Google search results

It seems you are factually challenged.

Let's test your premise further:

26 occurrences of "Trump" right now

24 occurrences of "Trump" right now

16 occurrences of "Trump" right now

4 occurrences of "Trump" right now

Boy, BBC sure does a lot of stories on Trump. Must be because they're as obsessed with him as US news outlets are...

...the blue helmets, ...

These ones?

Yes, that organization. No to those specific (and quite deplorable and catastrophic) deployments in Africa.

I've personally known what the Blue Helmets stand for. My godfather died as a blue helmet when trying to mediate peace in the 1969 Honduras/El Salvador war. I've known blue helmets who have done good work in Kashmir and the Balkans.

The ones you mention are a tragedy, a failure of the organization (and a function of the local troops used in Africa.) There are also stories of abuse in, say, Haiti. Those are tragedies that require analysis and remedy.

But to pretend that it represents the totality of the organization while negating all else, that's a bit like saying let's nuke police forces (rather than restructure them) and deny their obvious positive contributions because of police brutality.