Electronic voting is about the only method less reliable than the punch card ballots of Floridian infamy. And I'm surprised someone hasn't responded to you that Canadians manage to hand count all of their ballots in all of their elections quickly, honestly and accurately.
But to bash the Republicans and to ignore the Democrat's own abuses is a serious mistake, because it means we'll just replace one set of evil crooks with another.
Please, not only are Dems and Republicans not on the same page here, they aren't even on the same planet. The worst of what wingnut Republicans think Clinton did in their paranoid fantasies is dwarfed by what Bush has actually done.
Hardly. That's a valid opinion if you were his wife at the time, otherwise it's noneofyourfuckingbusiness.
through Janet Reno, he singlehandedly destroyed the last shred of respect people had for the DOJ.
Hardly. Reno was barely on the job when the FBI came and told her that children were being molested in the Branch Dividian compound. Having a prosecutors typically high opinion of child molestation, she authorized storming the compound.
And I see some people still cling to the "Clinton did it too defense," which generally requires a great deal of reaching, a great deal of misinformation, or a great deal of bullshit. Like with Gonzo and the USA firings...wingnuts bleated that "Clinton fired all the USA's, what are you complaining about". Which was of course reach, misinformation, and bullshit because Clinton fired the USA's at the start of his first term, whereas Bush was firing his own appointees in the middle of his second term.
No, it's time to put that bullshit talking point to bed. That Armitage's leak was the one that was published in no way changes the fact that at least Rove and Libby were also trying to leak the information to the press.
Rose colored glasses much? Today's comics don't have to worry about the Luddite Comics Code, and one dimensional characters are a lot harder to come by.
Except with a computer, you never have to worry about damage to the comic when you take it out and read it. And since comics are so much more visual than books, it isn't a strain to read them on a computer screen. I've looked at a ton of comics on my 19" monitor and have never had a problem.
I wish they would just get together with Apple and sell comics on the iTMS. Well established site, reasonable prices, and something to buy to put on those new iPhones and iPT's while your on the subway.
To be fair, the US is a totally different culture then western europe. You made your system work, we made our system work. One of the biggest culture clashes is that neither side seems capable of understanding that the other side LIKES their system.
No, Americans don't really like our system. They've just been snowed by decades of Republican propaganda and a pro-corporate media.
I think you're being unfair. US Democrats love to talk about all those things. That's got to count for something, right?
All those things? Just how many Democrats have come close to supporting true universal health care, much less max working weeks, state funded education, and having the minimum wage be high enough to support a family?
NBC doesn't seem to realize that a conveniance based model has more opportunities for growth. Time after time the internet has favored those who have figured out how to make a profit by catering to conveniance.
Yup. I've been making the point for years that piracy isn't about getting stuff for free, it's about convenience. If you make decent money and don't have a lot of debt, it's more convenient to pay so long as a reasonable option is available. If there is no reasonable option, then people who would otherwise be happy to pay will turn to P2P. If you don't make decent money, you're unlikely to be able to afford the stuff in the first place, and there is little difference between someone who pirates and someone who would never have bought the stuff in the first place. And if you have a lot of debt, you're already being a good consumer to the maximum of your ability.
Where the probable cause is. Everything that I see points to him working within the confines of the constitution.
Then you are either trolling, or you being willfully obtuse. Where are presidential signing statements in the Constitution, Yar? Where are the exceptions in the 8th Amendment for cruel & unusual punishment for terror suspects? Suspending due process for American citizens held on American soil?
Okay: "A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position." So when I think that you are constructing my argument in the wrong way - in a way that suits you - I call it a straw man argument.
Wrong again. A straw man is when you attack an argument or position as if your opponent as made it, but has not. So if I chide you for your pro-bestiality statements, that would be a straw man, because you haven't made any.
While I agree that shouldn't have happened, where did Bush violate the constitution?
Padilla had the right to due process, a speedy trial, and the right to be free from cruel & unusual punishment (sensory deprivation at the least). The Administration violated all of these rights.
You keep repeating this, as if that will firm up the legal case against it. It's not at all clear that listening in on overseas calls violates any law... at the very least it has not been tested in any court of law.
Purely overseas calls are not, and have never been the issue. The issue is when one end of those calls happens to be in the United States, as you do not surrender your constitutional rights anytime you call someone in another country. Keep in mind FISA laws already allow wiretaps on those calls, allowing federal agents to obtain a warrant up to 72 hours after the fact. And the FISA court is incredibly generous with their standard of evidence necessary to get a warrant: there have been over 10,000 requests for warrants since the court was set up, and around 4 have been denied. That's a.04% rejection rate. The FBI can tap someones phone, go to the FISA court two days later and say "hey, we suspected these guys were up to bad stuff" and the FISA court says "ok, here's your warrant." By going around FISA, the Bush Administration wants to be able to tap phones without having to provide any reason at all.
