What? Isn't there a Sarah Palin for President committee yet? No matter which way this election goes, you know that's coming. So I'll have to wait until the morrow... OK, fine.
Well, I'm a LOT upset with what Democrats are saying with Obama!
20 years at "the church of "God damn America because America deserved it?" Check. Announced his first candidacy at the home of a pair of unrepentant terrorists? Check. ZERO executive experience? Check. Chooses plagiarizing Senate insider of 30+ years as running mate when running under the banner of "Change!"? Check. Didn't even bother to go through the motions of vetting Hillary? Oh, THAT was smart! (Yes, I voted for Hillary in the primary)
Invading someone's personal email is WRONG. If some "repug" does it to Obama or Biden, the offender should get whacked, too!
Returning servicemen and women helped to bring about a crisis of the old political order in Tennessee. In the town of Athens on August 1, 1946--primary election day--a pitched battle occurred between ex-GIs and supporters of the entrenched political machine in McMinn County. For over six hours the streets of Athens blazed with gunfire as armed veterans laid siege to the jail where the sheriff and fifty "deputies" had holed up with the ballot boxes.
Under our Constitution, anonymous pamphleteering is not a pernicious, fraudulent practice, but an honorable tradition of advocacy and of dissent. Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. See generally J. Mill, On Liberty and Considerations on Representative Government 1, 3-4 (R. McCallum ed. 1947). It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation-and their ideas from suppression-at the hand of an intolerant society. The right to remain anonymous may be abused when it shields fraudulent conduct. But political speech by its nature will sometimes have unpalatable consequences, and, in general, our society accords greater weight to the value of free speech than to the dangers of its misuse. See Abrams v. United States, 250 U. S. 616, 630-631 (1919) (Holmes, J., dissenting). Ohio has not shown that its interest in preventing the misuse of anonymous election-related speech justifies a prohibition of all uses of that speech. The State may, and does, punish fraud directly. But it cannot seek to punish fraud indirectly by indiscriminately outlawing a category of speech, based on its content, with no necessary relationship to the danger sought to be prevented. One would be hard pressed to think of a better example of the pitfalls of Ohio's blunderbuss approach than the facts of the case before us.
The judgment of the Ohio Supreme Court is reversed.
It is possible that one could be for celebrating Veteran's Day and still be an anti-war Progressive (or liberal, or whatever we're calling it these days).
True.
Sadly, the perception I have is that this is true of far too damned few of the progressives. You may be rightly proud that you are one of those few. On this day, as a veteran, I say: "THANK YOU!"
We should be able to talk to our political opponents without automatically demonizing them. There are good people on the left. They are not as visible as the loud-mouthed idiots, but they are there. There are good people on the right, too. No, really! Trust me on this.
But who's going to listen to me? I'm just an far-ultra-right-wing "Wingnut!"
Aye -- there's the rub: those blinded by their politics filter out there being any chance of "Truth" (capitalized on purpose) appearing on sites with politics other than theirs.
It is best to acknowledge your bias. I am a Strict Constitutionalist, which most would characterize as a blend of conservative and libertarian. But I can still recognize that sometimes CNN is correct. Hell, even CBS gets it right occasionally (mostly by accident, no doubt). Neither CNN nor CBS will admit their OBVIOUS bias, but World Net Daily will! Sure, read with a grain of salt, just as I have to in examining the content of Routers, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, NPR.... Even Harvard Finds The Media Biased.
Aside: What I find really funny is those on the left agreeing with Michael Medved in calling it "World Nut Daily."
Everything they can now try with this *still limited* stem-cell, they could have been doing years ago with embryonic-stem-cells.
Except that they seem to have better luck getting adult stem cells to actually do what they want them to do.
We right-to-life types tire of being accused of being against stem cell research. We object to sacrificing those we consider to be baby humans for the purpose. Think of our attitudes as that of the many who see the death penalty for murder as immoral: "It deters crime? So? It's immoral!"
On this we can all agree: Stuff like this is GREAT! Add more funding!
Yeah, it's not like any of those so-called "terrorists" every came over here and tried to kill us, like maybe more than once. Nah....
