And I keep laughing at all the butthurt liberals who continually tell me I'll regret Trump. Never will I regret Trump. I did it for the lulz and you snowflakes are delivering in spades!
I have to routinely remind people of who his opponent was. Like Hillary was some great choice.
I haven't heard any arguments about why things would have been great if she had won, only about how terrible they will be since Trump did.
The electoral college has always been and will always be bullshit
The electoral college is a feature, not a bug.
It exists precisely to prevent what would have happened without it in the 2016 election. One party shouldn't be able to pack dependent voters densely into areas they control to have power over everyone else.
Twice in the last 17 years the democrats lost a race they should have won, if the vote was fair, and the world would have been better off both times.
I call bullshit on all counts here.
If they *should have won*, then they would have won. They lost according to the rules that everyone knew from the beginning. Al Gore lost the presidency because he couldn't even carry his home state. Hillary lost because she lost states that Obama carried in the previous two elections. I live in a state that's full of Union Democrats and Hillary lost it. She was the first Democrat to lose this state since Dukakis.
The elections were perfectly fair. The candidate who performed best under the system that is mandated by the constitution, prevailed.
If the presidency was based on the national popular vote, everyone's campaigns would have been waged differently. It's all speculation about who would have won if the rules had been different.
In what way would the world have been better off if Gore had won in 2000 or Hillary in 2016? Are you talking about the Iraq and Afghan wars? Those military actions that most Democrats in congress voted in favor of taking?
Under Trump, the stock market is hitting all time highs. Personally, my 401k is up over 15% in just the most recent quarter.
Enough with the sour grapes. If put up a better candidate if you want to win.
Is that not what is going on here? They don't like the way things are working in their government and are trying, within the established rules of law, to change things.
California had a Republican Governor not that long ago.
He was a Republican but he was not a conservative.
I despised Obama but I'm going to disagree with you.
He is smart. He was smart enough to out-maneuver Bill and Hillary Clinton to secure the Democratic nomination. He was smart enough to out-protean the ever protean John McCain and win both the electoral as well as popular votes.
He was smart enough to evade or lie (call it pivot or evolve if you like) about his true feelings about guns, abortion and same sex marriage until the political climate was right for him to declare the position that he held the entire time. He was smart enough to take full advantage of the sympathetic media who covered every disagreement from his perspective. He was smart enough to take full advantage of the legions of dumb-as-rocks supporters out there who would believe everything he said and repeat every lie he ever told.
Failing all of that, he was smart enough to hire the right people into his organization to advise him on all of these matters.
I remember being approached by some IBM drones afterwards offering us a license for OS/2 to replace the Linux of the machine. I think my response was something to the effect of "haha.... god no"
They couldn't even give it away, huh? The only person I knew who was using OS/2 in that era was running a BBS and wanted something more robust than desqview.
There was also Oscar Grant. (While not truly, completely innocent) He was shot in the back while laying handcuffed on a subway platform and the officer who killed him, though convicted, spent less than two years in prison.
The trouble is that your definition of innocent is not necessarily the true definition of innocent. If you don't follow lawful orders and act like you're going for a weapon, you're going to get shot.
No. I'm talking about truly innocent people.
People like Aiyana Jones, a 7 year old girl who was shot and killed by police officers while she slept. I'm talking about people like Kameron Prescott, a 6 year old boy who was killed by police when they opened fire on an unarmed suspect outside of his home.
I do agree that when it's a clear case of a cop killing somebody for no good reason, that cop should go to prison.
Bullshit. Your earlier red herring belies the truth.
There are some bad cops, just not as many as you and your fellow BLM'ers imagine.
A cop who ignores the misconduct of other officers is a bad cop.
Walk a mile in their shoes (or at least have some of the training they go through) before you paint them all with such a broad brush.
No thank you. I chose the life and career I wanted. I didn't want to become a cop.
In this matter, it doesn't matter if he's foreign or not. No one has the right to have their product bought by the government. I don't see any way for him to win this, outside of judicial activism. What he has the right to is due process of law and he has that because he's a person.
I didn't say that corporations have the rights of "people", they have the rights of "persons". In every day speech, there is no difference but in the context of the constitution, there is.
Personhood is what allows a corporation to own assets, engage in the practice of business and (arguably most importantly) pay taxes.