No, that's an opinion.
We spend more than twice as much money for worse care. We have higher infant mortality rates and lower life expectancies. A country that spends 1/30th as much per patient is nearly even with us in statistics. Socialized medicine is better than our current private insurance racket. That. Is. A. Fact.
Besides, we HAVE socialized medicine now. Not a form that you or I are happy with, but we do have socialized medicine.
For a few. But it's done in a half-hearted, half-assed fashion. For example, if you are struck with kidney failure, you might be able to get reimbursement for a $300,000 kidney transplant operation. But you're on your own for the $3,000 a month in anti-rejection drugs.
But in my example, both Bush and the Dems were advocating INCREASING funding for a popular and successful program. Their positions were exactly the same except for a squabble over just how much the INCREASE should be. Under either plan, children would receive MORE coverage then they have today. Is it really too much to expect some bipartisanship for such an easy issue? What hope do we have for more difficult issues?
In that case, why are you blaming Democrats when enough Republicans joined them to nearly override Bush's veto?
Last I checked, it was not against the constitution - or against the law - for a President to fire federal prosecutors, and it is in fact done by every president. Bush was slimy about it, and he did it for a bad reason, but it's not illegal.
Of course it was illegal. Just like in right to work states, you can be fired for any reason. You can be fired for n
Did I say "Clinton" in that post? The fact that I didn't, yet you still thought of him should tell you something.
Well, I guess it is possible you are talking about someone else, instead of being a full of crap wingnut.
It said: Sexual relations occur "when the person [Clinton] knowingly engages in or causes contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person [Lewinsky] with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person [Lewinsky]."
Clinton admitted to fondling her breasts. His only defense is that he didn't intend to arouse or gratify either his own or her sexual desire.
Nope, full of crap. But I helpfully bolded the parts you missed - your standard issue boob grab is for the male's satisfaction, not the female's. Unless you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it with intent to arouse her...didn't think so.
Wrong again. In the Paula Jones case, he was accused of seeking oral sex from a subordinate. The Violence Against Women Act, (which Clinton himself signed)make it legal to try to establish a pattern of behavior on the part of an accused sexual harrasser. If you're accused of seeking sexual favors from your subordinates, it's certainly relevant if you have actually received sexual favors from your subordinates.
A bunch of Googling of "violence against women act" + "pattern of behavior" and then + "sexual harassment" turns up...nothing. The "pattern of behavior" stuff is for domestic violence on current or former intimate partners. None of which applies to Clinton and Jones. So it looks like you are full of crap once again...at least you are consistent. Besides, Clinton getting it on with Monica in a consensual fling is a pattern of behavior for cheating on your wife in consensual flings - not harassment.
Bullshit. He was disbarred for perjury.
Ah, I see we come to the part of the conversation where you make up shit to back up your baseless talking points.
When he told Monica, that if she denied the affair then no one could prove otherwise, that's exactly what he was doing.
Hearsay based on one of Linda Tripps tapes. You know, where Monica lies left and right all on her own, and Tripp was the only person to actually be convicted of anything from the whole fiasco. But even if the hearsay was correct, it was Robert Jordan who supposedly told Lewinsky to lie, not Clinton.
Paula Jones's right to justice. She had the right (because of a law that he signed) to establish a pattern of behavior on his part. He lied and denied her that. His lie was obstruction of justice.
See above on pattern of behavior. And what was relevant and what was not. Then remember that her case was thrown out because even if what she said was true, it didn't amount to harassment.
I guess you missed that part where congress didn't renew the law that provided the special prosecutor.
I guess you missed the part where that could easily be renewed.
Call it payback. You supported your guy even though he was as guilty as sin, so how can you expect us to do any different?
A pathetic attempt to rationalize Republican hypocrisy, and another example that you have no idea what the hell you are talking about. Clinton was found not guilty by the Senate, whereas Libby was found guilty by a jury, in charges brought by a Bush appointed prosecutor before a Bush appointed judge. Clinton was caught up in a pathetic witch hunt to drive him out of office. Libby was convicted because a serious crime was committed: outing a covert agent working on nuclear non-proliferation. Specifically, Iran. And who do the Republicans want to attack now, and for what supposed reason? Hmm, what was it...something about bombs and Ajamindinad or something....