And -- if it was "all about oil," all we'd have to do is clear the populace out of the well/pipeling areas, pump like hell, and kill anyone who tried to enter. We'd just let the rest of the country rot. Why didn't we do that?! Damned incompetent evil emperialists, aren't we?
The bogeyman is imaginary and lives in closets. The guys I'm talking about are real and just love posting videos of their latest beheading. I'm sure your mother would weep for you if you were their next "star." How many rights would your headless torso enjoy?
Wiretapping within the country should be done by the FBI, not the NSA. They do tend to guard their rice bowls most diligently.
Was the professor flagged and put on the list for criticizing the government? Really? If so, someone should go to jail. Was he perhaps advocating violence or support for our enemies? If so, maybe he should be in jail.
You worry about capabilities? Hell, the local cop on the beat has the capability to put a bullet through your head.... The installation of the capability to sniff the AT&T backbone is much like the built-in capability to monitor phone calls now extant in switches. The capabilty should not be used until there is a warrant, but once there is a warrant, I damned well want the government to have the capability! Someone uses it without a warrant? Send them to jail!
Terrorists want to establish a repressive state in America, that would arrest people who speak out against the government by eavesdropping on communications
Wrong. The terrorists want to impose a religious dictatorship, kill or enslave those who won't submit, execute all the gays, make all women slaves who must cover themselves completely and remove their rights to freedoms like driving or being on their own, and beat those who fail to live up to the most exacting code of conduct they can enforce, like failing to pray in the prescribed manner at the prescribed time to the prescribed devil.
Screw that!
America, trying to defeat terrorism, starts eavesdropping on communications, looking for people speaking out against America
Wrong again. America is eavesdropping on foreign communications, looking for people speaking out about killing Americans.
Yeah to that evesdropping!
When the bustards are here, then they get some cover from the Constitution. If they're citizens, hang 'em for treason. If not, jail them. After a fair trial, of course. Consider the "blind sheik" and the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. He now rots in jail. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center_bombing
You need to be a bit more clear about who it is that wants to slice your throat open and who it is that wants to stop them.
I tire of the many self-righteous comments against the SFWA and Dr. Pournelle. "Oh, how DARE they...!
It's simple: Scribd appears to have been making money off the work of others. They didn't do the due diligence necessary to insure they product they offered didn't belong to others, then made it difficult for those who did the work to contact them and request they quit stealing (yes, stealing). One or more of those victims asked their association to help them, and the SFWA accidentally demanded they take down of more than just the protected works.
Real damage ($$) was done to the authors who's work was improperly taken, like Dr. Pournelle. No real damage ($$) was done to those who's free works were accidentally made unavailable for a short time.
The self righteous are now incensed at those who made an error while trying to stop the theft, call one of the victims names, scream that the SFWA didn't do proper due diligence, ignore that Scribd didn't do any due diligence, and defend those appear to make a living as thieves.
I am ashamed of you! Methinks you should rethink your notions of right and wrong.
Take heart, this is my last post on this matter. I can abide proof by emphatic assertion from an IQ which begins with a negative sign only so long.
presidential elections are a state matter
Uh, wrong again. Not when they violate the 14th Amendment. You see, in some matters, Federal Law takes precedence. Like in the case of "literacy tests," for example. They finally cleared up the "Poll Tax" gambit with the 24th Amendment. Federal law also take precedence in campaign finance (a fact that I bet just cases you to wet your little pink panties)
Did I ever say the Republicans were pure? No. There sure are too many on the liberal side--like you--who will scream to the death about how evil the conservatives are, then scream even louder when one of us dares to say boo about the idea that your side might not be as pure as the driven snow. To wit:
Rove successfully manipulated public opinion, yes, but he did so with innuendo, lies, and manipulation.
As if the other side never does that? Please.
I take offense at wanting to count votes that blatantly violate election law.
You have yet to give a reference to a "blatant violation" of a election law. I did give links to support my assertion--narrowly scoped--that suppressing the military memebers's ballots was wrong.
It wasn't "Gore's team", it was "one person on Gore's team".
Yeah, sure, one man wrote it. (Oh, here's a link on that.) But it was embraced and used by the Gore Team. Got a link showing where they disavowed it and ordered the party faithful watching every recount to not use that strategy?
