if you read my posts again I am blaming the voters, just as you are, for where we are and arguing against stupid laws that don't really address the problem of uninformed voters. campaign finance laws are a simplistic quick fix and ignore the real problem.
I was saying not that everyone should go along with the president regardless of their own beliefs, I would prefer they didn't, but that the president needs lots of people to work with him to get things done so only if a lot of people agree with him will things go 'his way.' even with the health care thing all three branches are involved, as they should be. looking back at that first post I could have made that point more clear.
although there are much more important issues currently. The quicker fix would to find a way to inform voters of the consequences of their action and importance of selecting good leaders, just as hard as explaining to your average voter that there are indeed others styles of voting and why they should support them. later we can make voting easier on ourselves.
First would be to ask my representatives to do it or else I won't support them and convince others to do the exact same thing until they have no chance of support with out following. Next option is a bit more radical. Don't know if I pointed it out already but we didn't exactly get the British to leave by asking nicely.
"You get mad and vote in Beth Republican, to teach Sally a lesson. Beth wrings her hands and votes for the same thing." does not represent logical, rational, and informed decision making and yes you are right you can't win like that. Also in the America that I live in there are more than two parties. While admittedly almost no one votes for them whose fault is that if those parties represent the voters will. I will agree with you on the fact that dominant two party system restricts choices, however it only needs to if you are only voting against the other guy and not FOR anyone. There are several options for this such as single district voting, multiple votes per voter, instant run off voting and many other methods tried around the world to varying degrees of success. As you noted irrational behavior on behalf of the voters rewards bad politicians who then go on to make bad choices on our behalf, so if it is not the 'ignorant masses' at fault who is? The bad politicians WE, if of course only if you vote, choose? This can be changed by informed discussion on policy and issues, which I appreciate this conversation taking that turn. But realizing the problem won't make it go away only give us the chance to take back the government from those who have it now, and as you note we need to interfere. In democracy lobbyists may have sway over issues that no one pays attention to or does not care about only votes keep jobs for politicians in government, they can go to lobby privately however, and the masses hold onto that power and need to act as if they do.
there is plenty of ways to get rid of the need for massively expensive campaigns. Get rid of voters swayed only by how much money a candidate receives. You don't have to pay to be on good news outlets, except travel and I do mean that people need to pay attention to good outlets with competent analysis as well instead of rewarding spout boxes like most major outlets are, you don't need much money to host a website with your views and contact information to discuss with constituents by email, phone or town hall meetings. If you are swayed by how much a candidate spends then you are part of the problem, wake up get informed and yes that sometimes takes effort. If you are informed reward informed and logical representatives and encourage friends to be informed as well with informative debate not pushing party lines or pandering or even debasing the conversation to baseless insults that you can't comprehend but just repeat. Democracy wasn't chosen because it was the easiest method of governing.
I never stated that you had an agenda. I merely pointed out that the U.S. government is HUGE and slow. Only by rewarding 'good' politicians with a job for a few more years and punishing bad ones by voting for better representatives will we get 'good' government democracy takes work. I too am an independent but that does not preclude me from bias. Since the U.S. government is an attempt to reach consensus not everything promised by a candidate can be delivered and his lack of delivery can be forced by other politicians. For example gitmo. He promised to close it, has he? No, he needs first to find a place for the prisoners. Many people irrationally don't want them near them. The ones that should be released can't be released her, imagine that shitstorm but we also cry about their relocation to tropical paradise and Swiss alps. The ones we must hold "can't be held in U.S. prisons because they are war criminals not common criminals" Obama fails on a promise with the help of the larger U.S. gov't so give credit where it is due and research exactly why something is not going as you expect. Or you could always go to a dictatorship and not be burdened with 'civic duty' like I said democracy takes work.
