Slashdot Mirror

Only legal immigrants commit less crime. Illegals commit more crimes and past studies conflated the two groups to spin a narrative.
https://www.washingtontimes.co...

> immigrants (legal or otherwise) are overall more law-abiding than US citizens
Could you repeat that after reading this.

If not here are some interesting tidbits:"legal immigrants between 15 and 35 are less than 3 percent of the state’s population, but nearly 8 percent of its prison population. And the crimes they were convicted of were, on the whole, more serious" and "past studies usually don’t look at legal versus illegal populations".

"4,000 first- and second-degree murder convictions, undocumented immigrants accounted for nearly 13 percent — significantly higher than their percentage of the population. Legal immigrants, by contrast, were less than 1 percent of convicts. Native-born made up the rest."

In other words, legal immigrants that follow the process are in fact less likely to commit crime than the native population. Who would have guessed that. Meanwhile, those that don't respect the law coming in the nation commit more serious crimes and there are people that conflate the two groups to push their narrative.

Really? Your "rebuttal" is based on one article? https://www.washingtontimes.co...

Do people believe that presidents create jobs?

Here's someone who does:

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

"“I’ve created over a million jobs since I’m president.”
— President Trump, remarks on infrastructure, Aug. 15, 2017

“I think if we continue to create jobs like I’ve done — over 1 million since I’ve been in office, way over 1 million.”
— Trump, remarks at rally in Phoenix, Aug. 22, 2017

And here's someone who thinks that presidents can destroy jobs:

Washington Times...

I guess if presidents can create jobs, they can also destroy jobs. Or maybe they can only do one or the other, depending on whether you are from the same political party as the president. In fact, there's probably a newspaper article, or a passage in the Bible, or a clause in the Constitution that will support whatever you to believe.

Has anyone on Slashdot ever changed their view of an item of "fake news" changed based on something they've read? I doubt it...

Indeed.

[July 1 2018] Trump's border wall not worth government shutdown, say lawmakers

Citations:

https://berniesanders.com/open... https://www.bbc.com/news/world... http://www.spiked-online.com/n... https://www.washingtontimes.co...

Citation needed.

Given.

Too bad that totally disagrees with your assertion. You claimed 92% of media supports Democrats. The reality is, from your own goddamn link, 7% of journalists are Republicans, 28% are Democrats, and the vast majority are independent.

It's a fact just a FYI

Your claim: "The media is a propaganda arm for the Democratic party". The facts: "The media" is NOT a monolithic entity. SOME reporters are biased towards Democrats, and SOME reporters are biased towards Republicans. Your own links show this, and agree with the link I posted showing a distribution of biases among media orgs.

Or the reporters who went to John Podesta's house for dinners?

Ooh... spooky. Guess what - I've had dinner with reporters, and I'm not a Republican or a Democrat! Reporters are just humans, and having dinner with someone is not a crime, or proof of bias.

There IS a slight leftward lean among media as a whole, but it is minimal and there are several mainstream (and reputable) media sources with a rightward lean that you can read if you prefer. Instead, Republicans scream "MSM BIAS!"to indiscriminately dismiss any piece of reality that isn't comfortably aligned with their political preferences. It's a war on the press, a war on truth, and a war on the simple idea that facts matter more than opinions. And YOU are defending it.

Citation needed.

Given. You can also find the wapo story on it if you really want.

Naked assertion. You've got nothing whatsoever to back this up.

It's a fact just a FYI

what the hell are you talking about?

You don't know what they're talking about? Remember when she handed off debate questions to Clinton from CNN? Or the reporters who went to John Podesta's house for dinners? You'll note they're registered democrats by the way. It's almost like you've only ever heard half the story...

For the love of both God and Satan, use only Wall Street Journal.
The only word-neutral and cold/scientific report site that I know of on account that its main readership are economists trying to analyze and compare effects of news on the market which require cold and unbiased reporting for accuracy, and also since it's the hub of global journalist unions regardless of their political affiliation who need a pure source before shitting it up with their bias.
If someone can name a few more news sites like Wall Street Journal, please do.
Even Washington Times - Milk: The new symbol of racism in Donald Trump's America and NYT have gone down the shitter with stupid shit like moronism like the "racist milk" articles.