I'll give you this: if they counted faxed-in ballots, that may have been a "blatant violation." You never quoted any law or cases in support of your assertion. You have the floor all to yourself now, buckwheat. What you gonna do? Whine and name-call like a child or back up your big mouth?
Call me not "son," unless you know that you are older than me. Chances are you ain't. I'm a bit long in the tooth and my beard is rather grey. Remember hippies? I wasn't one, but I remember the smell.
You already knew about the court's judgment but choose to ignore it and prove your assertion that "Bush did it worse" by emphatic assertion. Uh, huh.
Yes, the counties went "well beyond" -- in counting every kind of ballot! We all got sick of dimple, pregnant and hanging chads.
I have my problems with Bush -- like his idiotic desire to give amnesty to illegals and the way he screwed up handling the war (for a good overview of how old-style conservatives view this, see Dr. Pournell's comments on Iraq and Paul Bremer).
You forget that I am pissed that Gore's team explicitly targeted the military vote for exclusion. People trashing the military's ballots, just because they are military's ballots is one of the few areas in which I agreed with famous liberal Maury Maverick, Jr.. He wrote a great column about having found out that during WWII they had trashed military ballots in Texas. Why? Because the military let blacks vote. It was wrong then, it was wrong in 2000, and it'd be wrong today. BUT YOU'D RATHER CHANGE THE SUBJECT!
As to foes -- you are a foe, right? Uh, so what's the problem?!
You mention McCain to defend the Democrats? The subject is whether or not both sides use "innuendo, lies, and manipulation," so that's not really germane.
I take offense at wanting to count votes that blatantly violate election law.
Section 3406. Balloting materials under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act
(a) Balloting materials under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens
Absentee Voting Act (individually or in bulk) -
(1) shall be carried expeditiously and free of postage; and
(2) may be mailed at a post office established outside the
United States under section 406 of this title, unless such
mailing is prohibited by treaty or other international agreement
of the United States.
(b) As used in this section, the term "balloting materials" has
the meaning given that term in section 107 of the Uniformed and
Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act.
Court: U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals Topic: Civil Procedure, Elections Title: HARRIS v. FLORIDA ELECTIONS COMISSION Date: 12/11/00 Case Number: 00-16423 Summary: Plaintiffs' request to nullify absentee military ballots denied because it would violate Paragraph 7 of Rule 1S-2.013 of the Florida Administrative Code and a federal court order on how presidential elections in Florida must accommodate Florida residents.
So -- who did in fact "blatantly violate election law?" Not the military members who voted, had their ballot's signature witnessed by their commander, and mailed their ballot in good faith. Looks more like Al Gore's minions to me!
(( And there's some idiot out there calling me a liberal . . . . ))
Rove successfully manipulated public opinion, yes, but he did so with innuendo, lies, and manipulation.
As if the other side never does that? Please.
As a retired Captain (USAF), I took great offense at Al Gore's election-2000 team explicitly trying to get them to throw out the absentee votes of GIs stationed overseas. What was the usual reason? No postal cancellation. Much mail sent by those on ships doesn't get cancelled. There was one especially grevious case--a guy serving on one of the ships helping rescue the USS Cole after it was boat-bombed managed to track it down. His vote had been thrown out.
During the news this morning, there was Hillary talking about the need to count every vote and make every vote count.
You hate Rove & Republicans? Fine. But please recognize that yours is not a side made up of angels, pure and bright. Thou hast thy blemishes, too.
Slashdot Mirror
What? Isn't there a Sarah Palin for President committee yet? No matter which way this election goes, you know that's coming. So I'll have to wait until the morrow... OK, fine.
If EITHER end of the exchange is a government account, then it crossed a government server and should have been captured.
Well, I'm a LOT upset with what Democrats are saying with Obama!
20 years at "the church of "God damn America because America deserved it?" Check.
Announced his first candidacy at the home of a pair of unrepentant terrorists? Check.
ZERO executive experience? Check.
Chooses plagiarizing Senate insider of 30+ years as running mate when running under the banner of "Change!"? Check.
Didn't even bother to go through the motions of vetting Hillary? Oh, THAT was smart! (Yes, I voted for Hillary in the primary)
Invading someone's personal email is WRONG. If some "repug" does it to Obama or Biden, the offender should get whacked, too!
