Every last one of these kind of ppls should be swinging for the traitors to the Constitution that they are.
If you want to hang everybody who is a traitor to the Constitution then I hope you have lots of rope -- you'll be hanging most of Congress. You'll also need a plan to get past the Secret Service if you plan on holding Obama accountable for his failures to uphold his oaths.....
If we start looking at every politician based soley on his or her merits alone and ignore his or her political affiliation we would see the enormous "change of course" that we have been promised oh-so-many times and never actually seen.
The problem is that the vast majority of voters will never do that. The politicians know this and they know the key to winning is name recognition and publicity. That requires vast amounts of money in the modern era, which requires a vast organization (i.e: political party) to raise and manage said funds. Like most other large organizations the political party eventually forgets its original mandate and starts to focus on preserving and expanding the organization.
Smarter people than I have failed to come up with a viable solution to this problem. In short, we are all screwed.
Interestingly, nothing chills political party circle-jerk fantasies of unlimited executive power quite like the possibility that an opposing party might wield it.
Fixed that for you. If you think the phenomena that you have described is unique to Republicans then I think you are in for a rude surprise.
So what you're saying is that because they believe X is true while you believe that X is false, they're hypocrites because they act as though X is true?
I'm saying they are hypocrites because they claim a mandate to protect civil liberties while choosing which rights they deem important enough to consider civil liberties. The definition of civil liberties that I've seen is "Fundamental individual rights, such as freedom of speech and religion, protected by law against unwarranted governmental or other interference." It's hard to see how the 2nd amendment isn't a fundamental individual right.
Slippery Slope [wikipedia.org] arguements are fallacy's. There is no proof that one step forward equates the same thing as ensuring that someone is going to go the full nine yards
Which is why our social security numbers are only used for the purposes of tracking our social security accounts and not for identification or anything extra like that.......
i'll take being taxed a little more for adequate healthcare for middle class people
wake. the. fuck. up. conservatives.
your ideology is dead
I find it amazing/annoying that more than half of your post is an offtopic rant about political issues that have zero to do with the article yet you stand at +5 right now. One wonders if a Conservative ranting about political issues that have nothing to do with the article would be given the same treatment or if his post would be sitting at -1 right now?
Sounds to me like he's a religious type, and he sees an opportunity to impose his Judeo-christian values onto the citizens. He likely thinks nudity is a horrible, horrible sin deserving of punishment and hopes to scare other people from being nude. Or having sex. Or fun. There's no tyrant worse than a tyrant trying to "do good". I hate morality dictators.
Oh, please. Do you have anything at all to base that on other than your assumptions about "religious types"? He sounds to me like the typical politician looking to score some free publicity and gain some name recognition.
Thanks for the math contribution. Where would we be without your mad skills?
You'll surely note that I said my case had five different court appearances and the GP's had one. Hence I think my question was valid. Now bugger off unless you have something meaningful to say.
I mean, the girls were dragged though court for a year now
Umm, have you read ANY of the stories about this case? The DA has threatened to charge them. They haven't been "dragged" anywhere more menacing than a conference room as yet.
and probably get a psychic damage for lifetime
Oh please. This whole thing smells like bullshit but I'm growing weary of hearing people play the "damaged for a lifetime" card. If they are like the teenagers I know their reaction is probably somewhere between smugness and indifference. Either way, it takes more than a few meetings with an asshole DA to damage most people for "a lifetime"
they would like the ACLU more if they also duplicated the work of the NRA. Presumably that organisation doesn't fulfill its remit to their satisfaction, and they'd like the ACLU to lend a hand?
I don't want them to duplicate the work of the NRA, I just want them to acknowledge that the 2nd amendment protects a civil liberty that's every bit as important as the rest. Instead they claim that "In our view, neither the possession of guns nor the regulation of guns raises a civil liberties issue." One doubts they would make the same claim about the regulation of free speech, hence they are hypocrites. Because of that, most people who care about gun rights can not bring themselves to donate money/join the ACLU. American Civil Liberties Union, eh?
And people need to be far more careful about electing prosecuters. They have a LOT of power for a local position. For an average person, a prosecuter might even be more important than the President, which would imply a thinking period of several months should be completed before a vote is cast.
