Slashdot Mirror

He's not the only one. People are imprisoned on Cuba for all sorts of bizarre reasons, even when there's no evidence they've actually committed a crime. Read the shocking story here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

The irony is pretty thick there as well.

As an example, all too often when I see comparisons of the US and abroad, Europeans often refer to their way of doing things as the way "the rest of the world" works, and likewise Europeans also think of themselves as being "the world."

Just as an example from recent memory, one guy was detracting an article about EMV adoption in the US in the comments, saying it was just a ploy by the banking companies to force you to pay for fraudulent charges, and I responded to him saying that in the US there are already protections against that kind of thing so it doesn't matter anyways, to which he replies to me that I'm a stupid ignorant American and that "the rest of the world" isn't like us, and had to remind me that he was from France and not the USA and how I shouldn't just assume that he's American, in spite of the fact that the fucking article was about the USA, so I'm not sure what basis he was to expect me to expect him to not be from the USA, other than simple arrogance on his part.

Another thing I can think of is that South American's take GREAT offense when you refer to people in the USA as American. It doesn't have to be somebody within the USA doing it, rather if somebody from say Europe, Asia, or wherever says it (which they often do) whereas they themselves don't seem to have any qualms about being identified as such. Forget that none of their countries have the word "America" in it, they just get pissed when you issue that name to somebody they term "estadiounidense".

Also as a minor example, for whatever reason when you talk to Germans about the holocaust, they inevitably redirect the conversation by saying that the US is the most racist country in the world, even though that's unlikely.

Go to a modern well funded post office some time. They're incredibly efficient.

huh?

perhaps you live on a different world as I, but "efficient" businesses do not lose 1.9B USD every three months.

unfortunately, history has shown for at least 2500 hundred years that government bureaucracies always devolve into political quagmires, where empire building and ass-kissing trump sound business practices.

If you had actually bothered to read the article you linked to, you would have noticed that Congress is preventing them from taking cost savings measures the USPS wishes to implement. Congress controls the prices they can charge. Congress mandates six day deliveries. Congress prevents them instituting their own health insurance plan (which an organization the size of the USPS can easily do). Congress mandates pre-paying health and pension benefits many decades into the future (the only case of this occurring in the U.S. government, and also all but unknown in the private sector).

And then there all the Constitutionally-derived mandates for keeping unprofitable rural branch offices open, and delivering mail to every household everywhere, every mail-day. Things no private business will do.

When Congress's package of restrictions and controls essentially requires an organization to run a deficit, efficiency alone cannot turn the situation around.

Go to a modern well funded post office some time. They're incredibly efficient.

huh?

perhaps you live on a different world as I, but "efficient" businesses do not lose 1.9B USD every three months.

unfortunately, history has shown for at least 2500 hundred years that government bureaucracies always devolve into political quagmires, where empire building and ass-kissing trump sound business practices.

Actually, it was ShangahiBill who attempted to move the goalposts. My original response was to his claim that " It isn't clear if yellow light duration was decreased in the intersections studied." It's clear.

Even then it was just some interesting questions he raised. Probably not known until he goes through the Paywall. Not very likely that a consensus can be reached, because what are the metrics? Some might say increased safety is laees accidents, some may say loss of life, some may say insurance company payouts. Some may just want the ticket money.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetw...

If you use less accidents as a metric, it is very difficult to defend the cameras. If less T-Bone accidents, you can. Money? Oh frabjous day, this is a friggin cash cow!

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

And safety? Hey, Washington will give you a redlight ticket if you don't come to a full and complete stop and turn right.

What is more, remember that the companies have a say, they love that money too. So some contracts specifiy the shortest yellow duration to maximize the number of people fined.

http://www.npr.org/2012/02/22/...

http://www.npr.org/templates/s...

There's plenty more.

Now as ShanghaiBill noted, the real increases in Safety come from longer yellow light times. Very short times tend to cause more in the intersection accidents, and coupled with cameras, are more likely to produce rear end accidents, especially with the very short yellow light timing - and some say the photos are taken while the light is still yellow. I know myself, if we had redlight cameras in my area and short times. If I see the yellow light, I'm standing on the brakes. Yeah, I might get rear ended, but it will be the other drivers fault. I might know I am going to get hit, but I'll avoid a big fine. What a stupid, stupid system, that in essence causes people to purposely cause traffic accidents. That's just insane.