Read about the Battle of Athens, TN (page 438 or so)
Lord, how I have prayed for an EMP weapon every time some idiot with a 50,000 watt car stereo going "THUMP! THUMP! THUMP!" gets near.
If it'll fry their car's engine, too, so much the better!
Sadly, the perception I have is that this is true of far too damned few of the progressives. You may be rightly proud that you are one of those few. On this day, as a veteran, I say: "THANK YOU!"
We should be able to talk to our political opponents without automatically demonizing them. There are good people on the left. They are not as visible as the loud-mouthed idiots, but they are there. There are good people on the right, too. No, really! Trust me on this.
But who's going to listen to me? I'm just an far-ultra-right-wing "Wingnut!"
Aye -- there's the rub: those blinded by their politics filter out there being any chance of "Truth" (capitalized on purpose) appearing on sites with politics other than theirs.
It is best to acknowledge your bias. I am a Strict Constitutionalist, which most would characterize as a blend of conservative and libertarian. But I can still recognize that sometimes CNN is correct. Hell, even CBS gets it right occasionally (mostly by accident, no doubt). Neither CNN nor CBS will admit their OBVIOUS bias, but World Net Daily will! Sure, read with a grain of salt, just as I have to in examining the content of Routers, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, NPR.... Even Harvard Finds The Media Biased.
Aside: What I find really funny is those on the left agreeing with Michael Medved in calling it "World Nut Daily."
We right-to-life types tire of being accused of being against stem cell research. We object to sacrificing those we consider to be baby humans for the purpose. Think of our attitudes as that of the many who see the death penalty for murder as immoral: "It deters crime? So? It's immoral!"
On this we can all agree: Stuff like this is GREAT! Add more funding!
First: I am one of those "wingnuts."
That said, I agree with you on this. That was no Troll. Someone's Karma should be "adjusted."
The San Antonio, TX area has 19 Independent School Districts. Needless to say, the quality varies. Greatly.
I like how Dr. Jerry Pournelle puts it: "We all know that the way to be sure that no child is left behind is to see that no child gets ahead."
Yeah, it's not like any of those so-called "terrorists" every came over here and tried to kill us, like maybe more than once. Nah....
And -- if it was "all about oil," all we'd have to do is clear the populace out of the well/pipeling areas, pump like hell, and kill anyone who tried to enter. We'd just let the rest of the country rot. Why didn't we do that?! Damned incompetent evil emperialists, aren't we?
The bogeyman is imaginary and lives in closets. The guys I'm talking about are real and just love posting videos of their latest beheading. I'm sure your mother would weep for you if you were their next "star." How many rights would your headless torso enjoy?
Wiretapping within the country should be done by the FBI, not the NSA. They do tend to guard their rice bowls most diligently.
Was the professor flagged and put on the list for criticizing the government? Really? If so, someone should go to jail. Was he perhaps advocating violence or support for our enemies? If so, maybe he should be in jail.
You worry about capabilities? Hell, the local cop on the beat has the capability to put a bullet through your head.... The installation of the capability to sniff the AT&T backbone is much like the built-in capability to monitor phone calls now extant in switches. The capabilty should not be used until there is a warrant, but once there is a warrant, I damned well want the government to have the capability! Someone uses it without a warrant? Send them to jail!
We don't need to tap their phones to ID them -- they're right there on CSPAN making idiots of themselves during congressional committee hearings.
Yeah -- because a "President Hillary" with those powers would be a real fright!
Someone please moderate parent as funny. Hilarious, even!
Screw that!Wrong again. America is eavesdropping on foreign communications, looking for people speaking out about killing Americans.
Yeah to that evesdropping!
When the bustards are here, then they get some cover from the Constitution. If they're citizens, hang 'em for treason. If not, jail them. After a fair trial, of course. Consider the "blind sheik" and the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. He now rots in jail. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center_bombing
You need to be a bit more clear about who it is that wants to slice your throat open and who it is that wants to stop them.
I tire of the many self-righteous comments against the SFWA and Dr. Pournelle. "Oh, how DARE they...!
It's simple: Scribd appears to have been making money off the work of others. They didn't do the due diligence necessary to insure they product they offered didn't belong to others, then made it difficult for those who did the work to contact them and request they quit stealing (yes, stealing). One or more of those victims asked their association to help them, and the SFWA accidentally demanded they take down of more than just the protected works.
