It also removes dissenting population from the socio-political equation.
Dissenting from fatherhood, completing a high school education and from being capable of even having a low rung job in technological society. Where else do you put them?
You know what's going to happen, is that Open Source advocates are going to argue for public funding of open source projects because they can't make money giving something away for free, and there's never going to be enough donations or volunteers to pay the people you need to pay. It's going to be like public radio, all over again. They are too good to charge for ads, make billions of dollars merchandising Sesame Street, take corporate money anyway, and still run ads of a sort, and yet STILL look for public money and will probably look for a lot more once the Dems get in.
I imagine that, while Windows may stop because of WGA, Linux will periodically halt and start playing entertaining videos about all the buffoons that write it, as part of an NPR like Linux beggars night. Donate to Linux, and get a stack of 2nd tier magazines and a handy tote bag!
My argument is that maybe the reason they couldn't or didn't bother to get this warrant is because the evidence wasn't trustworthy anyway.
Well, no.. because, you could always throw out the evidence because the chain of custody wasn't there. A broken chain of custody of evidence is independent of the warrant issue. What's going on here is that the defendent abused the 4th amendment to avoid the argument of chain of custody. Instead the police are going to the jury compelled to -lie- about the situation, and the truth is, there -is- evidence with a dubious chain of custody. Justice is about truth and your position of the 4th amendment compels dishonesty.
hasn't and it is storing up a massive amount of trouble. The war lords and local leaders who control various communities have been bought off with troops handing out grants and other incentives, and so violence has lessened.
Seemed to work ok with the Marshall Plan and free trade. Of course, the allies also completely destroyed Prussia and gave it to Poland... so, perhaps if we really wanted to repeat our success with transforming Germany perhaps we need to confront our own little bit of postwar ethnic cleansing that we and the Russians did.
The current mission of the United States in Iraq is to provide an enhanced policing capability to support a stable democratic government in Iraq. Following the change in tactics in 2006 - 2007, this is actually working.
This is part of several objectives of the war, of which there were:
a) The removal of a dictator who is declared to be unfriendly to the USA and presented an ongoing foreign policy problem for the USA and its allies. Done.
b) The elimination of Iraq as a security threat to the United States and its allies. Done.
So, for this war, 2/3 is where we are at. If we compare to this to the goals of World War II.
a) the removal of dictators unfriendly to the USA. done.
b) the establishment of a democracy in Europe and Asia.
c) bring peace to the world and security to the USA through the establishment of multilateral institutions.
d) create a world wide frame work for free trade.
only one of those objectives was actually accomplished by 1945 (the removal of dictators). Democracy in Europe would not happen for nearly another 50 years and the UN is a joke. So, pretty much, if you want to keep a score card on wars, World War II was actually a bigger failure than Iraq, from the perspective of advancing American interests. I mean, the whole reason the USA pushed itself into war with Japan and Germany was to guarantee China and Poland (via the UK's promise), and within 5 years of a war fought to liberate it, China was at war with the USA. So... Why did we do that again?
So, really, he can only claim to have temporarily put people in homes, and - unlike what Tennyson said about love - buying a house only to lose it a few years later is probably worse than never having bought it in the first place.
Tennyson was wrong about love and you are wrong about houses. People got the chance to have a home and had a time to enjoy it. I did, in both cases.
The other thing is that the entire site will be cloaked in a couple of meters of CO2 ice over winter; as it accumulates on the solar panels, the weight is expected to physically snap them off.
That would be some pictures to get, for sure, watching a martian "snow" overcome the lander..
The people (in India at least) are not richer solely because they are able to export. They are richer because each of them can produce and trade without artificial constraints imposed by the government.
Good, so, if we cap trade with them, then, you are saying that local demand should pick up the slack for the services. I'm sure there's plenty of local companies that could use the 20,000 callers hired by American Express.
Boeing aircraft are assembled in Washington, but the Chinese have decreed that 20% of the content of any aircraft has to be manufactured in China or they wont buy them. That doesn't even touch on other manufacturing sites
I think its high time the USA start issuing similar requirements. Everyone is allowed to be protectionist except for the USA, it seems.
You are making as assumption that for 40 million people to be in new homes, the financial crisis *had* to happen.
No, it didn't, but the financial risks that we took to put those people into those homes made it far more likely.