In principle, I hae no issue with redlight cams. In real life however, politicians are too anxious to get any non-tax revenue they can, and the companies that install and run these things are the kinfolk of the for profit prison people, so the demands for increased profits every quarter will have a similar effect. More tickets will need to be issued, and company pressure placed on the local Government to increase fines in order to increase profit. So there will be tinkering, I suspect in the end to just randomly take photos,of cars in intersections because most people will just cough up the thousand dollars or so it will cost by that time rather than hire a lawyer. Sweet gig if you can get it.

Since the human factor is inevitably and fatally flawed, the cameras need to be banned outright.

as in, this was on mainstream two days ago.

http://www.abdn.ac.uk/news/718... & http://www.abdn.ac.uk/oceanlab... (original research)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/scie...

and a seriously poor writeup from the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

"Colorado already proved that with the tax revenue they brought in from legalized marijuana"

Colorado probably got significantly increased business from being the first, surrounded by neighbours where it is still illegal. They probably even have increased secondary trade from people travelling in to get marijuana and then buying other stuff. Also, there's probably the effect of the novelty. I'm not saying there isn't a permanent increase, but it will be less if Nebraska and Oklahoma also legalise it.

"Probably even have increased secondary trade" doesn't even begin to cover it. My wife works in ophthalmology and she has four patients who have moved to colorado just because of pot. That's likewise cited as a primary reason that housing prices have increased recently. I find it hard to believe that people would uproot their lives just for weed, but it appears to be happening.
Colorado is making an estimated $1M/day in taxes on pot and that's probably significantly lower than the actual revenue, since because there are virtually no banks (one credit union) that'll deal with marijuana dispensaries, it's a cash-only business so the businesses could in theory only report as much business as they wish, and pocket the rest. If/when more financial institutions start dealing with them, and people feel they can use credit cards to pay for pot, the tax revenues are likely to increase.
It's also not clear that the novelty is outweighed by the convenience. There are a lot of people who didn't use pot previously because it was just a hassle to get and there was a bit of risk involved. The people I know who are long-term smokers have stayed with their black-market dealers because they know it's safe and it's cheaper. But people who want to use it occasionally, or don't know/want to deal with black-market stuff, is apparently a huge market. They may overwhelm the local novelty effect.

Are you serious?

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

Sarkeesian was going to speak at Utah State University. An anonymous person threatened to go on a shooting rampage and claimed to have multiple weapons and bombs. So there's your proof, someone threatened to go on a school shooting to prevent her from speaking. Such threats are very serious, if they catch the person that made them they will be going to jail.

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

Looks like pretty clear-cut persecution to me...

Hahahahahaha you think tax money goes to pay for water and highways. No. Tax money goes to pay for stuff like this, this and this.

I know that *some* (not all) taxes go to stuff like that. If you are claiming that NO TAXES go ever to public infrastructure, then you are going to have to do better than just pointing at counter examples.

I never claimed that ALL TAXES go to public infrastructure. I claim that taxes PAY for infrastructure. That claim does not says "ALL TAXES go to infrastructure" or that "infrastructure gets funded PROPERLY by ALL TAXES."

As a result, your reply, by logical necessity, is misplaced and inadequate. Unless you can prove anywhere that I've said anything that warrants your reply, you have to admit, if you are honest, that you are simply building a strawman.

Haven't you noticed that America's infrastructure is crumbling?

Yes.

Now why is that?

Because its maintenance and expansion is not funded properly. This is no proof that taxes never go there. It is certainly not proof of the following statement:

And taxes are good, right? Not like that's stealing or anything.

People shouldn't expect not to be challenged when they post asinine shit like that without a context or at least some thought behind it.

Giving more tax income for the government is no better than giving a crackhead more money.

There is not one government. There is federal government, there is state and local government, and depending on the region, tribal government. Each operates differently, with different levels of efficiency and honesty (or lack thereof) when it comes to collecting taxes (and putting them to good use.)

In this specific context, this thread, taxation is being referred to state and local taxation. It is not accurate to describe taxation and public spending in such over-generalized terms. It is great from the point of rhetoric.

It has been a long time since the US government has made effective use of its money. Besides - all tax revenue is barely enough to cover the INTEREST on the deficit (even at these low low rates) - let alone the deficit. A few hundred million here or there will make zero difference to the ocean of pork.