Then they need to take out back whoever is doing their calculations, pistol whip them, fire them, then pistol whip them again, along with the "don't dignify GOP attacks with a response" consultants that worked so very well for Presidents Dukakis, Gore and Kerry. Our entire political system and media needs a complete enema.
"The President shall be commander in Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States..."
If mining and miners are so evil, and you approve of running them out of the country, where do you get the materials for your house, your Prius, and your PC?
Analogy time. I like eating chicken. A lot. I like it baked, fried and grilled. I like it in stew. I like it in burritos. I even like it on pizza. That does not mean, however, that I have to like chicken make from big operations where the birds have part of their beaks cut off, are kept in tiny cages and violently thrown into hoppers so their wings are broken until they die. So I don't buy chicken from factory farms, and if those places all go out of business, then too god damned bad for them.
If your jobs involves doing horrible things - abusing chickens on factory farms, selling lead paint for children's toys, making DDT for mass agricultural spraying, clear cutting irreplaceable forests or polluting rivers with waste from your sloppy mine - then find a different job. Meanwhile, I will happily enjoy my free range chicken and my PC and mp3 player made from materials from environmentally safe mines.
Kennedy after the Democrats swiftboated his first choice, Robert Bork
That word does not mean what you think it means.
Alas, the facts have a well known liberal bias and when they don't, we'll just ignore them to slam Bush and conservatives anyway. Cognitive dissonance FTW!
Then they should have told Florida to start recounting all the counties, rather than stopping the recount altogether. I'm glad to see that SOD is living long enough to see what a stupid partisan mistake she made back then.
Slashdot Mirror
Pen and paper can still be forged.
Not really. It would take a large conspiracy to swing an election.
The only corruption-free method of voting is to stand up and be counted.
Uh, no. You need anonymous voting so voters can't be bribed/pressured to vote a certain way.
Electronic voting is about the only method less reliable than the punch card ballots of Floridian infamy. And I'm surprised someone hasn't responded to you that Canadians manage to hand count all of their ballots in all of their elections quickly, honestly and accurately.
Yup. Just re-release 2k, with instant user switching, the one feature they've added this century that is actually useful.
Wow, completely missing GP's point
No, I didn't. Not my fault you don't know how to read.
and proving it at the same time! Congrats, you've scored a two-fer!
No, I didn't. But I suppose you'll continue with your rhetorical masturbation without actually making an argument, and keep declaring victory.
The DMCA was deplorable, but supporting it hardly makes one "scum."
But to bash the Republicans and to ignore the Democrat's own abuses is a serious mistake, because it means we'll just replace one set of evil crooks with another.
Please, not only are Dems and Republicans not on the same page here, they aren't even on the same planet. The worst of what wingnut Republicans think Clinton did in their paranoid fantasies is dwarfed by what Bush has actually done.
Clinton? Scum of the Earth
Hardly. That's a valid opinion if you were his wife at the time, otherwise it's noneofyourfuckingbusiness.
through Janet Reno, he singlehandedly destroyed the last shred of respect people had for the DOJ.
Hardly. Reno was barely on the job when the FBI came and told her that children were being molested in the Branch Dividian compound. Having a prosecutors typically high opinion of child molestation, she authorized storming the compound.
And I see some people still cling to the "Clinton did it too defense," which generally requires a great deal of reaching, a great deal of misinformation, or a great deal of bullshit. Like with Gonzo and the USA firings...wingnuts bleated that "Clinton fired all the USA's, what are you complaining about". Which was of course reach, misinformation, and bullshit because Clinton fired the USA's at the start of his first term, whereas Bush was firing his own appointees in the middle of his second term.
Should they also save every document sent to the printer? Should they get rid of shredders and save every piece of paper?
Would you like a straw man? How about another?
The logistics of saving each email are just crazy, and our taxpayer money will be spent making it possible.
We have databases in the hundreds of terabytes. Saving 8 years of email is trivial.
No, it's time to put that bullshit talking point to bed. That Armitage's leak was the one that was published in no way changes the fact that at least Rove and Libby were also trying to leak the information to the press.
. The ones who want only to consume the media and care nothing for the experience of holding an actual comic book will pirate.
I like the experience of holding a comic book plenty, I just don't have a few extra thousand dollars lying around to get back issues plus new ones.
Rose colored glasses much? Today's comics don't have to worry about the Luddite Comics Code, and one dimensional characters are a lot harder to come by.
Except with a computer, you never have to worry about damage to the comic when you take it out and read it. And since comics are so much more visual than books, it isn't a strain to read them on a computer screen. I've looked at a ton of comics on my 19" monitor and have never had a problem.