please clarify because as I point out politicians are not capable of making their own decisions. If voting for another politician does me more good than voter for the incumbent I will vote for the other guy. As long as people take their civic duty to vote informed seriously this will lead to better outcomes. Too many people act as if their vote doesn't matter at all and act as if it did by voting with out getting useful facts. Act as if you are choosing people who are speaking on your behalf. Tell the politicians whose decisions you like that you support them and why and tell your friends. Tell the ones you don't like why you don't like them and what they would have to do to keep your vote and if you have to get involved personally, if you want democracy to work you have to make it. One of the best things about democracy is that if it fails only everyone who let it fail is forced to face the consequences. Oh and next time bring an argument and facts to the discussion instead of taking your anger at the system out on me with name calling. If I am misguided and uninformed please tell me why, not just that I am and insult me. Talk to me like a child if you like but at least back your insults up with something that helps instead of taking this discussion back to third grade.
actually I don't assume voters know what they want. I know they clearly don't. Like I said voters are lazy, inept, uninformed, and misinformed this is problem caused by the voters and we are paying for it, voters need to get off their ass (or stay on it so that informed people can influence policy) and remind politicians that they are the ones ultimately in control of their reelection. It is not the medias fault because they wont cram the information down our throats that we need to make informed decision. The info is out there but people would rather 'feel good' about being right and listen to news sources that reinforce their world view. Don't blame lobbyists because they CAN'T buy your votes directly they can only fund fear campaigns and 'information sessions' that we are not required to listen to. Ignore crap and find good news sources and rely on those to make your informed decision.
either change the system or choose the one that best represents your interests. You are never going to have a perfect politician like are never going to have a perfect dentist. Just choose the most important issues and vote based on that and how you judge his character. Influence sitting politicians between elections by writing letters. Democracy is a time intensive and expensive form of government. If you have a better solution please, tell us all. The problem is voters routinely reward bad behavior in our congressmen so we have no one else to blame but ourselves.
but the president is not the end all be all of government. Everyone else has to go along with him including people who just want him to fail no matter what so they can point out his flaws.
lobbyists only have sway over issues that people either don't care about or are not informed. Think, if a politician routinely votes against your wishes you don't vote for him right? Then where does his special interest money come from when he can no longer influence policy. Many issues with our government are due to lazy and inept voters. Only vote on an issue if you are well informed and NOT listening to propaganda, we vote these guys in and we can vote them out if they don't do their job.
while the idea of online health records I think is good, I am opposed to one company/gov't agency having it all stored in their care. The more data you have in one place the more valuable that database is and greater incentive to steal it. Admittedly this does go somewhat against the idea of e-health records that is an expense I am willing to pay.
from TFA "uval and his team are using a high-protein, bacteria enhanced “stud” breakfast to feed to the males before they’re released." I wonder if they use spanish fly?
from tfa "uval and his team are using a high-protein, bacteria enhanced “stud” breakfast to feed to the males before they’re released." The bugs aren't genetically super sexed but due to eating habits are more attractive.
The summary acts as if the site was run by the CIA and was hacked by the CIA. The article at times talks the same way, although it also sounds like the CIA had access to the site somehow maybe an account and the NSA hacked the site. Either way how could the army not look and see that they had intimate access to a communication channel used to organize activities. Only reason I can think is that they might have to sit on some information to avoid giving away the fact that they have it, but if that is the case why not just milk it for what its worth then hack it.
There was no mention of prostitution charges, she claimed that she had been fired for choosing clients and servicing her boyfriend without charge never mentioning prostitution except to note that it is illegal. Now if that is true and she was a prostitute it would seem as if the 'parlor' was sanctioning prostitution and they would be just as guilty. If she was 'working' outside of her job as a prostitute my question still stands, is a prostitution charge something you can fire an employee for in South Africa? Finally as you note right to vote, bear arms etc. are removed for felons but not all rights and there are several classes of crimes so is prostitution one of these? But the issue still remains that this article had no where near enough information.
So criminals don't have rights now? Was it in fact illegal to discriminate against her for criminal acts such as prostitution? If it is Then it does it really matter if she committed a crime, the law says she is protected. Otherwise there is no case. And from the article "The woman, known as "Kylie", alleged that the massage parlour's boss dismissed her for choosing her clients and for spending time with her boyfriend, who did not pay for her services." Then somehow in the next sentence it mentions prostitution, there is no legal charge of prostitution.