Millions of people in India have risen from poverty and are riche
That's true, but those people, as many people are the world over, are richer because they are able to export to the United States. As there's no "bigger economy" the USA can dump exports on, the USA has to backstop itself and the world to meet its own needs, of which housing is critical. Fannie Mae did that, and will do that again.
Trust me, Republicans eventually will come around to taking credit for Fannie Mae and aggressive lending practices and the lumps in order to get credit for the successes that it made. When they do, I'm sure that plenty of Democrats who bailed on this financial plan will suddenly find themselves stewing over Republicans claiming credit for something Franklin Delano Roosevelt did.
I find it somewhere between hilarious and deeply disturbing that People can get up there and call Obama a socialist for wanting to tax rich people, while at the same time supporting the buying of banks by the federal government, which actually is socialist
You're actually right, but its the kind of socialism first described by Alexander Hamilton, rather than Karl Marx.
The dirty secret of American capitalism is that America has always been a socialist country when it comes to home ownership via central banks. Republicans and Democrats have created a system that is inherently socialist at the top and privately owned at the bottom. Like many things American, it anticipates some social ideas, and is a compromise that is ugly on the surface but works very well.
Everyone gets to own their own home, but the government gets either the benefit of property taxes and stability back, or, in the worst case, assumes the risk of the mortgages. Democrats want to bail on the bailout and this basic economic crisis and their role in it, and, if anything finally proves that Bush is an idiot, it was his utter failure to see that if he had claimed responsibility for this mess, then he could have also claimed responsibility for its successes, thus accepting the social goodness of putting 50 million people into homes.
I mean, really, after 30 years of putting people into their own homes, the government is only on the hook for a trillion dollars. Let's, see, a trillion dollars and a few tough weeks on the stock market for pulling people out of the slums and into nice little houses. That's a damned good deal compared to some other stupid stuff we've spent a trillion dollars on.
I'm a Republican and I think our party deserves to lose. The way I see it, crisises present opportunities as much as they do danger and both Bush and McCain have fumbled the very economic crisis before us.
Democrats have made great hay of talking about how the current state of affairs has proven that socialism is the answer. I think Bush should have come out and accepted responsibility for the whole situation (rather than blaming Democrats by proxy), and said, yes, it was "all my fault", and from there he could have explained the successes of the last 30 years and included the current crisis as a cost. Accept blame for Fannie Mae and the whole securities mess and in doing so you get to claim credit for its successes too, and there are many, many successes. If you weigh the two together, the world has come out far ahead overall. I mean, the goal of having everyone own their own home is so admirable that I think the American people would at least understand if not accept the argument that it was worth the financial crisis to put 40 million people into new homes.
Instead, first Bush and then noticably McCain both jumped on the bash Wall Street bandwagon. Nobody bashed Wall Street when it made trillions of dollars for everyone, but now that we're out a trillion dollars for everyone wants to beat the goose that has us all slacking for a few minutes off and posting on slashdot.
That's one way they could have handled it, but in general, this election to the left wing was always a referendum on socialism versus capitalism and the current leadership of the Republican Party failed to see that until it was entirely too late. So, let's accept the Obama victory and the attendent left wing knee jerk demands for socialism. We know that that style of socialism will never accomplish much but, it won't hurt too much either, and let's we right wingers use the time come up with, well, the next big thing, a new financial plan that accepts some risk, moves the world a step ahead, again, and rather than linger on four years or even eight under a plan nobody really likes any more, let's toss the socialists a bone, let them have the country for four, and we'll come back with something that works for the next 30 years.
There are plenty of ideas to kick around. The one that I'm kicking around, as a possible candidate for Senate, is to build around a basic economic idea that information traded between countries should be freely exchangable, but perhaps goods should not be as much so. That way, every country can have the productive capacity to build its own goods, the world would be richer through diversity owing to more local alternatives and it would defuse a lot of socialist reactionaries by not undermining the world with a single corporate McCulture and the constant layoff cycles owed by the flow of capital randomly throughout the planet. Make some peace with the unions of a sort. Make Democrats be the ones arguing for the right to drive Japanese cars.
Policywise, there are a lot of ideas that can come out of this... and, plenty of suspects for the culture wars we all deride but never grow tired of..you know, if we can't get rid of left wing indoctrination by vouchers, we can perhaps crowd it out by offering funds for more classes for a curricula that fuses physics with shop classes - like, the "Physics First" espoused by some Nobel Prize Winner that also exposes every student to a CNC machine, welders, all the latest stuff.
