Slashdot Mirror

During the runup to the second Gulf War there was a story circulating about how The Empire was really the good guys and the Rebel Alliance was just a bunch of terrorists. The sad part was, in the logic of the time it was being sold by many as a serious argument. Not even a joke. Here's a link to it from 2002 in The Weekly Standard

So yeah, this has already happened.

The Case for the Empire
Are the "Rebels" in the Star Wars universe terrorists?
10 Reasons The Galactic Empire Wasn’t As Bad As Everyone Thinks
Who were the bad guys in Star Wars' original trilogy?
Your Terrorists Are Our Freedom Fighters (Warning: TVTropes link)

Have to start somewhere:DC Considers Allowing Non-Citizens to Vote

Case closed? Hardly. The CRU emails reveal internal doubts about this entire enterprise both before and after the hockey stick made its debut. In a 1996 email to a large number of scientists in the CRU circle, Tom Wigley, a top climatologist working at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado, cautioned: "I support the continued collection of such data, but I am disturbed by how some people in the paleo community try to oversell their product." Mann and his colleagues made use of some of the CRU data, but some of the CRU scientists weren't comfortable with the way Mann represented it and also seemed to find Mann more than a bit insufferable.

CRU scientist Keith Briffa, whose work on tree rings in Siberia has been subject to its own controversies, emailed Edward Cook of Columbia University: "I am sick to death of Mann stating his reconstruction represents the tropical area just because it contains a few (poorly temperature representative) tropical series," adding that he was tired of "the increasing trend of self-opinionated verbiage [Mann] has produced over the last few years ... and (better say no more)."

Cook replied: "I agree with you. We both know the probable flaws in Mike's recon[struction], particularly as it relates to the tropical stuff. Your response is also why I chose not to read the published version of his letter. It would be too aggravating. ... It is puzzling to me that a guy as bright as Mike would be so unwilling to evaluate his own work a bit more objectively."

In yet another revealing email, Cook told Briffa: "Of course [Bradley] and other members of the MBH [Mann, Bradley, Hughes] camp have a fundamental dislike for the very concept of the MWP, so I tend to view their evaluations as starting out from a somewhat biased perspective, i.e. the cup is not only 'half-empty'; it is demonstrably 'broken'. I come more from the 'cup half-full' camp when it comes to the MWP, maybe yes, maybe no, but it is too early to say what it is."

In another email to Briffa, Cook complains about Bradley, too: "His air of papal infallibility is really quite nauseating at times."

Even as the IPCC was picking up Mann's hockey stick with enthusiasm, Briffa sent Mann a note of caution about "the possibility of expressing an impression of more consensus than might actually exist. I suppose the earlier talk implying that we should not 'muddy the waters' by including contradictory evidence worried me. IPCC is supposed to represent consensus but also areas of uncertainty in the evidence." Briffa had previously dissented from the hockey stick reconstruction in a 1999 email to Mann and Phil Jones: "I believe that the recent warmth was probably matched about 1000 years ago." Even Malcolm Hughes, one of the original hockey stick coauthors, privately expressed reservations about overreliance on their invention, writing to Cook, Mann and others in 2002:

All of our attempts, so far, to estimate hemisphere-scale temperatures for the period around 1000 years ago are based on far fewer data than any of us would like. None of the datasets used so far has anything like the geographical distribution that experience with recent centuries indicates we need, and no one has yet found a convincing way of validating the lower-frequency components of them against independent data. As Ed [Cook] wrote, in the tree-ring records that form the backbone of most of the published estimates, the problem of poor replication near the beginnin

Not actually true. Two of her aides, Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills, used clintonemail.com addresses too. So any communications between the three of them are potentially lost.

I'm too lazy right now to find an unbiased source of the info but I originally heard it on NPR yesterday. First Google search lands here. The latest NYT articles definitely mention Abedin having a clintonemail account.

Emails between Abedin, Clinton and the wife of the Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi apparently fell into the memory hole. Not really interested in the Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy chatter but this was backdoor diplomacy that should have had some sort of record, even if it ended up classified.

And choice when it comes to our sugar, and that Joey Naylor, that is the definition of liberty.

I wish business and government would not collude to deny me the right to choose what I want to buy, e.g., sugar subsidies, tobacco subsidies, ObamaCare subsidies, etc.

And the Mexicans, too! They just announced in the Senate that an illegal alien can come to America, claim they have 4 children in a foreign land (no proof needed!) and collect Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) for FOUR BACKDATED YEARS AT ONCE for a total of $24,000 and $6,000 every year thereafter!!!