Since there is also a receiving email server the request could go to who ever hosts that. For example if you emailed a.gmail account the request would go to them. Now it would be harder to locate all email servers you send to and if the receiver often hosts their own server or you sent to many domains that would entail more work, but hey they get paid by the hour why would they care. For this reason never did understand why cops want their job to be easier. As for encryption that would just slow them down not stop them completely.
yeah Israel never screws up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lillehammer_affair 29 people seems excessive for Mossad in that quoted example there was nine agents. However there are many other concerns to take into consideration such as where to stay, how to get out, etc now not all of them will be involved in directly killing the target and most of the suspected agents were likely involved in support roles. Remember that there are cameras all over the place, biometrics taken of all entrants to the country, records kept at the hotel and many other places. Getting away without a single record was almost never even possible in this situation. More likely they wanted to get away alive and with enough deny-ability that everyone would know who did it with out being able to prove it. However I too am not entirely convinced that Israel was certainly behind the assassination.
Ever notice how almost all "terrorists" are Al Qada? And how there are hundreds of Al Qada "affiliate" groups? Yes many are separate but many pretend to be separate to look that way and insulate themselves and still many more are loosely aligned. These sites can be pro-active. From the sound of it they were places to organize protests and other similar activity or contact new people interested in "improving" their country. Just as any site that advocates protests and attempts to locate new contacts who think bombing buildings to wake America up to the consequences of its activities in Palestine to hopefully stop those activities would be labeled a terrorist training site with propaganda and promptly shut down.
Or they are are CIA/NSA sites set up poorly to justify their recent poor performance in the "Cyberwar" and the subsequent budget increases they would love to see.
Slashdot Mirror
if only their blog had mod points. all the comments are of the form "still down where ever I am"
if you read my posts again I am blaming the voters, just as you are, for where we are and arguing against stupid laws that don't really address the problem of uninformed voters. campaign finance laws are a simplistic quick fix and ignore the real problem.
I was saying not that everyone should go along with the president regardless of their own beliefs, I would prefer they didn't, but that the president needs lots of people to work with him to get things done so only if a lot of people agree with him will things go 'his way.' even with the health care thing all three branches are involved, as they should be. looking back at that first post I could have made that point more clear.
although there are much more important issues currently. The quicker fix would to find a way to inform voters of the consequences of their action and importance of selecting good leaders, just as hard as explaining to your average voter that there are indeed others styles of voting and why they should support them. later we can make voting easier on ourselves.
First would be to ask my representatives to do it or else I won't support them and convince others to do the exact same thing until they have no chance of support with out following. Next option is a bit more radical. Don't know if I pointed it out already but we didn't exactly get the British to leave by asking nicely.
"You get mad and vote in Beth Republican, to teach Sally a lesson. Beth wrings her hands and votes for the same thing." does not represent logical, rational, and informed decision making and yes you are right you can't win like that. Also in the America that I live in there are more than two parties. While admittedly almost no one votes for them whose fault is that if those parties represent the voters will. I will agree with you on the fact that dominant two party system restricts choices, however it only needs to if you are only voting against the other guy and not FOR anyone. There are several options for this such as single district voting, multiple votes per voter, instant run off voting and many other methods tried around the world to varying degrees of success. As you noted irrational behavior on behalf of the voters rewards bad politicians who then go on to make bad choices on our behalf, so if it is not the 'ignorant masses' at fault who is? The bad politicians WE, if of course only if you vote, choose? This can be changed by informed discussion on policy and issues, which I appreciate this conversation taking that turn. But realizing the problem won't make it go away only give us the chance to take back the government from those who have it now, and as you note we need to interfere. In democracy lobbyists may have sway over issues that no one pays attention to or does not care about only votes keep jobs for politicians in government, they can go to lobby privately however, and the masses hold onto that power and need to act as if they do.
