The TSA has armed guards. They just aren't the TSA, which is NOT a police agency, and why they are not armed. We have Airport Police for exactly this reason. And they did their job. You cannot stop a nut with a gun, and it is a rare event. The solution is not to take away guns (Airports are gun free zones, aren't they?) but rather to understand that you cannot prevent bad things from happening, without living in a tyranny state.
The problem is, we have a bunch of pansy people who believe that there is NEVER EVER a good reason to have an armed rebellion. These are the people I'm concerned about, because they are the ones walking us down the path of complete tyranny.
I Suggest that people read the Declaration of Independence. The original "Boston Tea Party" was over less than what is going on now. There is nothing sacred about a "federal government" that is hell bent on ruling us with iron fists and jack-booted thugs. I just wish people would stop supporting this concept.
Which is to say, it is the evidence that there is no functional difference between the Democrats and Republicans. And all you Demicans and Republicrats can call each other names and try to drive a wedge between people and the truth. I won't be buying your lies.
If enough people stop voting for the two parties, then and only then will things actually change in DC.
Alemeda County has approx 1.5 Million people (for rounding purposes) and 710,000 voters (Source Wikipedia) primaries are "county wide" and thus cost an estimated $6-8 per voter from the website link above. Total Cost of elections in Alemeda County 5.68 Millon dollars (high estimare). There are up to 20 Elected Offices available for ALL county voters (County, State, Federal), not including local city/regional offices. This represents, $284,000 per office. If each office ONLY an average of three candidates for Primary, that would be a cost of $94,000. So, lets just "round up" to 100,000.
I'm okay with a collective, say a Union having buying ads to support a candidate. But the ads have to clearly identify who is buying the ad. Multi source ads are prohibited, only single source collective (Teacher union cannot collaborate with IBEW) each would have to create their own advertisement.
The biggest problem isn't the money, it is the source of the money can be pretty easily hid. One PAC raises money, gives it out to another PAC who gives it to a Candidate. George Soros and Koch brothers money isn't the problem, it is that those sources are hidden behind a maze of "legal entities" that obfuscates who is backing what.
So you're okay with people getting "free" money if they do some legwork, regardless of any other qualifications?
Personally, as a Libertarian, we shouldn't have primaries to decide Party candidates. Let the parties pick their candidates on their own dime, and not on the public's dime. Further, I would suggest that to be on the ballot (Primary), the candidate should pony up 1/x of the cost of the primary costs for that district/precinct, where x is the number of candidates that file in time, with the initial fee to be 1/2 of the cost, with the difference refunded after the closing deadline for applications.
My point, we already have a "collective" process for our representation, called "Elections". All other "collectives" (parties, unions, corporations, PACs etc) are an affront to our primary form of collective representation, and subvert the established process for collective representation. If you want your "other" collective to have a say in elections, then those collectives should pay for their own campaigns, separated and distinct from any other collective.
Interestingly, the Liberals are on both sides of the argument here. On the one hand, they oppose "Citizens United" case, because they disagree with the court's ruling, on the other hand, they use the SCOTUS ruling on the ACA (ObamaCare) as "proof" that the Republicans should shut up and live with it.
Not really hard, impractical for the "collectives" people want to ban. You don't like Corporations but do like Unions, while I am the opposite (or visa versa). It doesn't matter. IF you allow one collective to do something, you have to allow all of them the same.
My solution is to prevent collectives from contributing to other collectives (campaigns) and buy their "speech" themselves, explicitly. If Comcast (or union) wants to elect a candidate, they should create their own campaign and fund it themselves.
ALL "collectives", such as Corporations, PACs, Unions... etc.
The problem, everyone is part of one of these "collectives" in some way or another. Some of us are part of several and often competing "collectives".
The fix, is to ban collectives from contributing to campaigns directly. If Comcast wants to run ads against or for a candidate, they can buy the adverts themselves. Same with all the other "collectives".
Merkell is important leader in Europe, and we spied on her. That is public knowledge right now. Everyone probably figured she was being spied on, and if they weren't they are just plain naive.
What is more troubling than this is the spying you DON'T know about on people who are not nearly as public, that isn't nearly as sensational as spying on Merkell's phone. Because we will stop spying no world leaders when caught, we won't stop spying on people we aren't caught spying on, because nobody cares about the NSA spying on me (I'm sure someone is).
Trust me when I say this, They have stuff on me and can bust me anytime, I'm just not interesting enough... yet. And trying to be anonymous on the internet is impossible. I'd rather be public and when you see my name stop posting my lunatic fringe stuff, you'll be able to figure out something "happened to me";)
Political Contributions of the Corporate interests is just ONE problem. Unions, PACs, hell, I'll even throw in Political Parties in general are all equal in culpability.
We already have "Group" politics, it is called representatives. THEY represent the only group that matters, period their voting constituents. The problem is that all these other groups seek to subvert this.