Ever since Obama's amnesty dictatorial push late last year!
http://www.weeklystandard.com/...

Before You Ask for a citation.

You missed that whenever the plan is about sharing information, it doesn't mean the role of each organization involved is to grab the information. The sharing of the information amongst the interested parties implies third parties which will not have a right to look at the information itself but still have a role to make the plan a reality. http://www.weeklystandard.com/...!

The summary is written to let people think all these organization will have full access to health records of everyone in USA. That is simply not true and not what the article says.

"This week, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced the release of the Federal Health IT Strategic Plan 2015-2020, which details the efforts of some 35 departments and agencies of the federal government and their roles in the plan to "advance the collection, sharing, and use of electronic health information to improve health care, individual and community health, and research."

You don't seem to have a good source for what contemporary American conservativsm is concerned with. Try these instead:

Weekly Standard
National Review

Actually it's about equality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... http://www.now.org/nnt/03-97/f... http://www.firstpost.com/india... http://www.hindustantimes.com/... http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/... http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/... http://www.weeklystandard.com/... http://douchebagdork.tumblr.co... http://www.ageofconsent.com/co... http://studentactivism.net/201... http://i.imgur.com/Vac0UOk.jpg http://i.imgur.com/aob5k.jpg http://www.law.fsu.edu/journal... http://www.genderratic.net/?ta... http://www.aifs.gov.au/acssa/d... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... http://www.theguardian.com/com... http://www.saveservices.org/pd... http://www.law.fsu.edu/journal... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... http://jezebel.com/294383/have... http://anescapedconviction.tum... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... http://news.nationalpost.com/2... https://imgur.com/zoR6eQ0 https://twitter.com/CodeusaSof... https://twitter.com/FabioFacch... https://twitter.com/DanielleGi... https://twitter.com/ForemanEri... http://theflounce.com/harassme...

Literally 5 seconds to search. sigh

What’s Wrong With “After-Birth Abortion”?

Fourth Trimester Abortion: Are You Serious? by Dr. Robert M. Myers, President, Toccoa Falls College

Video: Planned Parenthood Official Argues for Right to Post-Birth Abortion

You and Joe Biden ought to check your calendars; it's been the 21st century for well over a decade now.

Also, real libraries have old and out-of-print books, rare books, maps, art collections, local publications and artifacts, and plenty of things that are highly unlikely ever to be digitized, or which history -- and historians! -- demand be kept for the public good. In this information age, we need librarians more than ever. Get rid of libraries and you scrap civilization itself.

That's speculation, not evidence. I said evidence.

There's no such thing as evidence regarding the future. When the future becomes the present, we can measure it. Until then, we can only predict. Absolutely everyone knows this.

So in fact, the feedback could be greater than the models predict, since (you baselessly allege) the model predictions are uncertain.

Thanks for validating the need for urgent action.

If the models underestimate the feedback, then, short of a holocaust (which I presume you aren't openly advocating) there's no significant action anyone could take. We could do insignificant things for the sake of "doing something", but the benefits would be tiny, even if the costs were huge.

If the models are right, for example, Germany's pioneering $110 Billion energy program will delay the expected temperature increase in the year 2100 by 37 hours.

The relative stability of the climate, despite numerous past disruptions, argues against strong positive feedback.

Relatively stability compared to what? Other versions of the earth?

Compared to a climate that gets disrupted a little by some warming event or some additional carbon in the atmosphere, then the strong positive feedback makes it warmer and warmer and warmer until it's too hot to live. If this had happened, we wouldn't be here to talk about it. The Earth's climate is more stable, relatively, than this.

If the feedback were mildly negative instead of strongly positive, the climate would tend toward temperatures within a range -- like the climate we have here on Earth. Disruptions would raise or lower the temperature sometimes, but temperatures would stabilize.

If there were strong positive feedback, past disruptions would have caused the climate to get apocalyptically hot

No it wouldn't.

Where's your evidence?

Apparently the IRS was taken over by some political factions that wanted to limit speech... and when they got caught at it the whole IRS is now trying to cover it up.

Exactly. Lois Lerner also went after the Christian Coalition when she was at the FEC.

Something to keep in mind is that different people play by different rules, and not everyone that is claimed to be "innocent" is in fact innocent and/or truthful.