there is plenty of ways to get rid of the need for massively expensive campaigns. Get rid of voters swayed only by how much money a candidate receives. You don't have to pay to be on good news outlets, except travel and I do mean that people need to pay attention to good outlets with competent analysis as well instead of rewarding spout boxes like most major outlets are, you don't need much money to host a website with your views and contact information to discuss with constituents by email, phone or town hall meetings. If you are swayed by how much a candidate spends then you are part of the problem, wake up get informed and yes that sometimes takes effort. If you are informed reward informed and logical representatives and encourage friends to be informed as well with informative debate not pushing party lines or pandering or even debasing the conversation to baseless insults that you can't comprehend but just repeat. Democracy wasn't chosen because it was the easiest method of governing.
I never stated that you had an agenda. I merely pointed out that the U.S. government is HUGE and slow. Only by rewarding 'good' politicians with a job for a few more years and punishing bad ones by voting for better representatives will we get 'good' government democracy takes work. I too am an independent but that does not preclude me from bias. Since the U.S. government is an attempt to reach consensus not everything promised by a candidate can be delivered and his lack of delivery can be forced by other politicians. For example gitmo. He promised to close it, has he? No, he needs first to find a place for the prisoners. Many people irrationally don't want them near them. The ones that should be released can't be released her, imagine that shitstorm but we also cry about their relocation to tropical paradise and Swiss alps. The ones we must hold "can't be held in U.S. prisons because they are war criminals not common criminals" Obama fails on a promise with the help of the larger U.S. gov't so give credit where it is due and research exactly why something is not going as you expect. Or you could always go to a dictatorship and not be burdened with 'civic duty' like I said democracy takes work.
please clarify because as I point out politicians are not capable of making their own decisions. If voting for another politician does me more good than voter for the incumbent I will vote for the other guy. As long as people take their civic duty to vote informed seriously this will lead to better outcomes. Too many people act as if their vote doesn't matter at all and act as if it did by voting with out getting useful facts. Act as if you are choosing people who are speaking on your behalf. Tell the politicians whose decisions you like that you support them and why and tell your friends. Tell the ones you don't like why you don't like them and what they would have to do to keep your vote and if you have to get involved personally, if you want democracy to work you have to make it. One of the best things about democracy is that if it fails only everyone who let it fail is forced to face the consequences. Oh and next time bring an argument and facts to the discussion instead of taking your anger at the system out on me with name calling. If I am misguided and uninformed please tell me why, not just that I am and insult me. Talk to me like a child if you like but at least back your insults up with something that helps instead of taking this discussion back to third grade.
actually I don't assume voters know what they want. I know they clearly don't. Like I said voters are lazy, inept, uninformed, and misinformed this is problem caused by the voters and we are paying for it, voters need to get off their ass (or stay on it so that informed people can influence policy) and remind politicians that they are the ones ultimately in control of their reelection. It is not the medias fault because they wont cram the information down our throats that we need to make informed decision. The info is out there but people would rather 'feel good' about being right and listen to news sources that reinforce their world view. Don't blame lobbyists because they CAN'T buy your votes directly they can only fund fear campaigns and 'information sessions' that we are not required to listen to. Ignore crap and find good news sources and rely on those to make your informed decision.
either change the system or choose the one that best represents your interests. You are never going to have a perfect politician like are never going to have a perfect dentist. Just choose the most important issues and vote based on that and how you judge his character. Influence sitting politicians between elections by writing letters. Democracy is a time intensive and expensive form of government. If you have a better solution please, tell us all. The problem is voters routinely reward bad behavior in our congressmen so we have no one else to blame but ourselves.
but the president is not the end all be all of government. Everyone else has to go along with him including people who just want him to fail no matter what so they can point out his flaws.