I wish they would just get together with Apple and sell comics on the iTMS. Well established site, reasonable prices, and something to buy to put on those new iPhones and iPT's while your on the subway.
To be fair, the US is a totally different culture then western europe. You made your system work, we made our system work. One of the biggest culture clashes is that neither side seems capable of understanding that the other side LIKES their system.
No, Americans don't really like our system. They've just been snowed by decades of Republican propaganda and a pro-corporate media.
Back during the Bush/Gore race, it was hard for me as a US citizen to spot a difference.
Maybe, if you were an idiot at the time.
Gore's VP wanted to content restrictions on video games.
You can find 10 luddite Republicans for every luddite Democrat.
I think you're being unfair. US Democrats love to talk about all those things. That's got to count for something, right?
All those things? Just how many Democrats have come close to supporting true universal health care, much less max working weeks, state funded education, and having the minimum wage be high enough to support a family?
Well in reality Bush is more Democrat then Republican...
Bullfuckingshit.
The reasons Democrats hate him is the majority of Democrats are Liberal Bias too.
Bullshit. The Democrats are an extremely conservative party. That they look liberal next to the GOP tells you how far to the right they have gone.
NBC doesn't seem to realize that a conveniance based model has more opportunities for growth. Time after time the internet has favored those who have figured out how to make a profit by catering to conveniance.
Yup. I've been making the point for years that piracy isn't about getting stuff for free, it's about convenience. If you make decent money and don't have a lot of debt, it's more convenient to pay so long as a reasonable option is available. If there is no reasonable option, then people who would otherwise be happy to pay will turn to P2P. If you don't make decent money, you're unlikely to be able to afford the stuff in the first place, and there is little difference between someone who pirates and someone who would never have bought the stuff in the first place. And if you have a lot of debt, you're already being a good consumer to the maximum of your ability.
Where the probable cause is. Everything that I see points to him working within the confines of the constitution.
.04% rejection rate. The FBI can tap someones phone, go to the FISA court two days later and say "hey, we suspected these guys were up to bad stuff" and the FISA court says "ok, here's your warrant." By going around FISA, the Bush Administration wants to be able to tap phones without having to provide any reason at all.
Then you are either trolling, or you being willfully obtuse. Where are presidential signing statements in the Constitution, Yar? Where are the exceptions in the 8th Amendment for cruel & unusual punishment for terror suspects? Suspending due process for American citizens held on American soil?
Okay: "A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position." So when I think that you are constructing my argument in the wrong way - in a way that suits you - I call it a straw man argument.
Wrong again. A straw man is when you attack an argument or position as if your opponent as made it, but has not. So if I chide you for your pro-bestiality statements, that would be a straw man, because you haven't made any.
While I agree that shouldn't have happened, where did Bush violate the constitution?
Padilla had the right to due process, a speedy trial, and the right to be free from cruel & unusual punishment (sensory deprivation at the least). The Administration violated all of these rights.
You keep repeating this, as if that will firm up the legal case against it. It's not at all clear that listening in on overseas calls violates any law... at the very least it has not been tested in any court of law.
Purely overseas calls are not, and have never been the issue. The issue is when one end of those calls happens to be in the United States, as you do not surrender your constitutional rights anytime you call someone in another country. Keep in mind FISA laws already allow wiretaps on those calls, allowing federal agents to obtain a warrant up to 72 hours after the fact. And the FISA court is incredibly generous with their standard of evidence necessary to get a warrant: there have been over 10,000 requests for warrants since the court was set up, and around 4 have been denied. That's a
No, that's an opinion.
We spend more than twice as much money for worse care. We have higher infant mortality rates and lower life expectancies. A country that spends 1/30th as much per patient is nearly even with us in statistics. Socialized medicine is better than our current private insurance racket. That. Is. A. Fact.
Besides, we HAVE socialized medicine now. Not a form that you or I are happy with, but we do have socialized medicine.
For a few. But it's done in a half-hearted, half-assed fashion. For example, if you are struck with kidney failure, you might be able to get reimbursement for a $300,000 kidney transplant operation. But you're on your own for the $3,000 a month in anti-rejection drugs.
But in my example, both Bush and the Dems were advocating INCREASING funding for a popular and successful program. Their positions were exactly the same except for a squabble over just how much the INCREASE should be. Under either plan, children would receive MORE coverage then they have today. Is it really too much to expect some bipartisanship for such an easy issue? What hope do we have for more difficult issues?
In that case, why are you blaming Democrats when enough Republicans joined them to nearly override Bush's veto?