Al Qaeda Manual Drives Detainee Behavior at Guantanamo Bay

The closing chapter teaches al Qaeda operatives how to operate in a prison or detention center. It directs detainees to "insist on proving that torture was inflicted" and to "complain of mistreatment while in prison." ...

Butler said the Manchester document includes "a large section which teaches al Qaeda operatives counterinterrogation techniques: how to lie, how to minimize your role."

The document, he said, has surfaced in various locations, including Afghanistan.

More Former Guantanamo Bay Detainees Return To Terrorism

Of the 603 former detainees tracked by US intelligence services, a total of 100 have now been confirmed as reengaging in "terrorism" or "insurgent" activities, while another 74 are suspected of reengaging. This brings the total rate of recidivism to nearly 29 percent, up from 28 percent as of the last report six months ago.

I would also like to know what was claimed as a "favorable references to the KUBARK manual" since electric shock or other forms of torture would not be acceptable methods of interrogation in a criminal investigation, and would seem to have little relevance.

As to another point, gathering information for intelligence is to some degree a separate question from gathering evidence for a criminal prosecution. I expect that is where the "clean teams" comment came in.

There was however at least one no bid contract awarded --- it went to a local company: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/avoid-severe-consequences-delays-hhs-awards-no-bid-contracts-marketplaces_754032.html

It's being contested though: http://www.gao.gov/products/D04539

Or bring it into compliance with the GPLv2 or BSD3 licenses.

So in short you have no actual familiarity with its content. Maybe you could critique this article?

Obamacare Website Violates Licensing Agreement for Copyrighted Software

Or maybe this one at National Review?

Europe Tries Welfare Reform

Guessing is generally a poor substitute for knowledge, but I respect the fact that you stated that. I suggest you do a little outside reading. It could be dangerous though, it might broaden your horizons.

Bigger question is "When will the outrage begin on /. over healthcare.gov is violating a (FOSS) software license?": http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obamacare-website-violates-licensing-agreement-copyrighted-software_763666.html

It's money that probably wouldn't have been spent at all if al Qaida wouldn't have attacked the US. And once again, compared to the defense budget it is minor. If it makes you feel any better the defense budget is dwarfed by social welfare spending (Social Security, Welfare, Medicare, Medicaid).

As to waste and crumbling bridges, there is another culprit at least as large.

No Country for Burly Men - How feminist groups skewed the Obama stimulus plan towards women's jobs.

I have a dream, that one day all the little factual posts on Slashdot will not be marked troll because of the color of the moderators politics.

Charge of racism offensive to Obamacare critics

Louisiana state Sen. Karen Carter Peterson last week took to the chamber’s floor to declare opponents of President Barack Obama’s “signature legislative achievement” are motivated by race.

“I have talked to so many members both in the House and the Senate, and you know what? You ready? You ready? What it comes down to? It’s not about how many federal dollars we can receive, it’s not about that. You ready? It’s about race,” Peterson said. “I know nobody wants to talk about that. It’s about the race of this African-American president.”

After Calling Obamacare Critics Racist, LA Legislator Says 'I Didn't Call Anyone a Racist'

Mainstream Scream: Martin Bashir accuses Obama scandal critics of racism

Are Obama's critics racist? Jimmy Carter thinks so

A Modern Timeline of Liberals Claiming That Opposition to Obama = Racism

There is plenty more that could be posted on this topic.

If, as Illiberals outside and inside /. are explaining, the government must not only declare various facilities — like monuments and parks — closed, but actively enforce the closures of not just the federal facilities themselves, but also of anything remotely connected (such as private motels and other concessions located on Federal land), why should any facility, that is required to be actively supervised by Federal employees remain open?

And I don't mean just the power plants — no meat should be sold, because Department of Agriculture can't inspect it, for example...

Do I want it to happen? No... But, for me to accept the infamous closures of parks and memorials (which always remained open during all previous shutdowns) as anything other than capricious, it must happen.

It's the Republican Representatives that refuse to bring the budget bills to a vote.

Nonsense. Congress — where Republicans hold a majority — passed the budget bill weeks ago. Senate and President simply don't like it and would rather have the show-down, than accept the will of the people. Yes, the will of the people — not just the RethugliKKKans in Congress, but the clear majority of citizenry want to be rid of the program, that the Republican-passed bill would not fund...

And I've seen nothing that indicates it was Obama that shut down everything.

What exactly to shut-down and how to enforce it is up to the Administration. The memorials, for example, were never closed — not during any of the shut-downs we already had. That the President made sure, such places are closed — despite it costing more to enforce the closures, than to simply leave them running — is clear evidence of viciousness.

