It was an event where some people were told Obama was her successor; is there any evidence that was the FIRST time it was said? I'm sure it was said before and after, the only reason you are interested in it is because Ayers was there.
You're just making things up now to support your viewpoint. Barack and Michelle was an unauthorized tell-all book, essentially gossip, and relied heavily on unsupported assertions and anonymous sources.
As for your claim that the style is Ayers, that has been proven false:
Do you have citations for this? While it is generally accepted that Obama and Ayers had met at one point, the extraordinary claim that he "launched" his career at Bill Ayers house needs proof.
IAAL and you're right in that it is clearly unconstitutional, and should be struck down on broadness grounds or more likely just because it prohibits Constitutionally permitted activities. You don't even really have to go that far, though; Washington state's criminal code defines person this way:
"(17) "Person", "he", and "actor" include any natural person and, where relevant, a corporation, joint stock association, or an unincorporated association."
This does NOT include governmental agencies. A police department would not qualify as a "person" to be protected under this law.
In America, the cops is always right !! No matter what the cops did, or still doing, there are always people who will scream their heads off telling you that the cops are right !
Same in the US; being arrested means basically having your freedom of movement restricted by the police, even if temporarily. If a cop arrives at the scene and makes you stand at the wall, and tells you you'll be cuffed if you try leaving, that's technically arrest.
Not surprising with California's emission standards. Funny how environmental regulations and laws tend to be incredibly successful, yet the same people who were wrong about them in the past are still just as ardently fighting any new ones.
The costs of reducing carbon emissions would be comparable to reducing discharge of toxins into the environment. You may note the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act did not plunge the United States into a permanent depression.
The conflict on the CO2 question is shown by your own chart; CO2 trails temperature, when logically the reverse should be true. This has been a problem in the modeling for years. I am not a GW denier; I believe anthropogenic GW is probably true. I'm just saying (a) there is a legitimate conflict (though the idiotic arguments raised by many deniers should be ignored), and (b) the costs of mitigating anthropogenic GW, whether it exists are not, are worth it compared to the risk.
Actually climatological modellers, the only people who can really speak authoritatively on the subject have been conflicted for a while. That's actually the best argument against global warming, but most deniers are so mindnumbingly stupid they miss that. Based on what I've read on the subject I am unconvinced of warming; but the risk is sufficiently high that the relatively low costs and side benefits of moving to alternative fuels and capping emissions is worth it.
That's completely incorrect. The Democrats have been willing to compromise; Obama's facing a backlash among his own party for being too willing to compromise. If you've been following the news you know where the Democrats started and where they are now and can see what they've compromised on. The Republicans still refuse to compromise at all on taxes.
The trick to a healthy government is for the population to pay attention to what they do, don't just wave your hands vaguely in the air and say both parties are equally culpable.
You bring up an apt comparison, but it says the reverse of what you intended it to say. Rosa Parks practiced true civil disobedience; she broke a law out in the open, expecting to get arrested; that's a critical component of civil disobedience. She didn't do it secretly using a false name.
That IS outrageous and I'm going to write my congressman about this. That is not nearly enough boxcars with shackles for the US populace, and I am going to ask him to sponsor legislation requiring FEMA to buy substantially more boxcars with shackles.
Slashdot Mirror
It was an event where some people were told Obama was her successor; is there any evidence that was the FIRST time it was said? I'm sure it was said before and after, the only reason you are interested in it is because Ayers was there.
You're just making things up now to support your viewpoint. Barack and Michelle was an unauthorized tell-all book, essentially gossip, and relied heavily on unsupported assertions and anonymous sources.
As for your claim that the style is Ayers, that has been proven false:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article5063279.ece
More importantly from our perspective, their economic health depends on ours. China needs us to import their goods or their economy grinds to a halt.
Yep, it's not "lending money" in an altruistic sense.
"Once," eh? And this "launched" his career?
Yes, I do not believe that Ayers ghost wrote Dreams From My Father, primarily because I am not some fruitcake conspiracy theorist.
Do you have citations for this? While it is generally accepted that Obama and Ayers had met at one point, the extraordinary claim that he "launched" his career at Bill Ayers house needs proof.