Lawmakers, Lobbyists and the Administration Join Forces

Everything you need to know about the state of the union, right there.

I agree.

https://www.washingtontimes.co...

Bald and golden eagles may be legally killed or injured in the thousands by high-speed turbines (reaching speeds up to 170 miles per hour), under new regulations released Wednesday by the Obama administration. The rules, which affect individual wind-energy companies that plan to operate the technology for up to 30 years, allows up to 4,200 of the birds to perish.

Those evil capitalists just want to have government subsidies to kill endangered species.

Oh, I've brought up the problems of windmills killing birds before and a common reply is the far greater number of birds killed by domestic cats. If your "domestic cat" is hunting bald eagles then I suspect your "domestic cat" is also on the endangered species list.

You mean violence like this

Calling Russia non-democracy is just a rusophobic insult and not a meaningful statement,

America isn't even a democracy, what makes you think Russia is one?

Bill Nye the not to be confused with science guy is advocating a tax on cows. https://www.washingtontimes.co... . Can't make this stuff up. They will try to tax us for exhaling if we let them.

Side from the fact a "consensus" is not science and everyone knows it. Yet people keep believing in the lie.

But beware the danger of moon rocks!

They don't have to be moon rocks

Níggers!!

But beware the danger of moon rocks!

Brianna can be my harsh mistress whenever she wants.

But beware the danger of moon rocks!

They don't have to be moon rocks

But beware the danger of moon rocks!

All political movements tend towards "Near-absolute power for leaders." This is a simple consequence of how having power empowers one to gain more power. And it applies across the board.

Socialist movements need someone to manage the fair distribution of resources...and that someone naturally becomes a power nexus given that responsibility. It's all downhill from there.

Capitalist movements engender wealthy monopolies, and the owners of said monopolies have so much economic power that they wind up controlling the government through various means.

Every gradient in between winds up with similar long-term effects. And of course you have the occasional revolution with noble sentiments about power to the people....which never last.

America is an exemplar of this; in theory the citizens vote and hence have the power, but in practice a conglomerate of wealthy elites make all the important legislative decisions, proof.

Since a school suspended a 2nd grader just for chewing his poptart into the shape of a gun, an absurd decision upheld in court, I can't imagine anything that would confuse the recognition would end up well for the student. It's the world of Zero Tolerance [for common sense].

Climate skeptics more eco-friendly than global-warming alarmists: study

"A study by Cornell and the University of Michigan researchers found that those “highly concerned” about climate change were less likely to engage in recycling and other eco-friendly behaviors than global-warming skeptics."

LOL!

They got a huge tax break instead of an all-but-guaranteed tax hike.

Yeah, actually not. Clinton's plan contained significant cost reductions for people making under $50K/yr. Under trump, we got tax cuts for millionaires and tax bills for the middle class.

Unemployment is way down.

Not for rural whites. In fact, its still so bad for them that Michigan republicans are trying to exempt them from their draconian medicaid work requirements.
Also, those people at that Carrier plant that he "saved?" Yeah, they got fucked.

The stock market is way up.

(A) Doesn't mean squat for majority of people because they don't own stocks.
(B) Rate of growth in the stock market is slower than it was under Obama.
(C) China has stopped buying soybeans. Not just tariffs, full stop, buying em from somewhere else. China is the #2 largest market for US soy and soy is the #2 US crop export.

Denuclearization, peace, and potential reunification in Korea,

Not anything to do with trump. The sanctions only resulted in a ~20% increase in black market currency exchange, showing that it wasn't a big deal for a country that survived the great faminine of the 90s on nothing but Juche. Moon Jae-in is leading trump around by the nose. Though I guess you could say the fact that trump is so easily played by Moon is a point in trump's favor. So sure, promise that gloryhound a nobel prize if that's what it takes to keep him from screwing up everybody else's work.

Tons of sex cults and human trafficking rings have been broken up.

Ah, so now you reveal yourself as one of those RWNJ dumbasses. In fact, its the nothing of the kind. If anything, they've been cracking down on easy targets - adult sex-workers, not trafficking victims. Meanwhile Trump knowingly endorsed an actual pedophile.

Corrupt leaders and former leaders of many countries are actually being brought to justice.