Here you are properly elaborating a good point (finally). It still does not explain what states are to do with pot legalization, the war on drugs, state rights over their own taxation, their relation on that topic to the federal state, the nature of interstate commerce, free passage of citizens from one state to another to purchase an item and the arbiter role of federal government in such activities.

There are the goddamned subjects of this threat. Alcohol is already taxed with different sale taxes across the states, so logically legalization of pot by a state will imply its taxation by said state.

Inefficiency of (or even corruption during) taxation of an item by a government, be it local, state or federal, does not preclude a government, in particular a state government from exercising that sovereign power. If you oppose a state from taxing pot as a condition for legalization, you are going to have to do better than saying "taxation is bad or badly done."

Hahahahahaha you think tax money goes to pay for water and highways. No. Tax money goes to pay for stuff like this, this and this.

Haven't you noticed that America's infrastructure is crumbling? Now why is that?

Giving more tax income for the government is no better than giving a crackhead more money. It has been a long time since the US government has made effective use of its money. Besides - all tax revenue is barely enough to cover the INTEREST on the deficit (even at these low low rates) - let alone the deficit. A few hundred million here or there will make zero difference to the ocean of pork.

We can't take any US intelligence or claims seriously any more. WMD? Torture? Rendition? Sorry bro, you lied too many times.

Sorry, there were WMD found in Iraq. Nobody wanted to acknowledge it as it was the US and EU that sent them there originally. Regardless, the chemical weapons were there.

I don't condone torture, however most of what I've read in the recently released report barely qualifies. And no one seems to take into account the panic of the times. This feigned outrage by the people in congress over this is appalling. They knew exactly what was going on and approved it at the time. Additionally, most US special forces training programs subject our soldiers to as much or more physical and psychological discomfort than what I've seen described as torture. Yelling and threatening someones family is now considered torture?

Where's your outrage over the treatment of prisoners in Mexican prisons? Caning in Thailand?, Stoning in middle eastern countries? How about the victims of the 9-11 attacks? What about the agony that their family members went through? At that time, two planes had successfully brought down the world trade center towers, one crashed into the pentagon, and another in a field in Pennsylvania. Don't forget the Anthrax letters that were being mailed too. While they weren't related, it was unknown at the time. It seemed like one hell of a coordinated attack against the US. And it was painfully obvious no one was prepared for it.

Extraordinary Rendition required more than just the US.54 countries were involved. Spain, Portugal, Germany, UK, Canada, Australia, Sweden, Island, Finland, Denmark, etc. were among those countries involved.

Sorry bro, we've been lied to by damn near every country's government on the planet at this point.

What has to be remembered here is whatever they publicly tell us it does, secretly it does a shit load more, and will be used in ways they claim it won't be.

Mark my words, before long it will come out that they can track your car from the moment you leave your house. And it will be able to simultaneously do it with a lot of cars.

That day passed awhile ago. They will likely have a record of all visible travel in their coverage area (during pleasant weather). The commercial version of this tech collects 192M pixel time-lapse images. It will be an incredibly useful dataset.

Hysteria, eh? Well, let's just drag a few facts out. Here we go:

o Straight-up misconduct

o Botched paramilitary police raid data

o Judge, jury and executioners in blue: The death penalty -- without a court

o Warrants "not required" data

o Seizure of property without warrants details

o $2.02 billion dollars in cash and property seizures for/in which no indictment was ever filed

o Other illegal horrors

Just a little information -- what we know -- showing our government at work, cavreader. Now, I don't know how you will characterize this information, but I know how I do: Directly and unequivocally indicative of a systemic breakdown of respect, regard, and understanding of liberty and justice that extends broadly across all areas of law enforcement.

Now, you want to talk nonsense about legal protections in a system where the vast majority of defendants are pressured into plea bargains against a completely uneven scale full of extra charges, almost certain financial ruin, threats of extended incarceration, and outright lies from the police and prosecutor, where the police don't have to defend anything in court -- and which can be, and at times have been, followed up by ex post facto laws increasing punishment after conviction -- fine. But don't expect me to take you seriously, because you obviously don't have even the slightest idea what you're talking about.