Corporations are government constructs, they aren't things save for a government calling them a thing and giving them some degree of personhood.
Corporate personhood is the purpose of incorporation. Without corporate personhood, Eugene Kaspersky would just be a guy selling a product and then, as a person, Eugene Kaspersky would have the rights that belong to "persons" when operating under the jurisdiction of the USA.
The more accurate statement is that rights only apply to entities within the jurisdiction of the United States. Kaspersky, being wholly Russian owned, does not qualify as a US entity, and since the company is not located in the United States, it is not under US jurisdiction.
It need not be a "US entity", merely a legal entity that's present in the US.
Incidentally, it would be legal for a non-US person to hold a non-US person as a slave outside of the United States.
So... You're taking the time to explain that US law only applies to places under the jurisdiction of the US. Yes, we all know this. The discussion was about what the US government is doing, within the jurisdiction of the USA.
I'll concede that I haven't read Trump's order, so I'll ask. Is the government failing to pay for previously agreed to contracts/purchases or is this their way of disqualifying Kaspersky from future contracts and purchases?
If the government paid and met all previously agreements, I don't understand the theory under which Kaspersky is suing.
Slashdot Mirror
And I keep laughing at all the butthurt liberals who continually tell me I'll regret Trump. Never will I regret Trump. I did it for the lulz and you snowflakes are delivering in spades!
I have to routinely remind people of who his opponent was. Like Hillary was some great choice.
I haven't heard any arguments about why things would have been great if she had won, only about how terrible they will be since Trump did.
LK
Or maybe s/he had an insurance plan that met his/her needs and his/her needs were different than your desires.
LK
The electoral college has always been and will always be bullshit
The electoral college is a feature, not a bug.
It exists precisely to prevent what would have happened without it in the 2016 election. One party shouldn't be able to pack dependent voters densely into areas they control to have power over everyone else.
Twice in the last 17 years the democrats lost a race they should have won, if the vote was fair, and the world would have been better off both times.
I call bullshit on all counts here.
If they *should have won*, then they would have won. They lost according to the rules that everyone knew from the beginning. Al Gore lost the presidency because he couldn't even carry his home state. Hillary lost because she lost states that Obama carried in the previous two elections. I live in a state that's full of Union Democrats and Hillary lost it. She was the first Democrat to lose this state since Dukakis.
The elections were perfectly fair. The candidate who performed best under the system that is mandated by the constitution, prevailed.
If the presidency was based on the national popular vote, everyone's campaigns would have been waged differently. It's all speculation about who would have won if the rules had been different.
In what way would the world have been better off if Gore had won in 2000 or Hillary in 2016? Are you talking about the Iraq and Afghan wars? Those military actions that most Democrats in congress voted in favor of taking?
Under Trump, the stock market is hitting all time highs. Personally, my 401k is up over 15% in just the most recent quarter.
Enough with the sour grapes. If put up a better candidate if you want to win.
LK
You fail to understand democracy.
Is that not what is going on here? They don't like the way things are working in their government and are trying, within the established rules of law, to change things.
California had a Republican Governor not that long ago.
He was a Republican but he was not a conservative.
LK
I think that your sarcasm detector is faulty.
No, the Kochs and Mercers didn't even enter my mind until I read your comment.
The outnumbered conservatives in California wanting this for themselves makes perfect sense to me.
The people packed into the dense urban areas around Los Angeles and San Francisco have different needs and wants than the people in more rural areas.
Look at these maps to get some idea of why there are people who would like to split.
LK
I despised Obama but I'm going to disagree with you.
He is smart. He was smart enough to out-maneuver Bill and Hillary Clinton to secure the Democratic nomination. He was smart enough to out-protean the ever protean John McCain and win both the electoral as well as popular votes.
He was smart enough to evade or lie (call it pivot or evolve if you like) about his true feelings about guns, abortion and same sex marriage until the political climate was right for him to declare the position that he held the entire time. He was smart enough to take full advantage of the sympathetic media who covered every disagreement from his perspective. He was smart enough to take full advantage of the legions of dumb-as-rocks supporters out there who would believe everything he said and repeat every lie he ever told.
Failing all of that, he was smart enough to hire the right people into his organization to advise him on all of these matters.
LK
People who cheat in online games piss me off. They're first class jerks but why in the hell should it be a police matter?