Yeah. Putin. Duterte. Netanyahu MBS They've all been locked up!!! Yay!

The wall is being built.

Lol. He couldn't even get his own republican party to pay for it. Much less mexico.

Next year there will be no unconstitutional personal mandate for health insurance.

Yay! That's already working out so great for republicans.
Never mind how he totally fucked rural whites with empty promises about the opioid epidemic.

Except AM and FM radio are currently doing a lot better than television:
https://www.washingtontimes.co...

AM radio has been pretty steady for a while, and it seems more likely that adding cell antennas to radio towers is just an additional revenue stream.

If AM radio is dying, it is because of the crap that is broadcast on it all day, every day. Right wing political rants, conspiracy theorists, and religious kooks have taken over all the space between the baseball games. ...

Perhaps because that is what most listeners want?
As opposed to NPR which could not stay on the air without government subsidies.

Ever consider that main-stream and 'kook' might not be where you think they are?

In other news, Drew's composite girlfriend was unavailable for comment.

"That hasn't happened since Reagan became president however."

Stop lying.

Here are examples of prison sentences that I easily found , one from during the Trump administration and one from the Obama administration.

http://www.mlive.com/news/bay-...

https://www.washingtontimes.co...

I quickly bored of trying to filter by each individual president, but this is enough to refute the "hasn't happened since Reagan" claim. In fact the turning point was in 1986, or not until 3/4 of Reagans's tenure had elapsed.

How about the leaks that could cost him is license to practice law?

Ty Clevenger filed that accusation last year and nothing has come of it. He's famous for groundless political grandstanding.

Pointing out that somebody else made the same accusation as you, by linking an article that does nothing to justify either of your accusations, is not the same as making an argument.

James Clapper committed blatant perjury - and nothing came of it.

So I guess your argument is the Obama-era senior government officials aren't required to follow the law?

How about the leaks that could cost him is license to practice law?

Ty Clevenger filed that accusation last year and nothing has come of it. He's famous for groundless political grandstanding.

Pointing out that somebody else made the same accusation as you, by linking an article that does nothing to justify either of your accusations, is not the same as making an argument.

How about the leaks that could cost him is license to practice law?

Let's look for more information

The Moonie Times, Zero Hedge, World Nut Daily, Daily Caller, The Blaze, etc, etc, the usual suspects.

What is the basis for this and why are no serious publications reporting on this lawsuit? Because Ty Clevenger's lawsuit has no basis and zero chance of succeeding.

The whole thing is based on an article claiming that 4 out of 7 of Comey's memos had confidential information, and therefore he must have forwarded at least one classified memo to his law-school friend.

But the article doesn't actually cover when the information was deemed classified, it could very well have been classified after the fact in an effort to tar Comey. It also doesn't give any indication whether Comey would have reasonably thought the information to be classified, in fact he explicitly testified that he prepared the memos to be unclassified.

Not to mention the original reporter and only source I found has a history of inaccurate reporting, so we could be missing some crucial context.

How about the leaks that could cost him is license to practice law?

You DO realize that the fallacy of Iron Rule has been replaced with the Golden Rule, right?

He who has the gold makes the rules.

If you're going to attribute these things to the United States, then how can you not attribute them to all voters, which are about 50/50 male/female, of every age above voting, and have sizable minorities of every racial and ethnic background?

Because America is an oligarchy, not a democracy. The military does not work for The People, it works for those who control the government. The "deep state" (which we formerly called the "shadow government") is a real thing, kind of — because America truly is capitalism. Capital controls the means of production. The wealthiest, most connected creeps actually run everything. If enough of the population voted we might be able to change this, but only if it were on the same page.

Media manipulation is used to control how people vote. The education system has been systematically dismantled to produce low-information voters. Both major parties in America want to be able to influence voters with lies, so it doesn't work for either of them if we know what they're talking about. It's like our court system; the only way you can get on a jury is if you prove beyond question that you don't know anything about the case to be tried, because both sides' lawyers are counting on their ability to manipulate the jury to win the case.

Even if the planning was planned and carried out by white males, whom are they working for if not, ultimately, the voters? If the voters don't change anything, does their compliance absolve them of responsibility?