IAAL and you're right in that it is clearly unconstitutional, and should be struck down on broadness grounds or more likely just because it prohibits Constitutionally permitted activities. You don't even really have to go that far, though; Washington state's criminal code defines person this way:
"(17) "Person", "he", and "actor" include any natural person and, where relevant, a corporation, joint stock association, or an unincorporated association."
This does NOT include governmental agencies. A police department would not qualify as a "person" to be protected under this law.
"Generation gap. The 60s people marched, risked jail time, and their lives to deal with this crap."
Who do you think is in power now?
In America, the cops is always right !! No matter what the cops did, or still doing, there are always people who will scream their heads off telling you that the cops are right !
Why do you think this is unique to America?
" I am considered poor myself relative to what the government calls the poverty level. "
Perhaps you should work harder and shoulder your fair burden of taxes. I subsidize your services.
Probably the same phantom environmentalists that supposedly picket nuclear plants 24/7.
Same in the US; being arrested means basically having your freedom of movement restricted by the police, even if temporarily. If a cop arrives at the scene and makes you stand at the wall, and tells you you'll be cuffed if you try leaving, that's technically arrest.
Not surprising with California's emission standards. Funny how environmental regulations and laws tend to be incredibly successful, yet the same people who were wrong about them in the past are still just as ardently fighting any new ones.
The costs of reducing carbon emissions would be comparable to reducing discharge of toxins into the environment. You may note the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act did not plunge the United States into a permanent depression.
The conflict on the CO2 question is shown by your own chart; CO2 trails temperature, when logically the reverse should be true. This has been a problem in the modeling for years. I am not a GW denier; I believe anthropogenic GW is probably true. I'm just saying (a) there is a legitimate conflict (though the idiotic arguments raised by many deniers should be ignored), and (b) the costs of mitigating anthropogenic GW, whether it exists are not, are worth it compared to the risk.
Actually climatological modellers, the only people who can really speak authoritatively on the subject have been conflicted for a while. That's actually the best argument against global warming, but most deniers are so mindnumbingly stupid they miss that. Based on what I've read on the subject I am unconvinced of warming; but the risk is sufficiently high that the relatively low costs and side benefits of moving to alternative fuels and capping emissions is worth it.
Speaking of which (and all this talk about compromise), just what spending cuts has the Great Man-Child in the Whitehouse proposed?
"Man-child"? Obama is a lot more mature than any president we've had in a while, particularly the last president who thought he was a teenager. He's offered a lot of cuts. Do you not read the news? http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/in-debt-talks-obama-offers-social-security-cuts/2011/07/06/gIQA2sFO1H_story.html?hpid=z1
That's completely incorrect. The Democrats have been willing to compromise; Obama's facing a backlash among his own party for being too willing to compromise. If you've been following the news you know where the Democrats started and where they are now and can see what they've compromised on. The Republicans still refuse to compromise at all on taxes. The trick to a healthy government is for the population to pay attention to what they do, don't just wave your hands vaguely in the air and say both parties are equally culpable.
Nobody's saying the republicans are extreme in wanting cuts; they're extreme in wanting ZERO tax increases.
You make me laugh. Which one are you? http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2001/2/12/
"under 99 quadrillion bitcoins per serving" Or, in US currency, $4.35.
Unfortunately a rather stupid sentient race located in Solspace rendered a good chunk of their rivers too polluted to use.
I think the immoral part is breaking into someone else's property.
Yeah, that Rosa Parks, stop whining, bitch.
You bring up an apt comparison, but it says the reverse of what you intended it to say. Rosa Parks practiced true civil disobedience; she broke a law out in the open, expecting to get arrested; that's a critical component of civil disobedience. She didn't do it secretly using a false name.
Apple has never been relevant enough on the desktop to kill any desktop technology. PC CD-Rs and then the internet killed floppy drives.
That IS outrageous and I'm going to write my congressman about this. That is not nearly enough boxcars with shackles for the US populace, and I am going to ask him to sponsor legislation requiring FEMA to buy substantially more boxcars with shackles.