Men with guns being sent to arrest people for making software to cheat at video games. Is no one else alarmed by this?
LK
The Democrats supported civil rights with a lower percentage of their elected officials voting in favor of the civil rights acts than the Republicans?
Yeah... ok...
I remember being approached by some IBM drones afterwards offering us a license for OS/2 to replace the Linux of the machine. I think my response was something to the effect of "haha.... god no"
They couldn't even give it away, huh? The only person I knew who was using OS/2 in that era was running a BBS and wanted something more robust than desqview.
LK
I believe this was very similar to Intel's statement about the FDIV bug.
Let's see what they're saying in a week.
LK
I don't consider console game players to be "gamers".
I'm a snob about it.
LK
There was also Oscar Grant. (While not truly, completely innocent) He was shot in the back while laying handcuffed on a subway platform and the officer who killed him, though convicted, spent less than two years in prison.
I could also mention the case of John Crawford III, a man who was shot without warning while holding a toy gun in an open carry state.
The trouble is that your definition of innocent is not necessarily the true definition of innocent. If you don't follow lawful orders and act like you're going for a weapon, you're going to get shot.
No. I'm talking about truly innocent people.
People like Aiyana Jones, a 7 year old girl who was shot and killed by police officers while she slept.
I'm talking about people like Kameron Prescott, a 6 year old boy who was killed by police when they opened fire on an unarmed suspect outside of his home.
I do agree that when it's a clear case of a cop killing somebody for no good reason, that cop should go to prison.
Bullshit. Your earlier red herring belies the truth.
There are some bad cops, just not as many as you and your fellow BLM'ers imagine.
A cop who ignores the misconduct of other officers is a bad cop.
Walk a mile in their shoes (or at least have some of the training they go through) before you paint them all with such a broad brush.
No thank you. I chose the life and career I wanted. I didn't want to become a cop.
LK
I am a supporter of BLM and no, I don't want to kill cops. I just want them to go to prison when they kill innocent people.
LK
In this matter, it doesn't matter if he's foreign or not. No one has the right to have their product bought by the government. I don't see any way for him to win this, outside of judicial activism. What he has the right to is due process of law and he has that because he's a person.
I didn't say that corporations have the rights of "people", they have the rights of "persons". In every day speech, there is no difference but in the context of the constitution, there is.
Personhood is what allows a corporation to own assets, engage in the practice of business and (arguably most importantly) pay taxes.
Corporations are government constructs, they aren't things save for a government calling them a thing and giving them some degree of personhood.
Corporate personhood is the purpose of incorporation. Without corporate personhood, Eugene Kaspersky would just be a guy selling a product and then, as a person, Eugene Kaspersky would have the rights that belong to "persons" when operating under the jurisdiction of the USA.
LK
Make sure your stingray is kept inside the prison, which is itself inside a huge faraday cage.
If that were the case, inmates wouldn't be going through the trouble of acquiring these phones in the first place.
LK
The more accurate statement is that rights only apply to entities within the jurisdiction of the United States. Kaspersky, being wholly Russian owned, does not qualify as a US entity, and since the company is not located in the United States, it is not under US jurisdiction.
It need not be a "US entity", merely a legal entity that's present in the US.
Incidentally, it would be legal for a non-US person to hold a non-US person as a slave outside of the United States.
So... You're taking the time to explain that US law only applies to places under the jurisdiction of the US. Yes, we all know this. The discussion was about what the US government is doing, within the jurisdiction of the USA.
I'll concede that I haven't read Trump's order, so I'll ask. Is the government failing to pay for previously agreed to contracts/purchases or is this their way of disqualifying Kaspersky from future contracts and purchases?
If the government paid and met all previously agreements, I don't understand the theory under which Kaspersky is suing.
LK
Only Americans have rights to anything, due process included.
You are not correct in this assertion.
Only rights guaranteed to "the people" are exclusively applicable to American citizens.
Rights guaranteed to "persons" belong to everyone.
To make it clearer, would it be legal to hold a slave if that slave is not an American citizen?
LK
or the hundredth time I'm declaring that the end is nigh
So... you were wrong 99 times before?
LK
It has a Tulip-Bulby feel to it, doesn't it?
LK
It simply got better by playing itself over and over again at an accelerated pace -- a method of training AI known as "reinforcement learning."
Like it was playing Global Thermonuclear War with zero players...
LK