Corporations filing fake positions - position listings that are deliberately designed so that every possible applicant can be turned away, specifically so that the company can then go out and claim they "need H1-B workers" to fill the "jobs they can't find an American for" from India.
We should not perpetuate the insanity that protects companies like Hempel and Trafigura from media exposure while they're busy poisoning people.
Ok, please stop smoking crack.
FTFA: "The injunction, dated May 12 and seen by Reuters on Friday, includes Twitter and Facebook in the list of media prohibited from disclosing the information.
It was issued in the Court of Protection in the case of a mother who wants to withdraw life support from her brain-damaged daughter. It prevents the identification of the woman and those caring for her."
So, in a family court case, where there is a brain-damaged person whose condition the family feels is irreversible, the court has applied an injunction to prevent the leaking of information that would inevitably lead to people harassing the family or the medical staff.
How does this follow your "while they're busy poisoning people" line? Please do tell me.
I fully understand the point of this order, after seeing the lunacy that happened in the US with the Terry Schiavo case.
It helps nobody to have a gaggle of crazies showing up trying to hold a "protest" or worse yet, actually getting into the hospital room. All you get is the potential for a riot, or for someone else's needed care to be impacted because a bunch of idiots are getting in the way of hospital operations. But that's what would happen if news agencies or someone else puts the information out there.
OK, how does reducing the bargaining rights of public sector unions help a private sector company?
It is part of a strategy to depress the normal wages earned by most employees. Driving down the wage rates of a large sector - which is what eliminating collective bargaining rights is all about - will have an effect that goes far beyond.
The law you are referring to has nothing to do with the people who work for the Koch brothers companies forming unions.
The Koch Brothers have a larger strategy in play - they bought off legislators to try to push "right to work" and "at-will employment" laws in Maine and several other states recently too. Don't be fooled by the names: the laws they continually have pushed for are designed to make it so that employee unions do not survive and collective bargaining rights vanish.
Based on my experience with other people like you, I am going to bet the other situations will turn out to be much the same--sound very damning when all you know is the Democratic Party talking points, but actually good public policy when you actually know the whole story.
Based on my experience, people like you are mentally deficient.
I bet you're one of those "Reagan-worshiping" clowns who never realizes that Reagan raised taxes more than he reduced them and that Reagan actually spoke in favor of public and private unions alike.
I think that public sector unions are a bad idea and should be completely gotten rid of.
And I'm reminded of prominent people who thought like you who were named Mussolini, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Adolf, and Castro.
There's nothing wrong with porn (well, until you get into the realm of doing something that is illegal anyways and filming it). If you want to take the pseudo-feminist pseudo-right-wing-neanderthal position (how the hell did those two wind up on the same side for something, given that feminists are all about empowering women and the rightwing cro-magnons are all about keeping them barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen?) that it is "destructive to society and denigrates women", we'll have that argument another day.
There is, however, something incredibly ironic about a massive porn collection owned by people who among other things, murder porn stars for fun because they believe porn is "evil."
They want a "tax" levied by the government, paid to them.
On top of it, they want it to be illegal to exercise the right that the tax is supposedly being paid for.
Not so different from the USA, where the DMCA and constant copyright "extensions" paid for by Disney bribing Congress have pretty much destroyed the idea of the public domain.
In what ways do these laws make it difficult/impossible to form a union?
If you can't understand why: -stripping the public sector of bargaining rights, - trying to force yearly automatic "vote to dissolve the union" votes along with making the union registration process take a decade or more, and - trying to force the ballot to be non-secret so that voters can be intimidated and threatened with retaliation if they vote for a union, would necessarily make it nearly impossible to form a union, then you really are a fucking retard.
Did other people have the option to bid on these public utilities?
No.
What type of tax cut? State?
Yes. Which just so happened to go through a Retardican legislature who had also gotten a large amount of Koch "campaign contributions."
I really don't know why I bother. You're either a complete fucking retard or you are deliberately missing the point over and over again.