Real damage ($$) was done to the authors who's work was improperly taken, like Dr. Pournelle. No real damage ($$) was done to those who's free works were accidentally made unavailable for a short time.
The self righteous are now incensed at those who made an error while trying to stop the theft, call one of the victims names, scream that the SFWA didn't do proper due diligence, ignore that Scribd didn't do any due diligence, and defend those appear to make a living as thieves.
I am ashamed of you! Methinks you should rethink your notions of right and wrong.
Take heart, this is my last post on this matter. I can abide proof by emphatic assertion from an IQ which begins with a negative sign only so long.Uh, wrong again. Not when they violate the 14th Amendment. You see, in some matters, Federal Law takes precedence. Like in the case of "literacy tests," for example. They finally cleared up the "Poll Tax" gambit with the 24th Amendment. Federal law also take precedence in campaign finance (a fact that I bet just cases you to wet your little pink panties)
Did I ever say the Republicans were pure? No. There sure are too many on the liberal side--like you--who will scream to the death about how evil the conservatives are, then scream even louder when one of us dares to say boo about the idea that your side might not be as pure as the driven snow. To wit:You have yet to give a reference to a "blatant violation" of a election law. I did give links to support my assertion--narrowly scoped--that suppressing the military memebers's ballots was wrong.Yeah, sure, one man wrote it. (Oh, here's a link on that.) But it was embraced and used by the Gore Team. Got a link showing where they disavowed it and ordered the party faithful watching every recount to not use that strategy?
I'll give you this: if they counted faxed-in ballots, that may have been a "blatant violation." You never quoted any law or cases in support of your assertion. You have the floor all to yourself now, buckwheat. What you gonna do? Whine and name-call like a child or back up your big mouth?
I am done here. Pitiful, just pitiful.
"GOOD DAY, SIR!"
Call me not "son," unless you know that you are older than me. Chances are you ain't. I'm a bit long in the tooth and my beard is rather grey. Remember hippies? I wasn't one, but I remember the smell.
You already knew about the court's judgment but choose to ignore it and prove your assertion that "Bush did it worse" by emphatic assertion. Uh, huh.
Yes, the counties went "well beyond" -- in counting every kind of ballot! We all got sick of dimple, pregnant and hanging chads.
I have my problems with Bush -- like his idiotic desire to give amnesty to illegals and the way he screwed up handling the war (for a good overview of how old-style conservatives view this, see Dr. Pournell's comments on Iraq and Paul Bremer).
You forget that I am pissed that Gore's team explicitly targeted the military vote for exclusion. People trashing the military's ballots, just because they are military's ballots is one of the few areas in which I agreed with famous liberal Maury Maverick, Jr.. He wrote a great column about having found out that during WWII they had trashed military ballots in Texas. Why? Because the military let blacks vote. It was wrong then, it was wrong in 2000, and it'd be wrong today. BUT YOU'D RATHER CHANGE THE SUBJECT!
As to foes -- you are a foe, right? Uh, so what's the problem?!
I quote the law and the court case and all you can say is "yawn" and complain that they did it worse. Yeah, right. Sure.
If you want to insult me by calling me thin skinned, try using the right link http://slashdot.org/~Ranten_N_Raven/journal/
Pathetic.
1. There is no legal requirement for military absentee ballots to be postmarked because there is no requirement for them to have postage (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ts_search.
(( And there's some idiot out there calling me a liberal . . . . ))
Uh ... calling me a liberal is generally considered to be using "fighting words." ;-)
As a retired Captain (USAF), I took great offense at Al Gore's election-2000 team explicitly trying to get them to throw out the absentee votes of GIs stationed overseas. What was the usual reason? No postal cancellation. Much mail sent by those on ships doesn't get cancelled. There was one especially grevious case--a guy serving on one of the ships helping rescue the USS Cole after it was boat-bombed managed to track it down. His vote had been thrown out.
During the news this morning, there was Hillary talking about the need to count every vote and make every vote count.
You hate Rove & Republicans? Fine. But please recognize that yours is not a side made up of angels, pure and bright. Thou hast thy blemishes, too.