Nah, I'll just vote for the one whose name I remember from that big trial a few months back. Ya know, the one where he cracked down on all that kiddie porn? I don't recall the specifics but the newspaper headline said "DA brings charges against kiddie porn ring", so I assume he's doing a good job. Failing that I'll just vote for the one who is in the same political party as I am.
And people wonder why the Founding Fathers were worried about the mob.....
but ethically should we not be allowed to sue, or bring charges, against prosecutors who do patently ridiculous and abusive things?
Perhaps, but the DA makes a good point (probably his only one ever) when he says that it's a dangerous precedent to set when a Federal court prevents a State prosecutor from bringing charges. I'm no fan of what he's trying to do but I probably would have called his bluff before I would have run off to the Federal court house. His 'evidence' seems pretty thin and it's doubtful that it would even make it to a jury, let alone a conviction.....
Nevermind the thousands of dollars in attorney's fees that we had to pay
How did you rack up thousands of dollars in fees for something that got kicked the first time the judge saw it? I wound up charged with a Class E felony in NYS that went to grand jury and five different court appearances and "only" wound up paying ~$4,500.
What our previous and current presidents have done is create yet-another gigantic bubble
I like the good Doctor as much as anybody but I think you are smart enough to know that our problems run deeper than POTUS. POTUS can use the bully pulpit to try and set the agenda but Congress deserves at least as much blame if not more. As I see it our problem is that nearly everybody has a vested interest now in one form or another of government welfare. It ranges from welfare moms waiting for the check to come to big defense contractors lobbying their Congress-critter so they can keep selling the military weapons that it doesn't need.
I honestly don't know how you begin to unravel that mess. I fear that the system will have to completely implode before the broader voting community will start to take people like Ron Paul seriously -- and if history is any indication they could start to take other types of people seriously. Ones who aren't as concerned with personal freedoms and liberties.......
You say that as if it isn't common knowledge that Shakrai is a Democrat.
Umm, Shakrai used to be a Democrat you mean. Now I'm a disillusioned still-registered-but-not-really-a-Democrat trying to decide if I should re-register without any political party or as a libertarian.
You could play with an automatic. Just load the magazine up with a bunch of snap caps and one live round. If it goes click you have to rack the slide before handing it to the next guy;)
Your numbers fail to account for the chance of said gun malfunctioning due to poor maintenance.
That rarely happens with revolvers and when it does generally manifests in the cylinder failing to turn. If the cylinder doesn't turn I'd wager that you'd discard the gun as being unsuitable for Russian roulette and find another one;)
Jefferson, for example, believed that large cities were "pestilential to the morals, the health and the liberties of man."
And the more time I spend in large cities the more I start to think that he was accurate. Let's see, I've got more stress from dealing with so many people/traffic/stimulations, so that's the "health" item. Liberties are definitely more infringed in urban areas -- how many rural dwellers have to pass through metal detectors to take in a sports event or get into school? Morals are in the eye of the beholder, so I'm not going near that one with a ten foot pole......
destroying America "as we know it" is not a bad idea. Perhaps doing so and then rebuilding it "as its forefathers intended" (and accounting for current situations) might be a good plan.
I'm with you. Where do we start? Convincing everybody who is feeding off the Government teat (a group so diverse it ranges from welfare moms to large defense contractors) of the folly of their ways is going to be a tall order, so where do we begin?
Unfortunately ALL of them qualify as "fucking idiots"
Fixed that for you. You had an extra word in there.
Why do we elect these bozos as our leaders?
Because the bozo in my political party stands for all that is just and righteous, while the bozo in the other political party is out to destroy America as we know it.
My guess is that one reason it costs $100k per plane to install this system is that part of the installation is doing the tests to insure that 802.11 doesn't interfere with any of the plane's systems.
I had a cross country flight a few years back with some friends. We created an ad-hoc network and played Worms World Party for about half of the flight. Amazingly enough the airplane didn't crash.....
Slashdot Mirror
Every last one of these kind of ppls should be swinging for the traitors to the Constitution that they are.
If you want to hang everybody who is a traitor to the Constitution then I hope you have lots of rope -- you'll be hanging most of Congress. You'll also need a plan to get past the Secret Service if you plan on holding Obama accountable for his failures to uphold his oaths.....