Besides, republicans were never too good of culture wars anyway. Nobody likes the southern salesman upon which our party is based when he starts talking about his personal values, but when he starts out with a new "let's all get rich scheme", we're all suckers for it. So let's do the latter, and let Obama and the Democrats argue for their new fairness while we in turn craft our "Reindustrialize America" agenda and try to sell the "Next Step Towards Wealth."
both political parties pushed a housing boom because everyone wants to see everyone own a home. I'm Republican and I think Bush and McCain failed not because of the financial crisis per se but because of their failure to accept the credit that goes with this simple point. Bush could have accepted the beating, like, what difference would it make on his ratings, and say, but he didn't. Rolling the dice to benefit the American people is at least something people would be empathetic to.
Washington was well intended, rolled the dice, and took a beating. I would be willing to bet that, if you look at the people that did get put into homes, that, overall the deal will be even worth the trillion dollar price tag. I mean, if we can accept blowing a trillion dollars as a cost overrun on a war, then, why not explain another trillion on putting people in homes. I think that effort far more noble.
You people cast yourself as a minority, and here I am with -17 karma on this thread... the outrage and mob is you guys, demanding that the police be hobbled at every turn, no matter how ridiculous. Your position is the popular one, and dogmatic.
I argued that letting a bad guy go because the cop screwed up is a losing proposition. You let the bad guy go and did nothing about the bad cop. What good did this decision serve, other than to let bad guys go?
The fact of the matter is that the undercurrent of this argument is in fact where you value children. Plenty of people had no problem with hacking into Sarah Palin's emails, which is a clear mob behavior - hey, she's bad, let's break into her house, which is what you people supported. But, god forbid, someone goes and finds kiddy porn on the notebook, and you want to let the guy go because your constitution has been trampled. That's just crazy talk.
If the constitution is a living document for the left wing, it is a living document for the right wing too. If you can trash the 1st amendment and the 2nd amendments, and the commerce clause, then certainly other people can trash the constitution in ways they see fit.
Ultimately, the whole point of this board is to prove that the constitution is NOT a living document. It is a treaty among the states and the people and you cannot lightly alter its terms to affect the pet causes. But, if the left wants to have the supreme court impinge upon the states in any manner of causes, grant congress the right to redistribute wealth, or any of its other causes, in the name of social justice, then I'm sorry, but we on the right are going to throw child molesters in jail, even if the cops bend the rules from time to time.
this sort of uninspired muddled everything in the browser thinking smacks to me of the same sort of cookie cutter approach that brought us to national financial ruin.
So you are saying that requiring police to submit cause to engage in a search before performing the search was devised by a bunch of traitors in the 60's?
No, the remedy of evidence suppression was. Prior to that, they paid a fine.
You know, you're right. And I think *you* are a child molester. So much so that I'll report you to the police. Under the new Think of the Children Act, the police I tipped off will be at your door to kick it in, drag you out of your house, and shoot you dead at the side of the road. What, you don't like this idea? Then you support child molesters!
That's a total strawman argument. You posit that an anonymous tip to the police leading to an instant beating is the same as replacing suppression of evidence with a sanction for the "crime" of finding criminal evidence during a search. It's completely not.
You see how it works? Due process is needed for everyone, no matter how vile.
See how what works? A strawman argument followed by the lame argument that retention of so-called feature of due process that was introduced by a bunch of traitors in the 1960s is the same as an assault on the constitution itself? I think not. Let's face it, everything liberalism has done is a systematic assault on American culture at every possible turn.... and rendering Americans powerless, through disarmament and judicial indifference in the supposed name of the rights of the people, is just another line of that attack. First the judiciary, then the economy, and now the coup will be nearly complete in november... It's so obvious that left wing has never had American interests at heart at all.
The 4th amendment doesn't get suspended just because you incant the word, "children."
Where's the constitution for the victims of crime, rather than the perps. I guess that balancing act doesn't matter at all you now, does it. So pretty much, what you are really saying is, that the perp, who -had the pictures-, deserves more constitutional protections than the victims, who got, nothing, when you let this freak walk. Yep, that's a good system right there.
The thing is that you don't have perfect knowledge of whether the suspect is a child pornographer or not. Lacking perfect knowledge, you should seek it out by following the appropriate channels.
the guy had the pictures on his computers. guilty... it's pretty cut and dry.