But, wait, some can still get to enter the National Mall — and even hold a rally... Must be nice to be on the President's good side... And though ordinary federal employees are warned, working would be a "federal offense", the Administration is Ok with federal officers picking up trash left by the rally.

Such selective enforcement of its own rules by the Administration is yet another evidence, it is deliberately trying to make things as painful as possible for the ordinary citizens — in the hope, that would put pressure on the opposition...

It is interesting to compare the treatment of the WW2 memorial versus the WW1 memorial.

WWII Memorial Barricade Wired Shut

Maybe because there is a perfectly good one that is already paid for? It is only being blocked as a political statement.

I think you do bring up a good point though - given that the federal government is becoming so ripe for abuse, its power in various areas should be diminished. This sort of arbitrary action just underscores that.

With some thorough research, I have discovered that yes, the news DIDN'T report that, only fundamentalist blogs whose next story was shape shifting reptilians creating the Obamacare Death Panels were reporting anything of the sort.

I'm sure you think you are doing thourough research. And in your fantasy land, it might be as good as it gets. In the real world, we have this thing called the internet and search engines. Now I will admit that my wording was slightly off as I was posting from my phone about stories piped to me by the news app on the phone and trying to do it from memory and the confusion could be your inability to intelligently discern the differences between what was reported, the phrasing I used, and what you want to think. Of course posting anonymously like that, I can only assume you were trying to deliberately mislead like Baghdad Bob was doing during the beginning of the Iraq war.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303492504579113781436540284.html

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/senior-admin-official-we-are-winningit-doesnt-really-matter-us-when-shutdown-ends_759185.html?nopager=1

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/3/pruden-the-cheap-tricks-of-the-game/

BTW, whether you want to believe it or not, those are news sites. Just because they don't spout the narrative doesn't make them any less.

Whatever you think of Obamacare, it was passed into law by a majority of both houses and the president's signature, just like the Constitution requires. Now the house R's, instead of trying to repeal the law, are instituting a tyranny of the minority.

Obamacare was passed on a straight party line vote by the Democrats. They had the majority of both houses of Congress at the time, and even then it took all manner of pork bribes to a few, as well as various threats and party discipline, to get it passed by legislative hook or crook. That is a big part of the reason that the law creating Obamacare has had so many screwed up provisions - nobody had time to read it, and they scraped together whatever bill they could get passed with the unusual maneuvers that they resorted to in the face of wide opposition. Now the Republicans have the majority in the House. You can't institute a "tyranny of the minority" if you are the majority party, which the Republicans are. The current Congress isn't bound by the decisions of a previous Congress, they can revisit whatever they choose to. The Democrats are doing it, and so are the Republicans.

Schumer: Democrats Won't Accept a Clean C.R. through 2014
Democrats Chose the Shutdown - And Republicans are within their legal and constitutional rights to act as they have

You're probably forgetting a little history, and a bit of the Constitution.

When Tip Did It - Tip O’Neill presided over two-thirds of the government shutdowns since 1976
Blame the Shutdown on James Madison - Gridlock is a feature, not a bug, of our system of separated powers
The Origins of the Origination Clause - The House’s power of the purse includes spending bills

I expect that you approved of Tip O’Neill's maneuvering.

Happy to reply to you, AC to AC. You should probably learn the actual budget process as you've got it wrong.

A Guide to the federal budget process

You're also mistaken about who owns what in regard to the shutdown. I'm sure you've read plenty of opinion in line with your views, want to try some from another perspective?

Democrats Chose the Shutdown
The Intransigents
Blame the Shutdown on James Madison
The Origins of the Origination Clause
When Tip Did It

Schumer: Democrats Won't Accept a Clean C.R. through 2014
Senior Admin. Official: 'We Are Winning...It Doesn't Really Matter to Us' When Shutdown Ends
Schumer: No Funding for Veterans and NIH 'Because We Have a Tea Party'
Reid: Senate Democrats Won't Fund Programs for Kids with Cancer Until the Entire Government Is Funded

Happy to reply to you, AC to AC. You should probably learn the actual budget process as you've got it wrong.

A Guide to the federal budget process

You're also mistaken about who owns what in regard to the shutdown. I'm sure you've read plenty of opinion in line with your views, want to try some from another perspective?