- Laws passed to benefit their businesses. Specifically, laws to make it difficult/impossible to form a union. - Public sector utility sell-offs from Walker are going straight to the Kochs. - $140 Million in tax cut kickback that headed mostly to Koch Industries.
Are you REALLY that fucking stupid that you are not aware of this?
So, if someone doesn't like a certain type of speech, it should be restricted?
Perhaps you missed the part where the Retardicans currently don't want doctors talking to women about abortions?
My aunt would be dead if the doctor hadn't. As it was, my baby cousin was already stillborn, part of his skull and brain hadn't developed properly.
But under Retardican laws that "abortion" would have been illegal. They'd rather kill two people in the name of "not aborting" than save lives.
It is my opinion that anyone stupid enough to be a Retardican voter ought to be sterilized for the good of humanity lest they pass on whatever genetic defect cause them to be that goddamn retarded.
When the Koch Bros buy politicians through what amounts to corrupt bribery for quid-pro-quo arrangements, they are corrupt and should be thrown in jail.
Show me an instance of Soros doing the same and I'll be happy to say he should be thrown in jail soon.
Why is it the Retardican morons' only response is "waaaah but they do it too" as if that means something?
- Took the call from a "Koch" that he wouldn't take from the media - Received over $43,000 direct from the Kochs in his election campaign - Received another $3.4 million laundered from the Kochs through the Republican Governors Association for attack ads on his opponent.
Scott Walker, WI John Kasich, OH Rick Snyder, MI Mitch Daniels, IN Jan Brewer, AZ Rick "fuck the poor" Scott, FL Nathan Deal, GA Terri Branstad, IA Chris Christie, NJ
All in the pockets, bought and paid for, of the Koch Bros.
Let's see:
campaign (support and attack ) ads - the feeding of information to voters who can make up their own minds
corruption - accepting bribes, giving jobs to relatives, redirecting tax money to campaign donors, etc.
Hmm... yeah, I'm going to have to say those aren't the same thing.
Corruption - accepting bribes, including "I will do this for you if you do this for me, I will do this against you if you don't do what I tell you" quid-pro-quo arrangements.
Which is precisely what that "coordinated issue ad" crap is.
What are you talking about? Even if I was willing to concede that point, better a governor beholden to the Koch brothers than one beholden to George Soros. At least the Koch brothers appear to be pushing positions they believe to be in the best interest of themselves at the expense of the rest of the US and anyone dumb enough to work for them.
Where are all these powerful lobbyists going to come from if we get rid of the quid pro quo of having government officials become lobbyists with huge salaries?
They'll be former party officials who were never officially "government officials." Or they'll be people who put together a firm simply for the purpose of being lobbyists from the industry themselves. It's not the "who", it's the fact that they can make the threats and promises that in any other setting would amount to bribery.
Which political organizations will lobbyists target if we reduce the power of those organizations by allowing other parties to be voted in?
There will still be political parties. There will still be individual representatives to target.
Which politicians will lobbyists target when term limits prevents them from buying a senator for 20 to 30 years? Fresh blood in congress means a reduction in strings.
Sons, daughters, neices, nephews... you forget how incestuous Congress really is. For that matter, say (just pulling a name here) Boeing is in need of some new law to help them out. You don't think Boeing's staff can't come up with a list of "possibly sympathetic" and "Need to stop them from speaking against us" representatives within an hour?
Political attack and support ads are not the main problem crippling our government. Corruption and the amassing of power are.
You say that as if they are not one and the same.
Lobbyists only have real power because we've allowed them to be incestuously intertwined with government. Those ties should be broken, but not by curtailing free speech.
That was the whole point of campaign finance laws: - Banning coordinated issue ads - Banning coordinated "sneaky soft money" right next to an election
If you can't do those two things, even if some corrupt asstard in a black robe wrongly conflates them with "free speech", then you can NEVER break the incestuous ties of lobbyists and government representatives.
Campaign finance reform ran into the first amendment. It's normally right to have the first amendment prevail against other well intentioned laws.