The people that for 8 years let the situation come to this?
If Fannie and Freddie had no government backing, there's no way mortgage backed securities could ever have been credibly floated... so, since the Dems created and defended Fannie and Freddie, the blame is squarely on them.
With that said, republicans do not deserve to win this election.
If I was the Republican in charge, I would be out in front of this and arguing that Republicans have made it possible to make homes for lots of people, which worked, but it carried a big risk and we (Republicans), rolled the dice a bit and lost. Still, we got 5 trillion dollars of new housing stock out there and we're only on the taxpayer hook for a trillion of it, but all in all it worked. More people are in homes than ever before but now we have some work to do to keep them there.
I would have then included mortgage relief for distressed homeowners, linked with a comprehensive national infrastructure and alternative energy and drilling plan to lower the price of energy and transportation to help our country.... make it easier to make mortgage payments... would have done something to check the rate resets.
sigh...
but they didn't. Instead we got Bush preaching doom and gloom and McCain going on about firing Chris Cox and bashing Wall Street. With every crisis comes an opportunity for success and Republicans whiffed on the play. Meanwhile Democrats positioned themselves very carefully to take advantage of the political opportunities and made the most of it. Quite frankly, this inability of Republicans to manage this message and crisis is why, even though I am a Republican, feel that this crop deserves to lose.
Time and time again Bush has been presented with various crises and time and time again he has done the wrong thing. If he had been the optimistic guy with the bullhorn on the flaming WTC in New Orleans, waving that bullhorn to the crowd in the superdome saying that we are going to bring you food. If he had had that bullhorn this last few months, at wall street and main street, he'd go down as the greatest president -ever-. But he blew it... he totally blew it, and mccain blew it too.
It's not a bad article but the problem that you and I both wrestle with is, is, how to assess the value of an intellectual property. I would suggest make to market rules should apply and carry it like it inventory. The property would be worth what it was the last time a good from it was licensed.
And whose to say that if a cop searches your computer for child porn, tjstork, and doesn't find any but you get charged anyway for some cracked game that you own (legally bought, still a DMCA violation!) because that evidence was collected without a warrant stating that is what they were looking for.
Then don't break the law! What is so hard about not breaking the law. What you are essentially doing is tolerating a certain amount of crime because you do not agree with the law? If the law is as important as you say it is, then should we not follow it. If you don't to pay for a game, then don't crack it! if you think games should be free, then, have copyright reform to do so. Pick one! Don't be saying that you don't have to follow laws you don't agree with and then use the 4th amendment to hide your criminal activity, otherwise, you render the law just as meaningless as the police you condemn would.
And anything we can do to deflate the "think of the children" hysteria will help protect our society
These children that you speak of aren't some imaginary thing you can airly dismiss. They are the hopes and dreams of the parents who raised them, the future of our society, innocent and worthy of our very best efforts to protect them. Honestly, I'd have to question the humanity of someone who is NOT outraged by any crime against a child, and least we can understand now that, that, given the active choice to let child molestors walk, that, all this other so-called liberal talk about children is a lie. They aren't interested in trying to save anyone, not the working man or the children. They are a cancer who deliberately brings countries down and ruins cultures in order to secure power for themselves. If the left can paint the current economic crisis as evidence of the failure of right wing greed, we can work our narrative too, the stabbed in the back narrative, and with ridiculous cases like this, we can and will make it stick. You just wait until Obama pardons Mumia...
It's not that child pornographers shouldn't be prosecuted, but like it or not, they're still entitled to the same due process as normal, "non-pervert" criminals. This "it's for the children" stuff shouldn't fly when we claim to follow the rule of law
The law exists to serve the public good, and if the public loses confidence in that law, then we have no law at all.
"It's for the children" stuff is not some abstract thing that you can so handily dismiss. With this decision, the courts have just given license to all of those who kidnap or exploit children to make this pornography, by giving them a cash cow.
How would you feel about this man if it was your child's photograph on this man's notebook.
Quite honestly, the judicial tradition of suppressing evidence entirely because it was produced without a proper warrant is absurd. The man was clearly guilty and the evidence was there. Instead, fine the police for doing the wrong thing, take it out of their pay, but, still keep the evidence.
Slashdot Mirror
One of the least patriotic and disrespectful things people can do is to tear the country apart into little groups
Oh let's see, like pentacostals from Alaska?
The 500,000 people that work in the oil industry?