Democrats Chose the Shutdown
The Intransigents
Blame the Shutdown on James Madison
The Origins of the Origination Clause
When Tip Did It

Schumer: Democrats Won't Accept a Clean C.R. through 2014
Senior Admin. Official: 'We Are Winning...It Doesn't Really Matter to Us' When Shutdown Ends
Schumer: No Funding for Veterans and NIH 'Because We Have a Tea Party'
Reid: Senate Democrats Won't Fund Programs for Kids with Cancer Until the Entire Government Is Funded

Happy to reply to you, AC to AC. You should probably learn the actual budget process as you've got it wrong.

A Guide to the federal budget process

You're also mistaken about who owns what in regard to the shutdown. I'm sure you've read plenty of opinion in line with your views, want to try some from another perspective?

Democrats Chose the Shutdown
The Intransigents
Blame the Shutdown on James Madison
The Origins of the Origination Clause
When Tip Did It

Schumer: Democrats Won't Accept a Clean C.R. through 2014
Senior Admin. Official: 'We Are Winning...It Doesn't Really Matter to Us' When Shutdown Ends
Schumer: No Funding for Veterans and NIH 'Because We Have a Tea Party'
Reid: Senate Democrats Won't Fund Programs for Kids with Cancer Until the Entire Government Is Funded

Happy to reply to you, AC to AC. You should probably learn the actual budget process as you've got it wrong.

A Guide to the federal budget process

You're also mistaken about who owns what in regard to the shutdown. I'm sure you've read plenty of opinion in line with your views, want to try some from another perspective?

Democrats Chose the Shutdown
The Intransigents
Blame the Shutdown on James Madison
The Origins of the Origination Clause
When Tip Did It

Schumer: Democrats Won't Accept a Clean C.R. through 2014
Senior Admin. Official: 'We Are Winning...It Doesn't Really Matter to Us' When Shutdown Ends
Schumer: No Funding for Veterans and NIH 'Because We Have a Tea Party'
Reid: Senate Democrats Won't Fund Programs for Kids with Cancer Until the Entire Government Is Funded

I would gladly pay far more in taxes if we had a functional safety net comparable to other first-world nations.

That's not what you get when you pay more taxes - you just get poorer and the tax collectors and thousands of their friends get richer.

Nobody is suggesting that people "stand up" for the rights of pedophiles and drug dealers to be pedophiles and drug dealers.

Actually yes there are, not only in advocacy, but also in various legal and legislative fights. There are people that post such advocacy on Slashdot with some regularity.

It is the right against unreasonable search and seizure, and lets not forget evidence planting.

That should apply in any case. There will obviously be debates about what constitutes "unreasonable."

Your rationalization (it isn't a rationale, it's a rationalization) is that the people are guilty and so there is therefore no reason to follow due process to determine their guilt.

No, I think that due process must be followed.

You should learn to see. You should also learn basic civics.

I might suggest the same to you, as well as to become better informed.

"Pedophilia Chic" Reconsidered

I did not say courts only hear cases for guilty people, I said that if you're innocent, then the "damned if you do, damned if you don't" quandary does not apply, because you can truthfully say you're innocent.

I've seen the "Don't Talk to the Police" video, but the law professor makes a few logical errors that undercut his argument. For example he says that in every case where the suspect ends up going to trial, their lawyer ends up wishing that the suspect had not talked to the police when they were arrested. The two errors here are: (1) His sample is excluding people who talked to the police and ended up not getting subsequently arrested. (The cop who speaks after Professor Duane says that there are obviously cases where the police talk to people and do not end up arresting them.) And (2) his sample includes people who are guilty, who got tripped up by their own words; Professor Duane says those people would have been better off not talking to the police, which is obviously true, but would society be better off if the guilty people hadn't been caught?

A good rebuttal to his argument can be found here:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/08/white_lawyer_says_dont_talk_to.asp

Besides, he's obviously not literally telling the truth when he says he will "never, ever" talk to the police -- what if his house got broken into? Hey, he had to talk to that cop to get him to appear in the video, didn't he? So if he didn't mean it literally, then what did he mean? One problem with staking out an extreme position is that if your own description of your position can't possibly be literally true, people are left guessing as to what version of your extreme position you actually do believe in. I assume he means that he would never talk to the police if the police approached him to gather information about a crime. But again, do you think that's literally true? What if the cops wanted to ask him about a case where one of his own family members had been assaulted? OK, maybe in that case, if it would help catch the perp -- but not if the victim was someone outside his family? Their protection isn't important enough for him to break his "Don't talk to cops" rule?