If we start looking at every politician based soley on his or her merits alone and ignore his or her political affiliation we would see the enormous "change of course" that we have been promised oh-so-many times and never actually seen.
The problem is that the vast majority of voters will never do that. The politicians know this and they know the key to winning is name recognition and publicity. That requires vast amounts of money in the modern era, which requires a vast organization (i.e: political party) to raise and manage said funds. Like most other large organizations the political party eventually forgets its original mandate and starts to focus on preserving and expanding the organization.
Smarter people than I have failed to come up with a viable solution to this problem. In short, we are all screwed.
Interestingly, nothing chills political party circle-jerk fantasies of unlimited executive power quite like the possibility that an opposing party might wield it.
Fixed that for you. If you think the phenomena that you have described is unique to Republicans then I think you are in for a rude surprise.
So what you're saying is that because they believe X is true while you believe that X is false, they're hypocrites because they act as though X is true?
I'm saying they are hypocrites because they claim a mandate to protect civil liberties while choosing which rights they deem important enough to consider civil liberties. The definition of civil liberties that I've seen is "Fundamental individual rights, such as freedom of speech and religion, protected by law against unwarranted governmental or other interference." It's hard to see how the 2nd amendment isn't a fundamental individual right.
Slippery Slope [wikipedia.org] arguements are fallacy's. There is no proof that one step forward equates the same thing as ensuring that someone is going to go the full nine yards
Which is why our social security numbers are only used for the purposes of tracking our social security accounts and not for identification or anything extra like that.......
dear fiscal conservatives and republitards: why exactly do you want to privatize and deregulate everything?
"bloated government bureaucracy... blah blah blah... welfare queens... blah blah blah"
i'll take being taxed a little more for adequate healthcare for middle class people
wake. the. fuck. up. conservatives.
your ideology is dead
I find it amazing/annoying that more than half of your post is an offtopic rant about political issues that have zero to do with the article yet you stand at +5 right now. One wonders if a Conservative ranting about political issues that have nothing to do with the article would be given the same treatment or if his post would be sitting at -1 right now?
Sounds to me like he's a religious type, and he sees an opportunity to impose his Judeo-christian values onto the citizens. He likely thinks nudity is a horrible, horrible sin deserving of punishment and hopes to scare other people from being nude. Or having sex. Or fun. There's no tyrant worse than a tyrant trying to "do good". I hate morality dictators.
Oh, please. Do you have anything at all to base that on other than your assumptions about "religious types"? He sounds to me like the typical politician looking to score some free publicity and gain some name recognition.
Thanks for the math contribution. Where would we be without your mad skills?
You'll surely note that I said my case had five different court appearances and the GP's had one. Hence I think my question was valid. Now bugger off unless you have something meaningful to say.
I mean, the girls were dragged though court for a year now
Umm, have you read ANY of the stories about this case? The DA has threatened to charge them. They haven't been "dragged" anywhere more menacing than a conference room as yet.
and probably get a psychic damage for lifetime
Oh please. This whole thing smells like bullshit but I'm growing weary of hearing people play the "damaged for a lifetime" card. If they are like the teenagers I know their reaction is probably somewhere between smugness and indifference. Either way, it takes more than a few meetings with an asshole DA to damage most people for "a lifetime"
they would like the ACLU more if they also duplicated the work of the NRA. Presumably that organisation doesn't fulfill its remit to their satisfaction, and they'd like the ACLU to lend a hand?
I don't want them to duplicate the work of the NRA, I just want them to acknowledge that the 2nd amendment protects a civil liberty that's every bit as important as the rest. Instead they claim that "In our view, neither the possession of guns nor the regulation of guns raises a civil liberties issue." One doubts they would make the same claim about the regulation of free speech, hence they are hypocrites. Because of that, most people who care about gun rights can not bring themselves to donate money/join the ACLU. American Civil Liberties Union, eh?
And people need to be far more careful about electing prosecuters. They have a LOT of power for a local position. For an average person, a prosecuter might even be more important than the President, which would imply a thinking period of several months should be completed before a vote is cast.
Nah, I'll just vote for the one whose name I remember from that big trial a few months back. Ya know, the one where he cracked down on all that kiddie porn? I don't recall the specifics but the newspaper headline said "DA brings charges against kiddie porn ring", so I assume he's doing a good job. Failing that I'll just vote for the one who is in the same political party as I am.