Anyone who makes over 250k a year, including S-corps?
White men?
Corn growers?
Oh, please, Democrats have been just as divisive as Republicans, if not more so.
It also removes dissenting population from the socio-political equation.
Dissenting from fatherhood, completing a high school education and from being capable of even having a low rung job in technological society. Where else do you put them?
You know what's going to happen, is that Open Source advocates are going to argue for public funding of open source projects because they can't make money giving something away for free, and there's never going to be enough donations or volunteers to pay the people you need to pay. It's going to be like public radio, all over again. They are too good to charge for ads, make billions of dollars merchandising Sesame Street, take corporate money anyway, and still run ads of a sort, and yet STILL look for public money and will probably look for a lot more once the Dems get in.
I imagine that, while Windows may stop because of WGA, Linux will periodically halt and start playing entertaining videos about all the buffoons that write it, as part of an NPR like Linux beggars night. Donate to Linux, and get a stack of 2nd tier magazines and a handy tote bag!
My argument is that maybe the reason they couldn't or didn't bother to get this warrant is because the evidence wasn't trustworthy anyway.
Well, no.. because, you could always throw out the evidence because the chain of custody wasn't there. A broken chain of custody of evidence is independent of the warrant issue. What's going on here is that the defendent abused the 4th amendment to avoid the argument of chain of custody. Instead the police are going to the jury compelled to -lie- about the situation, and the truth is, there -is- evidence with a dubious chain of custody. Justice is about truth and your position of the 4th amendment compels dishonesty.
hasn't and it is storing up a massive amount of trouble. The war lords and local leaders who control various communities have been bought off with troops handing out grants and other incentives, and so violence has lessened.
Seemed to work ok with the Marshall Plan and free trade. Of course, the allies also completely destroyed Prussia and gave it to Poland... so, perhaps if we really wanted to repeat our success with transforming Germany perhaps we need to confront our own little bit of postwar ethnic cleansing that we and the Russians did.
The current mission of the United States in Iraq is to provide an enhanced policing capability to support a stable democratic government in Iraq. Following the change in tactics in 2006 - 2007, this is actually working.
This is part of several objectives of the war, of which there were:
a) The removal of a dictator who is declared to be unfriendly to the USA and presented an ongoing foreign policy problem for the USA and its allies. Done.
b) The elimination of Iraq as a security threat to the United States and its allies. Done.
So, for this war, 2/3 is where we are at. If we compare to this to the goals of World War II.
a) the removal of dictators unfriendly to the USA. done.
b) the establishment of a democracy in Europe and Asia.
c) bring peace to the world and security to the USA through the establishment of multilateral institutions.
d) create a world wide frame work for free trade.
only one of those objectives was actually accomplished by 1945 (the removal of dictators). Democracy in Europe would not happen for nearly another 50 years and the UN is a joke. So, pretty much, if you want to keep a score card on wars, World War II was actually a bigger failure than Iraq, from the perspective of advancing American interests. I mean, the whole reason the USA pushed itself into war with Japan and Germany was to guarantee China and Poland (via the UK's promise), and within 5 years of a war fought to liberate it, China was at war with the USA. So... Why did we do that again?
So, really, he can only claim to have temporarily put people in homes, and - unlike what Tennyson said about love - buying a house only to lose it a few years later is probably worse than never having bought it in the first place.
Tennyson was wrong about love and you are wrong about houses. People got the chance to have a home and had a time to enjoy it. I did, in both cases.
The other thing is that the entire site will be cloaked in a couple of meters of CO2 ice over winter; as it accumulates on the solar panels, the weight is expected to physically snap them off.
That would be some pictures to get, for sure, watching a martian "snow" overcome the lander..
The people (in India at least) are not richer solely because they are able to export. They are richer because each of them can produce and trade without artificial constraints imposed by the government.
Good, so, if we cap trade with them, then, you are saying that local demand should pick up the slack for the services. I'm sure there's plenty of local companies that could use the 20,000 callers hired by American Express.
Boeing aircraft are assembled in Washington, but the Chinese have decreed that 20% of the content of any aircraft has to be manufactured in China or they wont buy them. That doesn't even touch on other manufacturing sites
I think its high time the USA start issuing similar requirements. Everyone is allowed to be protectionist except for the USA, it seems.
You are making as assumption that for 40 million people to be in new homes, the financial crisis *had* to happen.