The sad thing is that the President has already declared it his right to initiate the war unilaterally and he has plenty of cheerleaders, including in the supposed opposition party, who will support action even without Congressional approval.

Look at who signed this.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/experts-obama-here-what-do-syria_751267.html

The same old bunch of neocon bastards that lied us into Iraq as far back as the "Open Letter to Bill Clinton back in 1998.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm
http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm

And really, read the rest of the PNAC site.

PNAC morphed into the Foreign Policy Initiative

http://www.foreignpolicyi.org/about/staff
http://www.foreignpolicyi.org/about

Even during Mitt Romney's candidacy Mittens had a fucking wb page *titled* "new american century* with much of the above philosophy basically cut-and-pasted. Which shouldn't be surprising since his foreign policy "brain trust" consisted of FPI bastards. Up to and including Dan Senor (FPI and PNAC alum) on Meet The Press saying that we should bomb Iran back then.

Read. It's not conspiracy theory when it's from their own mouths.

I wouldn't put it past these bastards to hire someone to detonate a sarin bomb in Damascus to gin up an excuse for an invasion. And now they're wondering what the fuck to do now that the President just said "Well, we should have Congress' input on this."

Fuck these guys for wanting to get us involved in another war where there is no winning, just more death.

--
BMO

in case anyone was doubting you: https://www.weeklystandard.com/keyword/Senate-Elevator-Operator

and yes, the jobs are in conventional modern elevators that are fully automatic other than the press of a button

Could we get some winger trolls that are a little less willfully ignorant please?

Back at you, Obamabot.

1. Someone walking by and recording a conversation with a handheld device isn't "bugging", it's "eavesdropping". No device left in the room? Then it's not bugged.

Yet Curtis Morrison admitted bugging the McConnell office.

2. Obama is responsible for the actions of every democrat in the country now? In that case, which republican is responsible for James O'Keefe's actual attempt to bug a senator's office?

He's exactly as responsible as Nixon was for G. Gordon Libby's actions.

You do know that democratic groups were not just given equal scrutiny by the IRS, but that the only group to be denied tax-exempt status was a democratic group?

That's pretty disingenuous to delay, repeat continually more and more probing questions over the course of up to 3 years in some cases, and then claim "but none were denied. Yea, technically true, I guess. I don't know what denial you're referring to (probably an Occupy group - anything populist is viewed a threat to the statists in charge), site if you have it. But I do know that OFA got their tax-exempt status quickly and without a hitch, in spite of being "politically inclined", which was exactly the excuse stated for targeting the Tea Party / Liberty groups.

And this all happened under a Bush appointee to the IRS?

I don't think W appointees are any more ethical than Obama appointees. At best, maybe some of them were savvy enough to hide it better.

As for the EPA, you mean the agency where the Obama Administration had to be taken to court to actual enforce EPA regulations rather than giving industry a free pass? That EPA?

There are plenty of favored industries under the Obama Administration, probably just as many as there were under Bush, but most were different companies (other than some banks and Wall Streeters). So that's not surprising. But we were talking about using agencies for targeting political enemies, not providing favors. Stuff like this.

You mean Ford ended the war.

As Vice President? You'll have to explain that, or admit you're wrong. The United States officially ended its military involvement in Vietnam on March 29, 1973, and Nixon didn't resign until August 9, 1974.

The Authorization for Use of Military Force passed by the US Congress after 9/11 designates the enemy for the conflict. It is well settled law in the US that such an authorization is legally equivalent to a declaration of war. Al Qaida made their intentions clear in 1996 with Bin Laden's Fatwa which is a declaration of war in their culture.

There are a lot of misconceptions about Guantánamo Bay. This is a couple of years old, and doesn't reflect the most current controversies. It's a big topic, and I'm not going to get into all of it right now. One thing I would say to keep in mind is that you can disagree with what the administration says, or does, but remember that al Qaida trains its members to lie about their living conditions, and many of them are highly dangerous prisoners that regularly assault the guards. The training to lie is documented in captured training materials.

The Real Gitmo

I think what you are saying hints at something we should all be able to come together on in agreement, whether you are on the left, right, or center:

Never, ever listen to Joe Biden. - Biden Advises Gun Owners to Act Illegally

three fifths of all other Persons

That was a provision to weaken the institution of slavery, which was established in the southern colonies prior to the formation of the United States, not a comment on the humanity of the slaves.

Had the slaves been counted fully it would have meant more representatives for southern states to vote in Congress. Had they not been counted at all, the southern states might not have ratified the constitution. Like many things in the constitution it was a compromise, but it ultimately served its purpose.