The sprawling Ogallala Aquifer in the Great Plains provides freshwater for roughly one-fifth of the wheat, corn, cattle and cotton in the United States. But key parts of the underwater aquifer are being depleted faster than they can be recharged by rain (see map)....

To be perfectly honest, does anyone have statistics (recent) on the number of terrorist acts that are committed by Christians? I'd like to compare them with Islamic terrorist acts, because it seems to me that Islamic apologists need a wake-up call.

I don't know about world-wide, but in Mexico extremists in the cult of Santa Muerte are out of control.

"A recent United Nations report estimated nearly 9,000 civilians have been killed and 17,386 wounded in Iraq in 2014, more than half since ISIL fighters seized large parts on northern Iraq in June. It is likely that the group is responsible another several thousand deaths in Syria. To be sure, these numbers are staggering. But in 2013 drug cartels murdered more than 16,000 people in Mexico alone, and another 60,000 from 2006 to 2012 — a rate of more than one killing every half hour for the last seven years. What is worse, these are estimates from the Mexican government, which is known to deflate the actual death toll by about 50 percent.

Statistics alone do not convey the depravity and threat of the cartels. They carry out hundreds of beheadings every year. In addition to decapitations, the cartels are known to dismember and otherwise mutilate the corpses of their victims — displaying piles of bodies prominently in towns to terrorize the public into compliance. They routinely target women and children to further intimidate communities. Like ISIL, the cartels use social media to post graphic images of their atrocious crimes."

Perhaps that explains the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition.

There is nothing in attributed to the Christian god himself — nor any of his prophets — that required Crusades or the Inquisition.

On contrast, Koran — which purports to be the word of god verbatim — mandates that the faithful convert or kill the pagans and (tax the Christians and Jews). The prophet himself — whom Muslims world-wide adore — was an illiterate warlord, who used genocide centuries before it became cool.

Bible has plenty of warlords too, but none of them are His prophets. King David is described as a hero, but he killed too many people to found the Temple — the task was left to his son. Not the sort of quibbles, Muslims would consider...

The Crusades ended in the 14th century. Spanish Inquisition (a secular institution, BTW — ran by Spanish Crown) is also many centuries in the past. Since then the Western world has created the First Amendment, among other things. If you have nothing contemporary to contrast the ongoing craziness of the "religion of peace", you've lost your argument...

See the article, below, for more evidence of the problem:

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

apparently defending against accusations by denying them, implicitly calling the accuser a liar, isn't protected by the 1st amendment;-\

  http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

otoh, it's a clever ploy to drag him into court & examine alleged crimes after the statute of limitation has passed...or should we now retroactively prosecute?

Map Shows Most Racist People On Earth. http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

The heavily redacted 480-page report - published on Tuesday - covered the treatment of around 100 suspects rounded up by US operatives between 2001 and 2009 on terrorism charges.

The full 6,200-page report remains classified. Ahead of the publication of the report, the US had tightened security at its embassies across the globe.

Can you imagine what is on the other 6000Â pages? If this is what they decided to release imagine what they decided to keep hidden.

With a valuation of $40,000,000,000.00 "embattled" is hardly the adjective I'd use.

But Obama's social media team was often quicker to respond to things and more creative.

I sure am glad to have a tech-savvy Administration in Washington for once. Finally we have someone, who uses the same devices we do and appreciates their security. Someone, who "gets" of building web-sites, the importance of competition among ISPs, and other deeply technical issues.

NASA announcement: Arsenic-based life form discovered on Earth circa 2010

All this NSA stuff that got leaked -- he knew it before it got leaked. He's on the committee that has regulatory oversight to that agency. Did he do anything when he found out what they were doing? No.

Wow are you wrong. Seriously, overwhelming, jaw-droppingly-stupidly wrong.

With NSA revelations, Sen. Ron Wyden’s vague privacy warnings finally become clear

It was one of the strangest personal crusades on Capitol Hill: For years, Sen. Ron Wyden said he was worried that intelligence agencies were violating Americans’ privacy.

But he couldn’t say how. That was a secret.

Wyden’s outrage, he said, stemmed from top-secret information he had learned as a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. But Wyden (D-Ore.) was bound by secrecy rules, unable to reveal what he knew.

Everything but his unhappiness had to be classified. So Wyden stuck to speeches that were dire but vague. And often ignored.

Do you know who the Senator was who asked that question that showed that Clapper was lying? Go on. Guess.