No, it didn't, but the financial risks that we took to put those people into those homes made it far more likely.
Millions of people in India have risen from poverty and are riche
That's true, but those people, as many people are the world over, are richer because they are able to export to the United States. As there's no "bigger economy" the USA can dump exports on, the USA has to backstop itself and the world to meet its own needs, of which housing is critical. Fannie Mae did that, and will do that again.
Trust me, Republicans eventually will come around to taking credit for Fannie Mae and aggressive lending practices and the lumps in order to get credit for the successes that it made. When they do, I'm sure that plenty of Democrats who bailed on this financial plan will suddenly find themselves stewing over Republicans claiming credit for something Franklin Delano Roosevelt did.
I find it somewhere between hilarious and deeply disturbing that People can get up there and call Obama a socialist for wanting to tax rich people, while at the same time supporting the buying of banks by the federal government, which actually is socialist
You're actually right, but its the kind of socialism first described by Alexander Hamilton, rather than Karl Marx.
The dirty secret of American capitalism is that America has always been a socialist country when it comes to home ownership via central banks. Republicans and Democrats have created a system that is inherently socialist at the top and privately owned at the bottom. Like many things American, it anticipates some social ideas, and is a compromise that is ugly on the surface but works very well.
Everyone gets to own their own home, but the government gets either the benefit of property taxes and stability back, or, in the worst case, assumes the risk of the mortgages. Democrats want to bail on the bailout and this basic economic crisis and their role in it, and, if anything finally proves that Bush is an idiot, it was his utter failure to see that if he had claimed responsibility for this mess, then he could have also claimed responsibility for its successes, thus accepting the social goodness of putting 50 million people into homes.
I mean, really, after 30 years of putting people into their own homes, the government is only on the hook for a trillion dollars. Let's, see, a trillion dollars and a few tough weeks on the stock market for pulling people out of the slums and into nice little houses. That's a damned good deal compared to some other stupid stuff we've spent a trillion dollars on.
I'm a Republican and I think our party deserves to lose. The way I see it, crisises present opportunities as much as they do danger and both Bush and McCain have fumbled the very economic crisis before us.
Democrats have made great hay of talking about how the current state of affairs has proven that socialism is the answer. I think Bush should have come out and accepted responsibility for the whole situation (rather than blaming Democrats by proxy), and said, yes, it was "all my fault", and from there he could have explained the successes of the last 30 years and included the current crisis as a cost. Accept blame for Fannie Mae and the whole securities mess and in doing so you get to claim credit for its successes too, and there are many, many successes. If you weigh the two together, the world has come out far ahead overall. I mean, the goal of having everyone own their own home is so admirable that I think the American people would at least understand if not accept the argument that it was worth the financial crisis to put 40 million people into new homes.
Instead, first Bush and then noticably McCain both jumped on the bash Wall Street bandwagon. Nobody bashed Wall Street when it made trillions of dollars for everyone, but now that we're out a trillion dollars for everyone wants to beat the goose that has us all slacking for a few minutes off and posting on slashdot.
That's one way they could have handled it, but in general, this election to the left wing was always a referendum on socialism versus capitalism and the current leadership of the Republican Party failed to see that until it was entirely too late. So, let's accept the Obama victory and the attendent left wing knee jerk demands for socialism. We know that that style of socialism will never accomplish much but, it won't hurt too much either, and let's we right wingers use the time come up with, well, the next big thing, a new financial plan that accepts some risk, moves the world a step ahead, again, and rather than linger on four years or even eight under a plan nobody really likes any more, let's toss the socialists a bone, let them have the country for four, and we'll come back with something that works for the next 30 years.
There are plenty of ideas to kick around. The one that I'm kicking around, as a possible candidate for Senate, is to build around a basic economic idea that information traded between countries should be freely exchangable, but perhaps goods should not be as much so. That way, every country can have the productive capacity to build its own goods, the world would be richer through diversity owing to more local alternatives and it would defuse a lot of socialist reactionaries by not undermining the world with a single corporate McCulture and the constant layoff cycles owed by the flow of capital randomly throughout the planet. Make some peace with the unions of a sort. Make Democrats be the ones arguing for the right to drive Japanese cars.
Policywise, there are a lot of ideas that can come out of this... and, plenty of suspects for the culture wars we all deride but never grow tired of..you know, if we can't get rid of left wing indoctrination by vouchers, we can perhaps crowd it out by offering funds for more classes for a curricula that fuses physics with shop classes - like, the "Physics First" espoused by some Nobel Prize Winner that also exposes every student to a CNC machine, welders, all the latest stuff.