Besides which, I trust you heard that the abolitionist party in the US, the Republicans, was eventually able to get a president elected who then freed the slaves.

SLAVERY AND THE FOUNDERS

And when the IRS wants 10% more each year just because, and without respect to your income, they will soon run you into bankruptcy, not because you screwed up your taxes.

Same thing here. Emissions of X is legal now, but will soon be illegal. If they manage to reduce it to meet the new standards, they will ratchet it down again until it is not economically feasible to operate.

HE FUCKING SAID THIS IN 2008

I'm saddened to read of your plight. Although the US does have its share of problems, it is still a great country with much to offer, even if we may soon be passing the easy road for addressing some of its issues. Something like 80,000,000 people visit the US each year, and many immigrate to the US. Some people are desperate to reach the United States, willing to risk death. And it is very likely you are too far away from Europe to see its many problems, at least some of which are going to get worse in the years ahead due to massive demographic changes and financial problems. One recent example.

Although it is possible that you have some sort of medical condition that results in your unhappiness, it is very likely that your values play a part. I'm going to go out on a limb - a small one - and guess that you are left of center, maybe by a long ways. There are aspects of values of the left that add to personal unhappiness. After all, it is hard to be happy about a country if you misunderstand it and its values, believing it to be toxically racist, and militaristic, and having many other distorted, exaggerated, or imagined faults. That means seeing more clearly, not putting on rose colored glasses. Just one example: If the military industrial complex is so powerful, why has its slice of the fiscal piet fallen so much over the years?

Perhaps you would consider widening your exploration of the world of ideas. One of the odd things of life in America is that more people than you might suppose have many conservative values, but significant parts of the culture tell you that good people are on the left, so people misidentify themselves.

You might try listening to this gentleman's radio program (The Dennis Prager Show), and maybe read some of his writing.

Why Conservatives Are Happier Than Liberals

He tends to be thoughtful and explores ideas and values. He also has a weekly hour of his program devoted to happiness, called "The Happiness Hour." Catchy name. ;) It's the mid hour of his program on Fridays last I recall. He also wrote a book: Happiness Is a Serious Problem: A Human Nature Repair Manual

Dr. William Bennet is another thoughtful commentator.

Beyond that, do you have unmet spiritual needs? Have you explored Christianity? This is a great program: Insight for Living Having faith in God doesn't necessarily mean that our circumstances are better, but we better able to live with our circumstances due to faith in God, and the changes He brings about in us. Pray to God to ask for faith and guidance. If that doesn't seem scientific, remember that science lives with many ambiguities, and uncertain data. And note that some of the greatest minds and people in history have been Christians. And just because you lean to play baseball doesn't mean you forget how to play football.

It can also be helpful to give of yourself to other people - volunteer at a hospital, or food bank, or maybe something else. There are many people in this world that can use a helping hand. (But realize that not all of them are grateful.)

I'm not trying to be glib or dismissive of any challenges you may face. I'm just sharing a few things that have enriched my life over the years. And don't be discouraged if you don't feel different right away. Sometimes you must travel a ways down the road. There are still many things I continue to discover about

I regret to inform you that you don't know what you are talking about.

In their mind, Al Qaida is fighting on behalf of, and to reestablish, the Islamic Caliphate government that was dissolved in 1923 after the fall of the Ottoman empire. The nonsense about "never been chosen to represent a nation of people" would make the silly claim that any modern insurgency to overthrow a government by violent means isn't really a war.

The "War on Terror" is symbolic language, just like the "War on Fascism" in WW2. It is ridiculous that supposedly educated people can't figure that out. The Authorization for Use of Military Force makes it clear who the US is fighting again, and that it is at war. It is well settled law that such an authorization is legally equivalent to a declaration of war.

You can tell al Qaida and the Taliban are not ordinary criminals since they actually ran the country of Afghanistan, and have been trying to overthrow several others. The 9/11 attack is the only time that the self-defense provision of the NATO treaty has been invoked following an attack. NATO aircraft flew over American cities to protect them. The Taliban and al Qaida use heavy weapons and have been organized at the brigade level. They are regularly engaged by the US Air Force which is targeting them with missiles and dropping large bombs upon them. This isn't a problem with traffic stops gone bad, or a gang of bank robbers, or even the Crips and the Bloods.