Last I checked, it was not against the constitution - or against the law - for a President to fire federal prosecutors, and it is in fact done by every president. Bush was slimy about it, and he did it for a bad reason, but it's not illegal.
Of course it was illegal. Just like in right to work states, you can be fired for any reason. You can be fired for n
Well, I guess it is possible you are talking about someone else, instead of being a full of crap wingnut. Clinton admitted to fondling her breasts. His only defense is that he didn't intend to arouse or gratify either his own or her sexual desire.
Nope, full of crap. But I helpfully bolded the parts you missed - your standard issue boob grab is for the male's satisfaction, not the female's. Unless you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it with intent to arouse her...didn't think so.
Wrong again. In the Paula Jones case, he was accused of seeking oral sex from a subordinate. The Violence Against Women Act, (which Clinton himself signed)make it legal to try to establish a pattern of behavior on the part of an accused sexual harrasser. If you're accused of seeking sexual favors from your subordinates, it's certainly relevant if you have actually received sexual favors from your subordinates.
A bunch of Googling of "violence against women act" + "pattern of behavior" and then + "sexual harassment" turns up...nothing. The "pattern of behavior" stuff is for domestic violence on current or former intimate partners. None of which applies to Clinton and Jones. So it looks like you are full of crap once again...at least you are consistent. Besides, Clinton getting it on with Monica in a consensual fling is a pattern of behavior for cheating on your wife in consensual flings - not harassment.
Bullshit. He was disbarred for perjury.
Ah, I see we come to the part of the conversation where you make up shit to back up your baseless talking points.
When he told Monica, that if she denied the affair then no one could prove otherwise, that's exactly what he was doing.
Hearsay based on one of Linda Tripps tapes. You know, where Monica lies left and right all on her own, and Tripp was the only person to actually be convicted of anything from the whole fiasco. But even if the hearsay was correct, it was Robert Jordan who supposedly told Lewinsky to lie, not Clinton.
Paula Jones's right to justice. She had the right (because of a law that he signed) to establish a pattern of behavior on his part. He lied and denied her that. His lie was obstruction of justice.
See above on pattern of behavior. And what was relevant and what was not. Then remember that her case was thrown out because even if what she said was true, it didn't amount to harassment.
I guess you missed that part where congress didn't renew the law that provided the special prosecutor.
I guess you missed the part where that could easily be renewed.
Call it payback. You supported your guy even though he was as guilty as sin, so how can you expect us to do any different?
A pathetic attempt to rationalize Republican hypocrisy, and another example that you have no idea what the hell you are talking about. Clinton was found not guilty by the Senate, whereas Libby was found guilty by a jury, in charges brought by a Bush appointed prosecutor before a Bush appointed judge. Clinton was caught up in a pathetic witch hunt to drive him out of office. Libby was convicted because a serious crime was committed: outing a covert agent working on nuclear non-proliferation. Specifically, Iran. And who do the Republicans want to attack now, and for what supposed reason? Hmm, what was it...something about bombs and Ajamindinad or something....
Spank spank Lord Crapo. You got schooled again.
Then they need to take out back whoever is doing their calculations, pistol whip them, fire them, then pistol whip them again, along with the "don't dignify GOP attacks with a response" consultants that worked so very well for Presidents Dukakis, Gore and Kerry. Our entire political system and media needs a complete enema.
Um, no. Bolding the part you missed: If mining and miners are so evil, and you approve of running them out of the country, where do you get the materials for your house, your Prius, and your PC?
Analogy time. I like eating chicken. A lot. I like it baked, fried and grilled. I like it in stew. I like it in burritos. I even like it on pizza. That does not mean, however, that I have to like chicken make from big operations where the birds have part of their beaks cut off, are kept in tiny cages and violently thrown into hoppers so their wings are broken until they die. So I don't buy chicken from factory farms, and if those places all go out of business, then too god damned bad for them.
If your jobs involves doing horrible things - abusing chickens on factory farms, selling lead paint for children's toys, making DDT for mass agricultural spraying, clear cutting irreplaceable forests or polluting rivers with waste from your sloppy mine - then find a different job. Meanwhile, I will happily enjoy my free range chicken and my PC and mp3 player made from materials from environmentally safe mines.
Kennedy after the Democrats swiftboated his first choice, Robert Bork
That word does not mean what you think it means.
Alas, the facts have a well known liberal bias and when they don't, we'll just ignore them to slam Bush and conservatives anyway. Cognitive dissonance FTW!
And that well known bias whoops your ass.
Then they should have told Florida to start recounting all the counties, rather than stopping the recount altogether. I'm glad to see that SOD is living long enough to see what a stupid partisan mistake she made back then.