How about these changes to Political Campaign Financing.
ONLY PEOPLE(individuals) who are eligible to vote may contribute to a campaign. ALL other entities can purchase and run their own advertising for their own collective for the candidate/causes they support. Groups such as PACs, Corporations, Unions, are all allowed to provide their own campaigns for their own causes, but cannot contribute directly to any candidate or cause directly, ever.
No collaborative campaigns are allowed. Each Organization must run its own campaign without help from any other organization. Once an individuals donation is part of a campaign/organization, that donation is prevented from being combined with any extra-organization funds. This means that no organization can be a part of a larger organization for the purposes of campaigning.
Bringing the power back to the people (individuals) is imperative to a functioning democratic republic. Unfortunately, the unbridled collectivization is causing dysfunction in our elections. I personally view ANY collective as a threat to my individual rights, be it "right wing" or "left wing"
I effectively have a "brain filter" in place where I ignore ads. The places that have the annoying flashing adds that try to install crapware/trojans/spyware onto my computer are permablocked and never visited again. I classify those sites/ads as "actively hostile" and thus won't even give the site a second chance. But then again, I am not their target audience, so they probably don't give a shit.
You are under the amusing assumption that ballot boxes change anything. What we are dealing with are institutional government entities that exist apart from any apparatus to effectively monitor and contain them. THIS is the shadow government nobody pays any attention to, until it is too late. And those of us that have warned people for years, have been labeled "kooks" and "loons".
Oh, and this is just the surface they are allowing you to see. It is much much worse than you can possibly imagine.
Windows 8.1 does a pretty good job of making Windows almost usable again. I still don't "get" the whole touch interface on touchless monitors, but it should be more usable for people with touchscreen laptops.
Don't get me wrong, it is still very clunky in places, and changes who slew things just to move things around. I mean "shut down computer" is now in "settings", which completely baffles me.
Slashdot Mirror
The TSA has armed guards. They just aren't the TSA, which is NOT a police agency, and why they are not armed. We have Airport Police for exactly this reason. And they did their job. You cannot stop a nut with a gun, and it is a rare event. The solution is not to take away guns (Airports are gun free zones, aren't they?) but rather to understand that you cannot prevent bad things from happening, without living in a tyranny state.
The problem is, we have a bunch of pansy people who believe that there is NEVER EVER a good reason to have an armed rebellion. These are the people I'm concerned about, because they are the ones walking us down the path of complete tyranny.
I Suggest that people read the Declaration of Independence. The original "Boston Tea Party" was over less than what is going on now. There is nothing sacred about a "federal government" that is hell bent on ruling us with iron fists and jack-booted thugs. I just wish people would stop supporting this concept.
Which is to say, it is the evidence that there is no functional difference between the Democrats and Republicans. And all you Demicans and Republicrats can call each other names and try to drive a wedge between people and the truth. I won't be buying your lies.
If enough people stop voting for the two parties, then and only then will things actually change in DC.
Here is an example of what it actually costs ....
http://www.acgov.org/rov/est_election_cost.htm
Alemeda County has approx 1.5 Million people (for rounding purposes) and 710,000 voters (Source Wikipedia) primaries are "county wide" and thus cost an estimated $6-8 per voter from the website link above. Total Cost of elections in Alemeda County 5.68 Millon dollars (high estimare). There are up to 20 Elected Offices available for ALL county voters (County, State, Federal), not including local city/regional offices. This represents, $284,000 per office. If each office ONLY an average of three candidates for Primary, that would be a cost of $94,000. So, lets just "round up" to 100,000.
Is that unreasonable request for filing fee?
I'm okay with a collective, say a Union having buying ads to support a candidate. But the ads have to clearly identify who is buying the ad. Multi source ads are prohibited, only single source collective (Teacher union cannot collaborate with IBEW) each would have to create their own advertisement.
The biggest problem isn't the money, it is the source of the money can be pretty easily hid. One PAC raises money, gives it out to another PAC who gives it to a Candidate. George Soros and Koch brothers money isn't the problem, it is that those sources are hidden behind a maze of "legal entities" that obfuscates who is backing what.
So you're okay with people getting "free" money if they do some legwork, regardless of any other qualifications?
Personally, as a Libertarian, we shouldn't have primaries to decide Party candidates. Let the parties pick their candidates on their own dime, and not on the public's dime. Further, I would suggest that to be on the ballot (Primary), the candidate should pony up 1/x of the cost of the primary costs for that district/precinct, where x is the number of candidates that file in time, with the initial fee to be 1/2 of the cost, with the difference refunded after the closing deadline for applications.
My point, we already have a "collective" process for our representation, called "Elections". All other "collectives" (parties, unions, corporations, PACs etc) are an affront to our primary form of collective representation, and subvert the established process for collective representation. If you want your "other" collective to have a say in elections, then those collectives should pay for their own campaigns, separated and distinct from any other collective.