Besides, republicans were never too good of culture wars anyway. Nobody likes the southern salesman upon which our party is based when he starts talking about his personal values, but when he starts out with a new "let's all get rich scheme", we're all suckers for it. So let's do the latter, and let Obama and the Democrats argue for their new fairness while we in turn craft our "Reindustrialize America" agenda and try to sell the "Next Step Towards Wealth."
both political parties pushed a housing boom because everyone wants to see everyone own a home. I'm Republican and I think Bush and McCain failed not because of the financial crisis per se but because of their failure to accept the credit that goes with this simple point. Bush could have accepted the beating, like, what difference would it make on his ratings, and say, but he didn't. Rolling the dice to benefit the American people is at least something people would be empathetic to.
Washington was well intended, rolled the dice, and took a beating. I would be willing to bet that, if you look at the people that did get put into homes, that, overall the deal will be even worth the trillion dollar price tag. I mean, if we can accept blowing a trillion dollars as a cost overrun on a war, then, why not explain another trillion on putting people in homes. I think that effort far more noble.
You people cast yourself as a minority, and here I am with -17 karma on this thread... the outrage and mob is you guys, demanding that the police be hobbled at every turn, no matter how ridiculous. Your position is the popular one, and dogmatic.
I argued that letting a bad guy go because the cop screwed up is a losing proposition. You let the bad guy go and did nothing about the bad cop. What good did this decision serve, other than to let bad guys go?
The fact of the matter is that the undercurrent of this argument is in fact where you value children. Plenty of people had no problem with hacking into Sarah Palin's emails, which is a clear mob behavior - hey, she's bad, let's break into her house, which is what you people supported. But, god forbid, someone goes and finds kiddy porn on the notebook, and you want to let the guy go because your constitution has been trampled. That's just crazy talk.
If the constitution is a living document for the left wing, it is a living document for the right wing too. If you can trash the 1st amendment and the 2nd amendments, and the commerce clause, then certainly other people can trash the constitution in ways they see fit.
Ultimately, the whole point of this board is to prove that the constitution is NOT a living document. It is a treaty among the states and the people and you cannot lightly alter its terms to affect the pet causes. But, if the left wants to have the supreme court impinge upon the states in any manner of causes, grant congress the right to redistribute wealth, or any of its other causes, in the name of social justice, then I'm sorry, but we on the right are going to throw child molesters in jail, even if the cops bend the rules from time to time.
this sort of uninspired muddled everything in the browser thinking smacks to me of the same sort of cookie cutter approach that brought us to national financial ruin.
So you are saying that requiring police to submit cause to engage in a search before performing the search was devised by a bunch of traitors in the 60's?
No, the remedy of evidence suppression was. Prior to that, they paid a fine.
You know, you're right. And I think *you* are a child molester. So much so that I'll report you to the police. Under the new Think of the Children Act, the police I tipped off will be at your door to kick it in, drag you out of your house, and shoot you dead at the side of the road. What, you don't like this idea? Then you support child molesters!
That's a total strawman argument. You posit that an anonymous tip to the police leading to an instant beating is the same as replacing suppression of evidence with a sanction for the "crime" of finding criminal evidence during a search. It's completely not.
You see how it works? Due process is needed for everyone, no matter how vile.
See how what works? A strawman argument followed by the lame argument that retention of so-called feature of due process that was introduced by a bunch of traitors in the 1960s is the same as an assault on the constitution itself? I think not. Let's face it, everything liberalism has done is a systematic assault on American culture at every possible turn.... and rendering Americans powerless, through disarmament and judicial indifference in the supposed name of the rights of the people, is just another line of that attack. First the judiciary, then the economy, and now the coup will be nearly complete in november... It's so obvious that left wing has never had American interests at heart at all.
my god, this country is doomed.
The 4th amendment doesn't get suspended just because you incant the word, "children."
Where's the constitution for the victims of crime, rather than the perps. I guess that balancing act doesn't matter at all you now, does it. So pretty much, what you are really saying is, that the perp, who -had the pictures-, deserves more constitutional protections than the victims, who got, nothing, when you let this freak walk. Yep, that's a good system right there.