And people wonder why the Founding Fathers were worried about the mob.....
You've obviously confused the US with a society that is comfortable with human sexuality.
You've obviously never been to any reasonably large American city or high school ;)
but ethically should we not be allowed to sue, or bring charges, against prosecutors who do patently ridiculous and abusive things?
Perhaps, but the DA makes a good point (probably his only one ever) when he says that it's a dangerous precedent to set when a Federal court prevents a State prosecutor from bringing charges. I'm no fan of what he's trying to do but I probably would have called his bluff before I would have run off to the Federal court house. His 'evidence' seems pretty thin and it's doubtful that it would even make it to a jury, let alone a conviction.....
Nevermind the thousands of dollars in attorney's fees that we had to pay
How did you rack up thousands of dollars in fees for something that got kicked the first time the judge saw it? I wound up charged with a Class E felony in NYS that went to grand jury and five different court appearances and "only" wound up paying ~$4,500.
If Mr. Paul were president
What our previous and current presidents have done is create yet-another gigantic bubble
I like the good Doctor as much as anybody but I think you are smart enough to know that our problems run deeper than POTUS. POTUS can use the bully pulpit to try and set the agenda but Congress deserves at least as much blame if not more. As I see it our problem is that nearly everybody has a vested interest now in one form or another of government welfare. It ranges from welfare moms waiting for the check to come to big defense contractors lobbying their Congress-critter so they can keep selling the military weapons that it doesn't need.
I honestly don't know how you begin to unravel that mess. I fear that the system will have to completely implode before the broader voting community will start to take people like Ron Paul seriously -- and if history is any indication they could start to take other types of people seriously. Ones who aren't as concerned with personal freedoms and liberties.......
You say that as if it isn't common knowledge that Shakrai is a Democrat.
Umm, Shakrai used to be a Democrat you mean. Now I'm a disillusioned still-registered-but-not-really-a-Democrat trying to decide if I should re-register without any political party or as a libertarian.
You could play with an automatic. Just load the magazine up with a bunch of snap caps and one live round. If it goes click you have to rack the slide before handing it to the next guy ;)
Your numbers fail to account for the chance of said gun malfunctioning due to poor maintenance.
That rarely happens with revolvers and when it does generally manifests in the cylinder failing to turn. If the cylinder doesn't turn I'd wager that you'd discard the gun as being unsuitable for Russian roulette and find another one ;)
This happens sometimes when I try to play Heroes of Might and Magic V! It's like playing russian roulette.
Yeah, because not getting to play 'Heroes of Might and Magic V' is totally equivalent to a 16.667% chance of blowing your brains out ;)
Jefferson, for example, believed that large cities were "pestilential to the morals, the health and the liberties of man."
And the more time I spend in large cities the more I start to think that he was accurate. Let's see, I've got more stress from dealing with so many people/traffic/stimulations, so that's the "health" item. Liberties are definitely more infringed in urban areas -- how many rural dwellers have to pass through metal detectors to take in a sports event or get into school? Morals are in the eye of the beholder, so I'm not going near that one with a ten foot pole......
destroying America "as we know it" is not a bad idea. Perhaps doing so and then rebuilding it "as its forefathers intended" (and accounting for current situations) might be a good plan.
I'm with you. Where do we start? Convincing everybody who is feeding off the Government teat (a group so diverse it ranges from welfare moms to large defense contractors) of the folly of their ways is going to be a tall order, so where do we begin?
No, I'm not, but may I ask what you based that assumption on?
Wow, tell me what you really think :)
Unfortunately ALL of them qualify as "fucking idiots"
Fixed that for you. You had an extra word in there.
Why do we elect these bozos as our leaders?
Because the bozo in my political party stands for all that is just and righteous, while the bozo in the other political party is out to destroy America as we know it.
My guess is that one reason it costs $100k per plane to install this system is that part of the installation is doing the tests to insure that 802.11 doesn't interfere with any of the plane's systems.
I had a cross country flight a few years back with some friends. We created an ad-hoc network and played Worms World Party for about half of the flight. Amazingly enough the airplane didn't crash.....