Interestingly, the Liberals are on both sides of the argument here. On the one hand, they oppose "Citizens United" case, because they disagree with the court's ruling, on the other hand, they use the SCOTUS ruling on the ACA (ObamaCare) as "proof" that the Republicans should shut up and live with it.
Figure that one out.
So are Unions. Do you oppose Unions equally or are you more friendly towards them because they are closer to your political beliefs?
When signing petitions, people will sign just about anything ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l02E4cj4Vvo
Not really hard, impractical for the "collectives" people want to ban. You don't like Corporations but do like Unions, while I am the opposite (or visa versa). It doesn't matter. IF you allow one collective to do something, you have to allow all of them the same.
My solution is to prevent collectives from contributing to other collectives (campaigns) and buy their "speech" themselves, explicitly. If Comcast (or union) wants to elect a candidate, they should create their own campaign and fund it themselves.
ALL "collectives", such as Corporations, PACs, Unions ... etc.
The problem, everyone is part of one of these "collectives" in some way or another. Some of us are part of several and often competing "collectives".
The fix, is to ban collectives from contributing to campaigns directly. If Comcast wants to run ads against or for a candidate, they can buy the adverts themselves. Same with all the other "collectives".
Has anyone figured out how much food these things had to eat to grow that big, how long they had to live?
My questions are about the likelyhood of these things being "common" at those sizes.
And we need our government choosing what insurance we can have.
Pot and whores aren't what they have on me. I don't do illicit mind altering drugs (only the legal kind) or have a need to pay skanks for sex.
and what about the trees that allow fish to climb them? Won't anyone think of the trees?
Merkell is important leader in Europe, and we spied on her. That is public knowledge right now. Everyone probably figured she was being spied on, and if they weren't they are just plain naive.
What is more troubling than this is the spying you DON'T know about on people who are not nearly as public, that isn't nearly as sensational as spying on Merkell's phone. Because we will stop spying no world leaders when caught, we won't stop spying on people we aren't caught spying on, because nobody cares about the NSA spying on me (I'm sure someone is).
Trust me when I say this, They have stuff on me and can bust me anytime, I'm just not interesting enough ... yet. And trying to be anonymous on the internet is impossible. I'd rather be public and when you see my name stop posting my lunatic fringe stuff, you'll be able to figure out something "happened to me" ;)
Political Contributions of the Corporate interests is just ONE problem. Unions, PACs, hell, I'll even throw in Political Parties in general are all equal in culpability.
We already have "Group" politics, it is called representatives. THEY represent the only group that matters, period their voting constituents. The problem is that all these other groups seek to subvert this.
How about these changes to Political Campaign Financing.
ONLY PEOPLE(individuals) who are eligible to vote may contribute to a campaign. ALL other entities can purchase and run their own advertising for their own collective for the candidate/causes they support. Groups such as PACs, Corporations, Unions, are all allowed to provide their own campaigns for their own causes, but cannot contribute directly to any candidate or cause directly, ever.
No collaborative campaigns are allowed. Each Organization must run its own campaign without help from any other organization. Once an individuals donation is part of a campaign/organization, that donation is prevented from being combined with any extra-organization funds. This means that no organization can be a part of a larger organization for the purposes of campaigning.
Bringing the power back to the people (individuals) is imperative to a functioning democratic republic. Unfortunately, the unbridled collectivization is causing dysfunction in our elections. I personally view ANY collective as a threat to my individual rights, be it "right wing" or "left wing"
I effectively have a "brain filter" in place where I ignore ads. The places that have the annoying flashing adds that try to install crapware/trojans/spyware onto my computer are permablocked and never visited again. I classify those sites/ads as "actively hostile" and thus won't even give the site a second chance. But then again, I am not their target audience, so they probably don't give a shit.
You are under the amusing assumption that ballot boxes change anything. What we are dealing with are institutional government entities that exist apart from any apparatus to effectively monitor and contain them. THIS is the shadow government nobody pays any attention to, until it is too late. And those of us that have warned people for years, have been labeled "kooks" and "loons".
Oh, and this is just the surface they are allowing you to see. It is much much worse than you can possibly imagine.
"almost usable" means "not really usable"
MIB (original movie) in a nutshell.
We should just be on a level plane.
If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree ....
Windows 8.1 does a pretty good job of making Windows almost usable again. I still don't "get" the whole touch interface on touchless monitors, but it should be more usable for people with touchscreen laptops.
Don't get me wrong, it is still very clunky in places, and changes who slew things just to move things around. I mean "shut down computer" is now in "settings", which completely baffles me.
Municipality would own the right of way, and the fiber plant; the local Infrastructure. Maintained by taxes on services provided over the fiber.