This is real the reason why the US government is in such sad shape. Even the people who are with-it enough to know there's a problem, are such morons they can't manage to figure out who their friends are on an issue.

So both the claim that utilities are scared, and the claim that greenies think they are scared, these are both dubious to me.

Then you haven't paid much attention to things like the recent fight in arizona.

have you ever READ the original reports and release from the CDC? Pretty dry stuff.

Yeah, I've heard about some of their objective and disinterested reports on "disease."

Should possibly take that with a pinch of salt.

I'm at University of Florida. We got an armored vehicle, which is less than I expected. Orlando's UCF, however, got a couple dozen assault rifles and a grenade launcher.

A fucking grenade launcher.

Apparently it's been returned, though. Still, who orders a grenade launcher for a school?

as their xian religion requires. I'm surprised one of their kind hasn't murdered Hawkings yet because their religion demands he be killed since he is "defective."

In 2009 when the concept of "Universal healthcare" was floated around in the USA, one Republican FUD'er going on about "death panels" was saying "People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn't have a chance in the U.K., where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless."

Hawking was born, and lives in England.

Oops!

Go here - http://www.washingtonpost.com/... - and talk about how the worst Republian-drawn districts are so much worse than the worst Democrat-drawn district.

Both parties have been doing it for years, and every election the losers complain about gerrymandering the other party did.

Sure, from the article you just linked.

Democrats won in nine of the 10 most-gerrymandered districts. But eight out of 10 of those districts were drawn by Republicans.

Republicans drew Congressional boundaries in six of the 10 most-gerrymandered states.

So the Republicans are at least a little worse on the subject of gerrymandering, but I didn't just say gerrymandering, I said electioneering. The Republicans are notorious for voter suppression efforts which, when combined with gerrymandering, makes them egregious electioneers in general.

Go here - http://www.washingtonpost.com/... - and talk about how the worst Republian-drawn districts are so much worse than the worst Democrat-drawn district.

Both parties have been doing it for years, and every election the losers complain about gerrymandering the other party did.

Enjoy - from The Washington Post

You need to read Gene Weingarten's Pulitzer-prize winning article on this before you hurt someone: Fatal Distraction

no, dumbledork. There's not that much tape production.

Citation fucking provided

"This is voice, not metadata." "In the initial deployment, collection systems are recording "every single" conversation nationwide."

unlocking car boots, setting off windscreen wipers, locking brakes, and cutting the engine.

If a hacker can do all that, why can't the car itself open the windows slightly if the temperature inside gets high and there is no rain outside? All the hardware is already there — the sensors know both the inside temperature and whether anything is hitting the windshield (so wipers can turn automatically in rain).

Would've made returning to your car in the sunny lot more comfortable and even saved some lives.

Because opening the windows slightly only affects inside temperatures slightly? Yet it makes it much easier to thread in a wire to snag a door handle to open the door.

A forced air fan to vent in cooler air from below the car 30 minutes before you return to the car would be more effective. And the only thing stopping that is cost vs benefit - not enough people would find it useful enough to add $xx to the price of the car.

unlocking car boots, setting off windscreen wipers, locking brakes, and cutting the engine.

If a hacker can do all that, why can't the car itself open the windows slightly if the temperature inside gets high and there is no rain outside? All the hardware is already there — the sensors know both the inside temperature and whether anything is hitting the windshield (so wipers can turn automatically in rain).

Would've made returning to your car in the sunny lot more comfortable and even saved some lives.

Or perhaps you'll walk back to an empty parking spot where your car used to be.

All a thief really needs to steal a car (or the contents inside) is access, which you're suggesting to now provide in a automated and unattended fashion.

unlocking car boots, setting off windscreen wipers, locking brakes, and cutting the engine.

If a hacker can do all that, why can't the car itself open the windows slightly if the temperature inside gets high and there is no rain outside? All the hardware is already there — the sensors know both the inside temperature and whether anything is hitting the windshield (so wipers can turn automatically in rain).

Would've made returning to your car in the sunny lot more comfortable and even saved some lives.

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

Your statistics don't sound out of line, but I'd love citations. The one I've got shows sexual assault (not specifically rape) is higher for cops but 2x rather than 4x. On the other hand, it shows between 5 and 6 times as high for cops as non-cops for homicide. Copblock has an article about relative rates for cops.