Bin Laden was an utter failure. He made the classic mistake of dictators and would-be dictators in attacking the United States. The additional cost of the war is a pittance in the total federal budget. His organization is very badly damaged. There has been little if any genuine loss of real freedom, and modest impositions on privacy. The true threats in terms of spending come from the enormous growth in social welfare programs, and the damaged economy which is exacerbated by the current administrations over-regulation.

You've got things almost entirely wrong. It doesn't help that you get your news and views from fringe sites. Maybe you should try a few different ones.

National Review
The Weekly Standard
PJ Media

I say dubious, because for all the vaunted survelliance ongoing right now, it failed to stop the Woolwich stabbing attack [dailymail.co.uk]. It failed to stop the Boston marathon bombings

The surveillance is a tool, not magic. Even if the surveillance program provides good information it is still only an input to the security services. They still have to act upon it properly. In the case of the Boston Marathon bombing, the FBI appears to have dropped the ball, ignoring the direct warnings of the Russian security services. And somehow they didn't latch onto the trips to Dagestan. The security services are staffed flesh and blood that can make mistakes, no magic software is going to change that.

I think we are on a very slippery slope, where the temptation is all too great for the ruling parties to take the path of least resistance and extend the coverage gradually to all undesirables and enemies of the state - from terrorists to child pornographers to murderers to robbers to copyright infringers and finally to common members of the public.

Although I'm willing to agree that the security services need oversight from Parliament, I think there is a limited prospect for the sort of extension that you fear. In most democracies the dividing line between national security and ordinary criminal offenses tends to be well drawn and guarded. The two systems tend to live under different rules.

If you think this is impossible, look to China where it is happening even as we speak. The Chinese government even justified its censorship and surveillance of the internet on the basis of public security in a White Paper [english.gov.cn], including the following gem

I would hope it wouldn't be necessary to belabor the point that the British system of government is quite different in both manner and outlook from the government of the People's Republic of China, often referred to as Communist China. I think there is little danger there. They actually have a genuinely oppressive government there and have at best liberalized some.

What lies at the end of the slippery slope? Alan Moore might have the answer. [wikipedia.org] I suggest you look at his book, it is an intriguing read.

Thank you, but I'll take Alan Moorehead to Alan Moore any day. I've seen V for Vendetta. The movie is beautiful, the ideas are nonsense.

'A' for Absurd

For some people nothing says "appeal to emotion" like FBI arrest reports I guess.

Here are some great resources for anyone confused by information at "911truth.org" and would like more information.

'Debunking 9/11 Myths': Nano-thermite dust found near Ground Zero (Photos)
Debunking 9/11 Myths: conspiracy plots are sheer fantasy

NIST Releases Final WTC 7 Investigation Report
World Trade Center Disaster Study

Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts
Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report
Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report

Resources for debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Debunking 9/11 Bomb Theories

The Truthers Are Out There

9/11 Conspiracy Theories: The 9/11 Truth Movement in Perspective

Debunking Conspiracy Theories In 'Voodoo Histories'

President Obama said he was committed to being the most transparent Administration in history. It seems to be coming true, but not in the way votes expected. But it is true, the administration is becoming increasing transparent.

The EPA’s Secret Email Accounts

Most Transparent Administration Evah is Riddled with Secret Email Addresses

More secret email accounts for Obama’s EPA chief?

So, this can be added to the growing list of administration scandals fighting for public attention: Benghazi, IRS suppression of conservative political groups, IRS suppression of orthodox religious groups, IRS suppression of adoption, IRS seizure of health records, exploding costs for healthcare reform, ....

I guess it must be morning wherever the press has been on vacation the last couple of years.

Assuming you aren't going for sarcasm or irony given that the New York Times has generally been fans of the Obama administration and provided what could be called "friendly" coverage (although it may be more apt to describe it in military terms as "covering fire")...

IRS Admits Targeting Conservative Groups During 2012 Election
Medical Firm Sues IRS For 4th Amendment Violation In Records Seizure
US Government Monitoring Associated Press Phone Records

www.irs.gov - Tax collectors
www.justice.gov - Department of Justice

Good general resource for more info: National Review & the Weekly Standard.

We're all just still waiting on the change to come.

The wait is over, it's here.

A special prosecutor in the IRS matter is inevitable
IRS Official Lois Lerner: 'I Have Not Done Anything Wrong'
IRS tea-party bloodbath continues in Congress, as evidence emerges that IRS's own internal probe ended in May 2012, six months before election, but was hidden from legislators
Report: 'Rogue' IRS Agent Claim Unraveling