lobbyists only have sway over issues that people either don't care about or are not informed. Think, if a politician routinely votes against your wishes you don't vote for him right? Then where does his special interest money come from when he can no longer influence policy. Many issues with our government are due to lazy and inept voters. Only vote on an issue if you are well informed and NOT listening to propaganda, we vote these guys in and we can vote them out if they don't do their job.
and what if evil munchkins land on the wing to sabotage the engine and the only one who sees it is a guy who every one thinks is crazy? what if...
while the idea of online health records I think is good, I am opposed to one company/gov't agency having it all stored in their care. The more data you have in one place the more valuable that database is and greater incentive to steal it. Admittedly this does go somewhat against the idea of e-health records that is an expense I am willing to pay.
but do we as a species really have empathy?
from TFA "uval and his team are using a high-protein, bacteria enhanced “stud” breakfast to feed to the males before they’re released." I wonder if they use spanish fly?
from tfa "uval and his team are using a high-protein, bacteria enhanced “stud” breakfast to feed to the males before they’re released." The bugs aren't genetically super sexed but due to eating habits are more attractive.
The summary acts as if the site was run by the CIA and was hacked by the CIA. The article at times talks the same way, although it also sounds like the CIA had access to the site somehow maybe an account and the NSA hacked the site. Either way how could the army not look and see that they had intimate access to a communication channel used to organize activities. Only reason I can think is that they might have to sit on some information to avoid giving away the fact that they have it, but if that is the case why not just milk it for what its worth then hack it.
There was no mention of prostitution charges, she claimed that she had been fired for choosing clients and servicing her boyfriend without charge never mentioning prostitution except to note that it is illegal. Now if that is true and she was a prostitute it would seem as if the 'parlor' was sanctioning prostitution and they would be just as guilty. If she was 'working' outside of her job as a prostitute my question still stands, is a prostitution charge something you can fire an employee for in South Africa? Finally as you note right to vote, bear arms etc. are removed for felons but not all rights and there are several classes of crimes so is prostitution one of these? But the issue still remains that this article had no where near enough information.
So criminals don't have rights now? Was it in fact illegal to discriminate against her for criminal acts such as prostitution? If it is Then it does it really matter if she committed a crime, the law says she is protected. Otherwise there is no case. And from the article "The woman, known as "Kylie", alleged that the massage parlour's boss dismissed her for choosing her clients and for spending time with her boyfriend, who did not pay for her services." Then somehow in the next sentence it mentions prostitution, there is no legal charge of prostitution.
Since there is also a receiving email server the request could go to who ever hosts that. For example if you emailed a .gmail account the request would go to them. Now it would be harder to locate all email servers you send to and if the receiver often hosts their own server or you sent to many domains that would entail more work, but hey they get paid by the hour why would they care. For this reason never did understand why cops want their job to be easier. As for encryption that would just slow them down not stop them completely.
yeah Israel never screws up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lillehammer_affair 29 people seems excessive for Mossad in that quoted example there was nine agents. However there are many other concerns to take into consideration such as where to stay, how to get out, etc now not all of them will be involved in directly killing the target and most of the suspected agents were likely involved in support roles. Remember that there are cameras all over the place, biometrics taken of all entrants to the country, records kept at the hotel and many other places. Getting away without a single record was almost never even possible in this situation. More likely they wanted to get away alive and with enough deny-ability that everyone would know who did it with out being able to prove it. However I too am not entirely convinced that Israel was certainly behind the assassination.
Ever notice how almost all "terrorists" are Al Qada? And how there are hundreds of Al Qada "affiliate" groups? Yes many are separate but many pretend to be separate to look that way and insulate themselves and still many more are loosely aligned. These sites can be pro-active. From the sound of it they were places to organize protests and other similar activity or contact new people interested in "improving" their country. Just as any site that advocates protests and attempts to locate new contacts who think bombing buildings to wake America up to the consequences of its activities in Palestine to hopefully stop those activities would be labeled a terrorist training site with propaganda and promptly shut down.
Or they are are CIA/NSA sites set up poorly to justify their recent poor performance in the "Cyberwar" and the subsequent budget increases they would love to see.