Which is a colossal joke, because it hands the lobbyists the ultimate in corrupting power.
All your various "reforms" are meaningless when all the lobbyists have to do is show up with one of the two following statements: #1 - Do it our way and we'll coordinate a set of "issue ad" buys to the tune of a couple million dollars to help your next reelection run. #2 - Do it our way or else we'll coordinate a set of "issue ad" buys to the tune of a couple million dollars against you in your next reelection run.
Presto, corruption. And "Untraceable" corruption since it never "touches" their bank account.
No see... the difference here is that the democrat just wanted the sites de-linked and "hidden". but the republican wants the sites de-linked, hidden, and hard to get to.
Speech that can't be heard is speech that can't be heard.
I fail to see any important difference in the two "categories" you list above on that basis.
What we need is major campaign finance reform to get rid of all the backdoor contribution scams going on. But good luck getting that to happen - especially with the 5 senile delinquent conservatives on the Supreme Court having struck down the last few attempts at campaign finance reform!
Google is a worldwide company. If they run ads for a business, which is doing nothing wrong by the laws of its own country E.G. Canada (but happens to trip on the laws of the US), then why is Google liable?
It sounds like the US needs to be talking to Canada about this, rather than harassing Google.
Of course, that's not what the Big Pharma lobbyists want. They just want to shut the pharmacies down in the US and Canada, and this is one step to hurting them in both places.
Also remember, Microsoft isn't bothering to patch XP much any more. Nobody has to code new viruses/malware for it lately because year-old crap still works.
Slashdot Mirror
You forgot #4:
Corporations filing fake positions - position listings that are deliberately designed so that every possible applicant can be turned away, specifically so that the company can then go out and claim they "need H1-B workers" to fill the "jobs they can't find an American for" from India.
We should not perpetuate the insanity that protects companies like Hempel and Trafigura from media exposure while they're busy poisoning people.
Ok, please stop smoking crack.
FTFA: "The injunction, dated May 12 and seen by Reuters on Friday, includes Twitter and Facebook in the list of media prohibited from disclosing the information.
It was issued in the Court of Protection in the case of a mother who wants to withdraw life support from her brain-damaged daughter. It prevents the identification of the woman and those caring for her."
So, in a family court case, where there is a brain-damaged person whose condition the family feels is irreversible, the court has applied an injunction to prevent the leaking of information that would inevitably lead to people harassing the family or the medical staff.
How does this follow your "while they're busy poisoning people" line? Please do tell me.
Yawwwn. You just proved you know nothing of history.
I fully understand the point of this order, after seeing the lunacy that happened in the US with the Terry Schiavo case.
It helps nobody to have a gaggle of crazies showing up trying to hold a "protest" or worse yet, actually getting into the hospital room. All you get is the potential for a riot, or for someone else's needed care to be impacted because a bunch of idiots are getting in the way of hospital operations. But that's what would happen if news agencies or someone else puts the information out there.
OK, how does reducing the bargaining rights of public sector unions help a private sector company?
It is part of a strategy to depress the normal wages earned by most employees. Driving down the wage rates of a large sector - which is what eliminating collective bargaining rights is all about - will have an effect that goes far beyond.
The law you are referring to has nothing to do with the people who work for the Koch brothers companies forming unions.
The Koch Brothers have a larger strategy in play - they bought off legislators to try to push "right to work" and "at-will employment" laws in Maine and several other states recently too. Don't be fooled by the names: the laws they continually have pushed for are designed to make it so that employee unions do not survive and collective bargaining rights vanish.
Based on my experience with other people like you, I am going to bet the other situations will turn out to be much the same--sound very damning when all you know is the Democratic Party talking points, but actually good public policy when you actually know the whole story.
Based on my experience, people like you are mentally deficient.
I bet you're one of those "Reagan-worshiping" clowns who never realizes that Reagan raised taxes more than he reduced them and that Reagan actually spoke in favor of public and private unions alike.
I think that public sector unions are a bad idea and should be completely gotten rid of.