Responsibility, no. Active intent, yes. Most people are not participating in this system with the idea that they are funding imperialism. They think they're buying freedom. Problem is, freedom isn't something you can buy. The People do have a responsibility to prevent "their" government from committing evil acts in their name. We're clearly not doing a good job, but I'm at something of a loss as to what else we can be doing that we're not currently.

She pretty much fit the definition of batshit insane. A vegan and animal rights activist who had no trouble shooting people - who last time I checked, are also animals.

Nothing new there. Orwell wrote about it years ago.

ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL,
BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS.

The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.

Animal Rights: A Dangerous Aspect of Our New Secular Religion

‘Who are you to judge?’

. . . Then in the 1990s, something started to change dramatically in how her students responded to the sobering tale. Rather than being horrified by it, some claimed they were bored by it, while others thought the ending was “neat.”

When Ms. Haugaard pressed them for more of their thoughts, she was appalled to discover that not one student in the class was willing to say the practice of human sacrifice was morally wrong! She describes one interaction with a student, whom she calls Beth:

“‘Are you asking me if I believe in human sacrifice?’ Beth responded thoughtfully, as though seriously considering all aspects of the question. ‘Well, yes,’ I managed to say. ‘Do you think that the author approved or disapproved of this ritual?’

“I was stunned: This was the [young] woman who wrote so passionately of saving the whales, of concern for the rain forests, of her rescue and tender care of a stray dog. ‘I really don’t know,’ said Beth; ‘If it was a religion of long standing, [who are we to judge]?’”

How a Generation Lost Its Common Culture

Tomorrow's menus will include a fine selection of steamed frogs, lightly killed by the most gradual temperature increases.

Keep modding me down, douchebag. This is just to waste your precious modpoints, MORON.
 
By the way, Hillary really does have ties to the KKK.

So, planting a provocateur is illegal now? There goes the Democratic Party...

Reddit has been waging a war against free speech, and against certain demographics, for the sake of political correctness, for many years now.

Merely recounting some of the facts of journalistic ethical missteps with regards to Gamergate was sufficient cause for massive Orwellian Bannings, Shadowbannings, and Mass censorship. They will also do the same across Reddit for terrorist bombings that dare to mention a privileged group that bombed or killed, such as with the London terrorist knifings, or the Orlando Massacre

If you bring up inconvenient facts that are not politically correct, you can expect to receive the same treatment. You can also expect to have the Inquisitors of SRS downvote brigading your small subreddit. SRS is quite open about being against free speech, and actively opposing non-SJW outlooks. SRS receive active admin support, so they are rarely, if ever, punished. If you resist Admin control over a subreddit, your subreddit is removed.

Furthermore, there is a massive conspiracy of leftist moderators that, in cahoots with the Administrators of Reddit, actively attempt to squelch and censor the views of the Right, and Libertarians. This is not unlike the situation with Wikipedia, and the moderation wars that have occurred there, or the regular invasion of SJW material here, into Slashdot.

Why is this?

Politically Correct speech stands in direct opposition to Free Speech.
The privatization of the Commons
Corporate attempts to push Feel Good communication codes everywhere, to sell More Advertising.
Demonization of Men (White & Asian mainly), like Google
Active attempts to silence political opposition outside the Silicon Valley Worldview

'Soylent' Dawkins? Atheist mulls 'taboo against cannibalism' ending as lab-grown meat improves

"What if human meat is grown? Could we overcome our taboo against cannibalism?"
- @RichardDawkins - 6:15 AM - 3 Mar 2018

https://twitter.com/RichardDaw...
https://archive.fo/kSmgi

"Lab-grown 'clean' meat could be on sale by end of 2018, says producer"
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

"'Soylent' Dawkins? Atheist mulls 'taboo against cannibalism' ending as lab-grown meat improves"
https://www.washingtontimes.co...

and:

https://www.nationalreview.com...

'Soylent' Dawkins? Atheist mulls 'taboo against cannibalism' ending as lab-grown meat improves

"What if human meat is grown? Could we overcome our taboo against cannibalism?"
- @RichardDawkins - 6:15 AM - 3 Mar 2018

https://twitter.com/RichardDaw...
https://archive.fo/kSmgi

"Lab-grown 'clean' meat could be on sale by end of 2018, says producer"
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

"'Soylent' Dawkins? Atheist mulls 'taboo against cannibalism' ending as lab-grown meat improves"
https://www.washingtontimes.co...

and:

https://www.nationalreview.com...

but not Mexico would be hypocritical. Mexican citizens cast a significant number of votes in the election - illegally - which to me is a bigger deal than doing some advertising.

