"Terrorism" has been turned into a convenient buzzword. It's only applied to those the person using it disagrees with. The Syrian insurgency most certainly does have terrorist aspects. The American Revolution had terrorist aspects as well. If I were fighting as an insurgent, you can bet your ass I'd target civilian installations supportive of the regime against which I was fighting. It's eminently practical on a strategic level, and is one of the most effective tactics in a lop-sided conflict.
Exactly. There are really no realistic military threats to the US. The real threats are economic, and the US is becoming increasingly likely to fall under those economic threats due to the outsourcing of pretty much everything but services which absolutely require domestic workers.
I trust Facebook with my financial information just as far as I can throw the combined weight of every asset (both human and non) of the corporation combined.
Giving someone free will is the equivalent of making them imperfect, unless you also couple the free will with an innate pre-understanding of the consequences of every action they make.
Yeah, I misread the source article on which I was relying. Even though they are not legally common carrier for information services (which I would still argue ISPs should be legally categorized for any non-content services), they are still generally treated as though they are.
Like many things, it's all about government convenience. Medical care is necessary according to DHHS, and voluntary according to the DEA. You have to pay for it or you are penalized, and if you pay for it you give up your right to privacy. They've managed to legislate a method to force everyone in the USA to give up their rights to medical privacy.
You actually believe those who wrote the Constitution intended it to allow the Federal government the general power to ban absolutely anything under the taxing authority? That's what the Supreme Court rulings on the Constitutionality of Federal bans have laid out. Just because the power is not used more broadly does not mean it doesn't exist as a result of bad rulings. Hell, as a result of the ACA ruling, the taxing authority now allows both general bans and general mandatory purchases. The Federal government now has the "legitimized" ability to police every aspect of every transaction made.
And the most dangerous bureaucracies are those composed primarily of armed agents. Instead of ending up with a tax penalty for non-compliance, you are more likely to end up dead.
He's a politician from Chicago. Anyone with a brain should realize he never should have been elected (this isn't to say McCain should have been elected; they both sucked as choices), regardless of which party he came from. I don't think there's a non-criminal Chicago politician. They have more politicians sent to prison than any other state.
And if the ICC doesn't work, the taxing authority does (the ACA was held by the USSC to be Constitutional under the taxing authority, not the ICC).
Now, growing your own wheat for your own usage falling under the ICC, yeah, anything is "interstate," since everything indirectly affects interstate commerce.
They've decided the taxing authority allows them to do anything and everything now. You can buy and sell illegal drugs with a tax stamp, they just won't sell you a tax stamp. Bang, banned product. Don't want to buy health insurance? We'll tax you if you don't. It's small now, but if that authority holds they can tax you at any rate they want. Don't buy product X? Bang, we're adding a tax penalty of 100% of your income. Better yet, 1000%. Now you either don't work or you're an indentured servant since taxes can't be avoided through bankruptcy.
Slashdot Mirror
The Arab-Israeli conflict started 30 years before Israel existed as a state?
"Terrorism" has been turned into a convenient buzzword. It's only applied to those the person using it disagrees with. The Syrian insurgency most certainly does have terrorist aspects. The American Revolution had terrorist aspects as well. If I were fighting as an insurgent, you can bet your ass I'd target civilian installations supportive of the regime against which I was fighting. It's eminently practical on a strategic level, and is one of the most effective tactics in a lop-sided conflict.
Exactly. There are really no realistic military threats to the US. The real threats are economic, and the US is becoming increasingly likely to fall under those economic threats due to the outsourcing of pretty much everything but services which absolutely require domestic workers.
It's good to make the data interception as expensive as possible though.
A lot.
I trust Facebook with my financial information just as far as I can throw the combined weight of every asset (both human and non) of the corporation combined.
Giving someone free will is the equivalent of making them imperfect, unless you also couple the free will with an innate pre-understanding of the consequences of every action they make.
Write-ins are counted the same way third-party votes are: a lower percentage of votes for Republicrats.
Yeah, I misread the source article on which I was relying. Even though they are not legally common carrier for information services (which I would still argue ISPs should be legally categorized for any non-content services), they are still generally treated as though they are.
After all, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. </sarcasm>
Like many things, it's all about government convenience. Medical care is necessary according to DHHS, and voluntary according to the DEA. You have to pay for it or you are penalized, and if you pay for it you give up your right to privacy. They've managed to legislate a method to force everyone in the USA to give up their rights to medical privacy.
Exactly. Their time means more money for them, and every penny they spend comes from someone else. Why in the hell would they care a whit about cost?
You actually believe those who wrote the Constitution intended it to allow the Federal government the general power to ban absolutely anything under the taxing authority? That's what the Supreme Court rulings on the Constitutionality of Federal bans have laid out. Just because the power is not used more broadly does not mean it doesn't exist as a result of bad rulings. Hell, as a result of the ACA ruling, the taxing authority now allows both general bans and general mandatory purchases. The Federal government now has the "legitimized" ability to police every aspect of every transaction made.
They're both tasked with creating as many criminals as possible.
And the most dangerous bureaucracies are those composed primarily of armed agents. Instead of ending up with a tax penalty for non-compliance, you are more likely to end up dead.
The Constitution stopped being ordered deny,allow a long time ago. It's now interpreted as allow,deny.
Revolutions are always violent. They just aren't always violent on both sides. They are, however, almost always violent on both sides.
They refers to Illinois, rather than specifically Chicago.
He's a politician from Chicago. Anyone with a brain should realize he never should have been elected (this isn't to say McCain should have been elected; they both sucked as choices), regardless of which party he came from. I don't think there's a non-criminal Chicago politician. They have more politicians sent to prison than any other state.
There is, but there aren't enough people willing to do something about it to prevent you from winding up dead.
And if the ICC doesn't work, the taxing authority does (the ACA was held by the USSC to be Constitutional under the taxing authority, not the ICC).
Now, growing your own wheat for your own usage falling under the ICC, yeah, anything is "interstate," since everything indirectly affects interstate commerce.
They've decided the taxing authority allows them to do anything and everything now. You can buy and sell illegal drugs with a tax stamp, they just won't sell you a tax stamp. Bang, banned product. Don't want to buy health insurance? We'll tax you if you don't. It's small now, but if that authority holds they can tax you at any rate they want. Don't buy product X? Bang, we're adding a tax penalty of 100% of your income. Better yet, 1000%. Now you either don't work or you're an indentured servant since taxes can't be avoided through bankruptcy.
And God made man imperfect, thus setting him up to fail. Sounds like an asshole to me.
Considering that modern thorium salt reactors self-control and are basically incapable of melting down, yeah, they're safer.
No it doesn't. If I don't have a decent third-party candidate to vote for, I will write someone in before voting Republocrat.
The spoiler argument is for those who don't understand why people vote third-party.