And I'm reminded of prominent people who thought like you who were named Mussolini, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Adolf, and Castro.
Everybody likes sex. It's weird if you don't. But is it so important, that it dictates your daily actions?
You tell me the answer to that after you reconsider doing something because if your wife found out she'd make you sleep on the couch for a month.
There's nothing wrong with porn (well, until you get into the realm of doing something that is illegal anyways and filming it). If you want to take the pseudo-feminist pseudo-right-wing-neanderthal position (how the hell did those two wind up on the same side for something, given that feminists are all about empowering women and the rightwing cro-magnons are all about keeping them barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen?) that it is "destructive to society and denigrates women", we'll have that argument another day.
There is, however, something incredibly ironic about a massive porn collection owned by people who among other things, murder porn stars for fun because they believe porn is "evil."
You would.
Of course, the people trying to break in would most likely be armed-forces types.
Which means something along these lines is how they will get access.
Well, that's how the MafiAA works.
They want a "tax" levied by the government, paid to them.
On top of it, they want it to be illegal to exercise the right that the tax is supposedly being paid for.
Not so different from the USA, where the DMCA and constant copyright "extensions" paid for by Disney bribing Congress have pretty much destroyed the idea of the public domain.
In what ways do these laws make it difficult/impossible to form a union?
If you can't understand why:
-stripping the public sector of bargaining rights,
- trying to force yearly automatic "vote to dissolve the union" votes along with making the union registration process take a decade or more, and
- trying to force the ballot to be non-secret so that voters can be intimidated and threatened with retaliation if they vote for a union,
would necessarily make it nearly impossible to form a union, then you really are a fucking retard.
Did other people have the option to bid on these public utilities?
No.
What type of tax cut? State?
Yes. Which just so happened to go through a Retardican legislature who had also gotten a large amount of Koch "campaign contributions."
I really don't know why I bother. You're either a complete fucking retard or you are deliberately missing the point over and over again.
- Laws passed to benefit their businesses. Specifically, laws to make it difficult/impossible to form a union.
- Public sector utility sell-offs from Walker are going straight to the Kochs.
- $140 Million in tax cut kickback that headed mostly to Koch Industries.
Are you REALLY that fucking stupid that you are not aware of this?
So, if someone doesn't like a certain type of speech, it should be restricted?
Perhaps you missed the part where the Retardicans currently don't want doctors talking to women about abortions?
My aunt would be dead if the doctor hadn't. As it was, my baby cousin was already stillborn, part of his skull and brain hadn't developed properly.
But under Retardican laws that "abortion" would have been illegal. They'd rather kill two people in the name of "not aborting" than save lives.
It is my opinion that anyone stupid enough to be a Retardican voter ought to be sterilized for the good of humanity lest they pass on whatever genetic defect cause them to be that goddamn retarded.
When the Koch Bros buy politicians through what amounts to corrupt bribery for quid-pro-quo arrangements, they are corrupt and should be thrown in jail.
Show me an instance of Soros doing the same and I'll be happy to say he should be thrown in jail soon.
Why is it the Retardican morons' only response is "waaaah but they do it too" as if that means something?
Scott Walker, who:
- Took the call from a "Koch" that he wouldn't take from the media
- Received over $43,000 direct from the Kochs in his election campaign
- Received another $3.4 million laundered from the Kochs through the Republican Governors Association for attack ads on his opponent.
BOUGHT.
AND.
PAID.
FOR.
Now kindly stop lying, BITCH.
Scott Walker, WI
John Kasich, OH
Rick Snyder, MI
Mitch Daniels, IN
Jan Brewer, AZ
Rick "fuck the poor" Scott, FL
Nathan Deal, GA
Terri Branstad, IA
Chris Christie, NJ
All in the pockets, bought and paid for, of the Koch Bros.
Let's see:
campaign (support and attack ) ads - the feeding of information to voters who can make up their own minds
corruption - accepting bribes, giving jobs to relatives, redirecting tax money to campaign donors, etc.
Hmm... yeah, I'm going to have to say those aren't the same thing.