You're going to get modded down into oblivion, but here's a little evidence to support your argument.

The majority of people blame Government for the FL shooting.

And in turn, the republicant government, their chief, and NRA blame FBI?

The majority of people blame Government for the FL shooting.

https://www.washingtontimes.co...

For reasons yet to be explained, she chose to put her campaign into the hands of a youngish technocrat, appropriately named Mook, whose faith lay in "data analytics," and whose computer-generated analyses apparently helped convince her that her victory depended on appealing primarily to several distinct constituencies - women, blacks, academics and gender-challenged people.

As for the deplorables, those white working men and women once thought of by Democrats as the heart and sinew of their party, they could be taken for granted; and despite warnings from seasoned politicians like her husband, who read the volatile national political mood, they were.

There's a horrible plausibility to this.

Give it up; the entire entertainment industry is political now. Celebrities get harassed when they *don't* denounce Trump, movie writers get harassed when they *don't* have every permutation of gender/race/religious identity represented on-screen...

With the Chinese loyally turning every flaming turd of a movie ever released into a multi-hundred-million dollar profit and liberals queuing up to throw money and eyeballs at anyone that can reassure them of their smug righteousness on a nightly basis, they have no reason to worry much about profits anymore and have decided to use their platform to browbeat the wrongthinkers into submission with endless condescending hectoring until everyone votes democrat like good little citizens.

Because that worked so well for them in 2016.

Well, by the text of the Code of Conduct, most SJWs will be immediately banned.

Well that's the funny thing isn't it. You'd think so, but it doesn't happen. It's kinda like the whole #metoo thing, except if you're not male and happen to be engaging in the same behavior. Those rules don't apply. Suddenly, the benefit of the doubt applies. You don't get railroaded out. There's no giant mass-media stories about it, even though you're in a position of power.

We already do, we invented what the Russians did, it is called a Color Revolution and we just meddle in other countries elections right out in the open. https://www.washingtontimes.co...

The US spending 350k interfering in Israel makes these Russia indindiments truly laughable. https://www.washingtontimes.co...

They are laughable considering Obama conspired against Netanyahu in Israel and spent 350,000 https://www.washingtontimes.co...

That is great the US spent 350,000 to interfering in Israel's elections and the CIA FUCKING invented a Color Revolution. The US is NUMBER ONE in interfering in elections in other countries and we are crying about a few Russian trolls. https://www.washingtontimes.co...

tl;dr "When judges make rulings I agree with they are impartially ruling based solely on law. When they make rulings I disagree with they are allowing their political biases to get in the way. Here are some links to an Indian news site(?), a progressive legal organisation, the left wing Vox, usnews, a left wing British newspaper, a left wing rant from Esquire and the left wing Daily Kos which I'll add in randomly to make my post look well cited"

By the way it's pretty clear what Washington thought about homosexuality

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

In March 1778, Lieut. Enslin was brought to trial before a court-martial. According to General Washington's report: "...Lieutt. Enslin of Colo. Malcolm's Regiment tried for attempting to commit sodomy ..." Washington's secretary continues to describe the results of the trial: "His Excellency the Commander in Chief approves the sentence and with Abhorrence & Detestation of such Infamous Crimes orders Lieut. Enslin to be drummed out of Camp tomorrow morning...."

Oddly enough I read up on the Founder's views on abortion and they're rather nuanced

https://americancreation.blogs...