When race is the issue, remember that homicide with both white and black victims is primarily an intraracial issue. Most (84%) white murder victims are killed by whites and most (93%) blacks are killed by blacks. Murder is a mostly intraracial crime.

Prosecutors can 'indict a ham sandwich' with a grand jury. If they didn't indict, it's because the prosecutor didn't want them to.

Regardless of how one feels about the outcome, this much is apparent. Normally, prosecutors go to a grand jury and ask for specific charges, and present only inculpatory evidence (i.e. evidence that points towards the likelihood that a crime was committed). The prosecutors are under no requirement to present exculpatory evidence (i.e. that points away from guilt), and can even present only witness testimony that supports the charges while suppressing witness testimony that undermines the charges. This is considered fine, because (i) grand jury indictments are a low bar, (ii) that exculpatory evidence will be presented at trial, and (iii) theoretically, a reasonable jury could find all of the exculpatory evidence non-credible and inculpatory evidence credible and vote to convict so there's no need to show the potentially non-credible exculpatory evidence to the grand jury when determining mere probable cause.

That's normally. Here, the prosecutors didn't ask for any charges, and simply put all of the various contradictory testimony before the grand jury. It's not surprising that they returned with no indictment.

You can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich, but you have to at least ask them to indict. Simply serving them lunch doesn't qualify.

The world is complex. All those anti-terror laws passed in the US? Mostly being used against non-terrorist criminals.

If they can use all powerful tools expressly against what the tools were approved for use against, then future wielders of said tools have carte blanche ability to decide that what you did yesterday is now a threat to the state.

The US *currently* has 30 states of emergency in effect linky. One still in effect from the 70s!

Freedom also means freedom from gov't intrusion, which is also important for that Safety/Security thing you're concerned about. In the name of Safety/Security the gov't is trying to get backdoors built into all encryption protocols. That decidedly makes you LESS safe and secure.

Meteorologists say winter starts Dec 1. The meteorological seasons are tied to calendar months instead of the solstice/equinox as that's closer to the true warmest/coldest three months of the year and makes comparisons from year to year more accurate.

See NOAA or the Washington Post.

They're certainly trying to, yes.

The pedant's pedant antecedant was to see the point, but fail to read it.

Since your pedantry has you all tied up in knots, let me break down what others are so desperately trying to get you to realize.

1) Yes, The people casting the votes for legislation are indeed the elected officials. HOWEVER, the laws being voted on are often NOT PENNED BY THESE PEOPLE. Instead, they are often first penned as proposals by interest groups, which then get run through an approvals and support process, and get folded into larger bills, which then eventually get voted on. This is known as a "Christmas Tree Bill"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...

2) While anyone may theoretically petitiion congress, many studies have been conducted which indicate that congressional members (used generically for both house and senate) do not give any weight at all to such petitions, and give all their attention to the lobbyists that show up with suitcases full of money, minivans full of hookers, and dumptrucks full of blow.

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

These things are the elephant in the room my friend. It has been fucking PROVEN that the popular vote and popular issue created interest groups have practically no power to influence US policy, and yet you cling to the "VOTE!, IT'S THE WAY!" statement.

Somebody here is being delusional, and it isnt the people you are arguing with.

since March has raised about $300 million from ordinary citizens

That's how it would cost Pentagon to build temporary barracks in Eastern Bumfuck.

That Ukraine — a country promised protection, when it gave up nuclear weapons, and one of America's allies (such as in Iraq) want of anything, when they now need to defend their own country is a shame.

Obama would not supply them with weapons . Even getting some blankets and helmets — a puny quantity of the so called "non-lethal" supplies — was delayed by months.

Here's an interesting chart for you.

A few wealthy bastards trampling on their countrymen and countrywomen is hardly something to be proud of you fool. Not that Western countries are perfect but the major of the population in the US, UK, CA, and FR for example are not living in abject poverty and at risk of death by starvation.

Here's an interesting chart for you.

Good luck with that. The current batch of republicans have been the least productive house in the history.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
http://www.nytimes.com/politic...
http://www.eclectablog.com/201...

Why would Obama care about lobbyist money? As of two weeks ago, he's been freed of all political consequences to any of his actions. He can finally do what he thinks is right.

Apparently, he's can finally do what he thinks is wrong, too.