The thing is that you don't have perfect knowledge of whether the suspect is a child pornographer or not. Lacking perfect knowledge, you should seek it out by following the appropriate channels.
the guy had the pictures on his computers. guilty... it's pretty cut and dry.
The people that for 8 years let the situation come to this?
If Fannie and Freddie had no government backing, there's no way mortgage backed securities could ever have been credibly floated... so, since the Dems created and defended Fannie and Freddie, the blame is squarely on them.
With that said, republicans do not deserve to win this election.
If I was the Republican in charge, I would be out in front of this and arguing that Republicans have made it possible to make homes for lots of people, which worked, but it carried a big risk and we (Republicans), rolled the dice a bit and lost. Still, we got 5 trillion dollars of new housing stock out there and we're only on the taxpayer hook for a trillion of it, but all in all it worked. More people are in homes than ever before but now we have some work to do to keep them there.
I would have then included mortgage relief for distressed homeowners, linked with a comprehensive national infrastructure and alternative energy and drilling plan to lower the price of energy and transportation to help our country .... make it easier to make mortgage payments... would have done something to check the rate resets.
sigh...
but they didn't. Instead we got Bush preaching doom and gloom and McCain going on about firing Chris Cox and bashing Wall Street. With every crisis comes an opportunity for success and Republicans whiffed on the play. Meanwhile Democrats positioned themselves very carefully to take advantage of the political opportunities and made the most of it. Quite frankly, this inability of Republicans to manage this message and crisis is why, even though I am a Republican, feel that this crop deserves to lose.
Time and time again Bush has been presented with various crises and time and time again he has done the wrong thing. If he had been the optimistic guy with the bullhorn on the flaming WTC in New Orleans, waving that bullhorn to the crowd in the superdome saying that we are going to bring you food. If he had had that bullhorn this last few months, at wall street and main street, he'd go down as the greatest president -ever-. But he blew it... he totally blew it, and mccain blew it too.
It's not a bad article but the problem that you and I both wrestle with is, is, how to assess the value of an intellectual property. I would suggest make to market rules should apply and carry it like it inventory. The property would be worth what it was the last time a good from it was licensed.
And whose to say that if a cop searches your computer for child porn, tjstork, and doesn't find any but you get charged anyway for some cracked game that you own (legally bought, still a DMCA violation!) because that evidence was collected without a warrant stating that is what they were looking for.
Then don't break the law! What is so hard about not breaking the law. What you are essentially doing is tolerating a certain amount of crime because you do not agree with the law? If the law is as important as you say it is, then should we not follow it. If you don't to pay for a game, then don't crack it! if you think games should be free, then, have copyright reform to do so. Pick one! Don't be saying that you don't have to follow laws you don't agree with and then use the 4th amendment to hide your criminal activity, otherwise, you render the law just as meaningless as the police you condemn would.
And anything we can do to deflate the "think of the children" hysteria will help protect our society
These children that you speak of aren't some imaginary thing you can airly dismiss. They are the hopes and dreams of the parents who raised them, the future of our society, innocent and worthy of our very best efforts to protect them. Honestly, I'd have to question the humanity of someone who is NOT outraged by any crime against a child, and least we can understand now that, that, given the active choice to let child molestors walk, that, all this other so-called liberal talk about children is a lie. They aren't interested in trying to save anyone, not the working man or the children. They are a cancer who deliberately brings countries down and ruins cultures in order to secure power for themselves. If the left can paint the current economic crisis as evidence of the failure of right wing greed, we can work our narrative too, the stabbed in the back narrative, and with ridiculous cases like this, we can and will make it stick. You just wait until Obama pardons Mumia...
It's not that child pornographers shouldn't be prosecuted, but like it or not, they're still entitled to the same due process as normal, "non-pervert" criminals. This "it's for the children" stuff shouldn't fly when we claim to follow the rule of law
The law exists to serve the public good, and if the public loses confidence in that law, then we have no law at all.
"It's for the children" stuff is not some abstract thing that you can so handily dismiss. With this decision, the courts have just given license to all of those who kidnap or exploit children to make this pornography, by giving them a cash cow.
How would you feel about this man if it was your child's photograph on this man's notebook.
Quite honestly, the judicial tradition of suppressing evidence entirely because it was produced without a proper warrant is absurd. The man was clearly guilty and the evidence was there. Instead, fine the police for doing the wrong thing, take it out of their pay, but, still keep the evidence.
This judiciary system is madness.