Mind you look at this

A different window into colonial attitudes toward abortion can be found in Corenlia Hughes Dayton's "Taking the Trade: Abortion and Gender Relations in an Eighteenth Century New England Village." In her 1991 monograph which appeared in the William and Mary Quarterly, Dayton examined a case from 1742 that occurred in the village of Pomfret, Connecticut, where 19-year-old Sarah Grosvenor died in a bungled abortion urged on her by her 27-year-old lover Amasa Sessions. Magistrates filed charges against both Sessions and the "doctor of physick" who mangled the operation, but Dayton points out the legal complaints were not for performing the abortion as such (which was legal) but for killing the mother. The whole episode was surrounded with a hush of secrecy, in an era when "fornication" was not only illegal but culturally taboo. Abortion, in the colonial context, carried a stigma of shame not because it ended the life of a fetus but because it was associated with illicit intercourse-helping to explain the outrage of Franklin's two characters Celia Shortface and Martha Careful when their private remedies for ending a pregnancy receive a public airing.

I think it's clear that the modern left and the people who founded America had very different views - fornication i.e. sex outside marriage was illegal back then. Something which would hardly endear them to the Pussy Hat wearers. On the other hand abortion was legal up to the fourth month of pregnancy - i.e. 17 weeks or so. Interestingly that's not that much different to the current UK limit

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

The UK limit is 24 weeks. Of course Hillary has said 'the unborn person has no constitutional rights'

https://www.washingtontimes.co...

Even if you're uneasy about a ban on abortion that seems like an extreme position. I thought the Democrats had given up on the idea that some persons don't have rights after slavery was abolished...

It already has backfired, not in the way you're describing but there's been one female Congressional candidate that was forced out by the DNC because a company she worked for settled a sexual discrimination lawsuit with one of her ex-employees without her input.

https://www.washingtontimes.co...

Remember when we used to be a first world country in the US, and poured resources into science and engineering and education so that we wouldn't fall behind the Commies? Today it seems like our competition is Syria, and as long as we're doing better than Syria that we don't need to work harder to be better.

This is like Biff from Back To The Future is president, and he gives noogies to any nerdy scientist he runs across.

Scientists like Solyndra, who stole more than $500 million from the last administration? https://m.washingtontimes.com/...

"Much of this techlash is misguided."

Lets list some top shelf, recent bad things happening at the big tech giants:
- Google is suppressing relevant links in your search results that don't agree with their world view and/or whatever country you are searching from. If a conservative organization that controlled 90% of all search was doing this, it would be wall to wall media coverage, but the truth is Google is warping reality, rather than using straight relevancy to your search terms, now they are also deciding what is relevant.

Google must be regulated as a common carrier to protect the free exchange of ideas (a ubiquitous search engine is the very definition of a common carrier), and only a very narrow list should be censorable, and that list must be defined by the government with federal oversight and transparency and accountability to the people, not some unaccountable corporation. For example, sites inciting actual unjustified violence (in their content, not in some random user generated comment), sites promoting violent jihad, sites promoting harming children, etc.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articl...
https://www.usnews.com/opinion...
https://www.reddit.com/r/googl...

- Google and Facebook combined control 60% of all advertising revenue on the web, and routinely block content from receiving revenue if they don't agree with it (conservative video blogs on Youtube for example.) No other entity has more than 5% market share of online advertising. http://fortune.com/2017/07/28/...
- Google recently fired an employee who was asked for input on their internal hiring policies. When he highlighted a number of reasonable, demonstrable facts that contradict Google's diversity initiatives, one of his upper level managers leaked his memo to the press and he was subsequently fired (they are now facing a massive class action lawsuit, and more and more stories of the fascist intolerant alt left behavior at Google are coming out.) (no citation needed, well documented on slashdot.)
- Facebook first facilitated Russian (and likely Chinese and others) meddling by allowing false advertising stories to run during the election, then they tried to implement news censors, the vast majority of which were targeted against conservative sites, to the point that there was massive backlash and they got hauled in front of congress to explain WTF they were doing. They utilized blatantly biased censors as well as sites like politifact (which has very little facts beyond the actual name, and is a demonstrated shill for the alt left and not some non-partisan group) and the ADL (also an alt left hit squad group with zero credibility to anyone who has been paying attention).
https://gizmodo.com/former-fac...
https://www.washingtontimes.co...
Some concrete examples of conservative banning: http://www.foxnews.com/tech/20...

- Twitter has been caught red handed gleefully describing how they shadow ban people for expressing political views with which they disagree, rather than advocating anything objectively wrong. The political bans have been 90% right leaning people. Those on the left who have been banned have been advocating actual violence, and often associated with the terrorist group Antifa.