Corruption - accepting bribes, including "I will do this for you if you do this for me, I will do this against you if you don't do what I tell you" quid-pro-quo arrangements.
Which is precisely what that "coordinated issue ad" crap is.
What are you talking about? Even if I was willing to concede that point, better a governor beholden to the Koch brothers than one beholden to George Soros. At least the Koch brothers appear to be pushing positions they believe to be in the best interest of themselves at the expense of the rest of the US and anyone dumb enough to work for them.
FTFY
The Koch Brothers have a nice set of governors sitting on their mantel, bought and paid for through front groups like the "Tea Party."
How's that make you feel?
Where are all these powerful lobbyists going to come from if we get rid of the quid pro quo of having government officials become lobbyists with huge salaries?
They'll be former party officials who were never officially "government officials."
Or they'll be people who put together a firm simply for the purpose of being lobbyists from the industry themselves.
It's not the "who", it's the fact that they can make the threats and promises that in any other setting would amount to bribery.
Which political organizations will lobbyists target if we reduce the power of those organizations by allowing other parties to be voted in?
There will still be political parties.
There will still be individual representatives to target.
Which politicians will lobbyists target when term limits prevents them from buying a senator for 20 to 30 years? Fresh blood in congress means a reduction in strings.
Sons, daughters, neices, nephews... you forget how incestuous Congress really is.
For that matter, say (just pulling a name here) Boeing is in need of some new law to help them out. You don't think Boeing's staff can't come up with a list of "possibly sympathetic" and "Need to stop them from speaking against us" representatives within an hour?
Political attack and support ads are not the main problem crippling our government. Corruption and the amassing of power are.
You say that as if they are not one and the same.
Lobbyists only have real power because we've allowed them to be incestuously intertwined with government. Those ties should be broken, but not by curtailing free speech.
That was the whole point of campaign finance laws:
- Banning coordinated issue ads
- Banning coordinated "sneaky soft money" right next to an election
If you can't do those two things, even if some corrupt asstard in a black robe wrongly conflates them with "free speech", then you can NEVER break the incestuous ties of lobbyists and government representatives.
Campaign finance reform ran into the first amendment. It's normally right to have the first amendment prevail against other well intentioned laws.
Which is a colossal joke, because it hands the lobbyists the ultimate in corrupting power.
All your various "reforms" are meaningless when all the lobbyists have to do is show up with one of the two following statements:
#1 - Do it our way and we'll coordinate a set of "issue ad" buys to the tune of a couple million dollars to help your next reelection run.
#2 - Do it our way or else we'll coordinate a set of "issue ad" buys to the tune of a couple million dollars against you in your next reelection run.
Presto, corruption. And "Untraceable" corruption since it never "touches" their bank account.
No see... the difference here is that the democrat just wanted the sites de-linked and "hidden".
but the republican wants the sites de-linked, hidden, and hard to get to.
Speech that can't be heard is speech that can't be heard.
I fail to see any important difference in the two "categories" you list above on that basis.
Leahy is beyond corrupt and firmly in the pockets of the MafiAA - essentially he's the new RIAA hand-puppet in Congress.
He's actually worse than Fritz Hollings (D-Disney) was.
What we need is major campaign finance reform to get rid of all the backdoor contribution scams going on. But good luck getting that to happen - especially with the 5 senile delinquent conservatives on the Supreme Court having struck down the last few attempts at campaign finance reform!
So I'm confused though.
Google is a worldwide company. If they run ads for a business, which is doing nothing wrong by the laws of its own country E.G. Canada (but happens to trip on the laws of the US), then why is Google liable?
It sounds like the US needs to be talking to Canada about this, rather than harassing Google.
Of course, that's not what the Big Pharma lobbyists want. They just want to shut the pharmacies down in the US and Canada, and this is one step to hurting them in both places.
Ah, so you're an iOS fan?
Also remember, Microsoft isn't bothering to patch XP much any more. Nobody has to code new viruses/malware for it lately because year-old crap still works.