Good point with the military sites. IAAL (though not your L), and we have to verify military status before taking judgments. Big problems if you don't. Where do you do this?
Here: https://www.dmdc.osd.mil/scra/owa/home
Which, scarily for us, says:
Secure Connection Failed
www.dmdc.osd.mil uses an invalid security certificate.
The certificate is not trusted because the issuer certificate is not trusted.
(Error code: sec_error_untrusted_issuer)
Hmmm, should I add an "exception"? If I don't do it, I might get in trouble under the SCRA if the guy's on active duty. If I do do it, I don't get in trouble under the SCRA, but might stay up nights hoping I didn't just send some poor guy's SSN off to the identity thieves...
I could easily secure the border for *half* of that.
Where is this "4,000 miles long" border of which you speak? Look!: I just halved the cost again, just by RTFSummary:"the 2,000-mile border with Mexico."To be fair, though, I agree with your point: technofences are a colossal waste of money.
Now, let's get down to serious business: catskins for nothing!! http://www.snopes.com/critters/disposal/catrat.asp
Please, allow me to direct you back to the Constitution:
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
The Supremacy Clause says that "laws of the United States" are the "supreme law of the land". Given the broad powers given the legislative and executive branches under the Constitution itself, in particular the Commerce Clause http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Raich the 10th Amendment doesn't effectively reserve many remaining powers to the States anyway.
"Since the 9/11 attacks more than 100,000 Americans have been killed by drunk drivers, who have been causing a 9/11 death toll every 2 months since about 1960."
I don't think these statistics are true (as many--Mark Twain in particular--might well expect), at least as far as they claim causation.
As far as I know the NHTSA only tracks "alcohol-related" traffic fatalities, which mean accidents in which any party has a B.A.C. exceeding.01. The figure is therefore just about useless for gauging the frequency and number of (non-perpetrator) fatalities primarily caused each year by legally intoxicated drivers. This guy rants about MADD's misleading usage of these statistics: http://www.muckraker-report.org/id7.html
To put this in perspective, if we look at "speeding-related" fatalities, we can also cite a 9/11 death toll every two months (http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/Rpts /2005/809_839/pages/809-839_Final.pdf). Yet I hear no similar clamor for a War on Speeding Drivers. I'm still waiting for the War on Eating, Cell-Phone Talking, and Make-Up-Applying Drivers.
Seems rather presumptuous of you to designate certain churches as being Christian or not Christian. These distinctions ring strongly of those pamphlets I used to see at the county fair from the John Birch Society.
I'm sure both the Catholic Church and the LDS regard themselves as Christians, insofar as they say and apparently believe that some guy whose example we should supposedly follow, got nailed to a cross about 2000 years ago. Their institutional lapses in following said example (e.g. by failing to prevent harm to children on some occasions) do nothing to alter what they believe/profess they only show that they, like all human institutions, are fallible. Were they to systematically abandon all attempts to conform human behavior to the agreed-on model (i.e. Christ), you might justifiably claim they were no longer "Christian", but I've seen no evidence of that.
Conversely, I went through three laptops in a row that all had dead pixels. I just successively returned them to where I bought them. The trick is to find one that doesn't have any dead pixels before the reseller's return policy expires (make sure you go somewhere where you can return it for any reason with no restocking/extortion fee). If you have to rely on the manufacturer's magnanimity you're truly screwed.
I was at a loss about how to prevent Amex from calling me. I explicitly requested a couple of times that they quit calling my phone (a cell # to boot), and they continued to do it. Finally I told them "Thank you for your continued interest in speaking with me. I must inform you, however, that further contact with me will be billed at the rate of $100 per minute and I will construe any further contact from this phone # as expressed consent to this billing arrangement. So please do not call me unless you intend to incur such charges." This resulted in a flustered and obviously supervisor-coached employee in haltingly stating that "it might take a couple weeks to get me off the list" and other lame excuses of that ilk. At any rate, I haven't received any calls since then....
Slashdot Mirror
Hmmm, should I add an "exception"? If I don't do it, I might get in trouble under the SCRA if the guy's on active duty. If I do do it, I don't get in trouble under the SCRA, but might stay up nights hoping I didn't just send some poor guy's SSN off to the identity thieves...
I could easily secure the border for *half* of that. Where is this "4,000 miles long" border of which you speak? Look!: I just halved the cost again, just by RTFSummary:"the 2,000-mile border with Mexico."To be fair, though, I agree with your point: technofences are a colossal waste of money. Now, let's get down to serious business: catskins for nothing!! http://www.snopes.com/critters/disposal/catrat.asp
Please, allow me to direct you back to the Constitution:
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
The Supremacy Clause says that "laws of the United States" are the "supreme law of the land". Given the broad powers given the legislative and executive branches under the Constitution itself, in particular the Commerce Clause http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Raich the 10th Amendment doesn't effectively reserve many remaining powers to the States anyway.
"Since the 9/11 attacks more than 100,000 Americans have been killed by drunk drivers, who have been causing a 9/11 death toll every 2 months since about 1960."
.01. The figure is therefore just about useless for gauging the frequency and number of (non-perpetrator) fatalities primarily caused each year by legally intoxicated drivers. This guy rants about MADD's misleading usage of these statistics: http://www.muckraker-report.org/id7.html
To put this in perspective, if we look at "speeding-related" fatalities, we can also cite a 9/11 death toll every two months (http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/Rpts /2005/809_839/pages/809-839_Final.pdf). Yet I hear no similar clamor for a War on Speeding Drivers. I'm still waiting for the War on Eating, Cell-Phone Talking, and Make-Up-Applying Drivers.
I don't think these statistics are true (as many--Mark Twain in particular--might well expect), at least as far as they claim causation. As far as I know the NHTSA only tracks "alcohol-related" traffic fatalities, which mean accidents in which any party has a B.A.C. exceeding
THIS IS THE USUAL REASON! http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-316.html
Seems rather presumptuous of you to designate certain churches as being Christian or not Christian. These distinctions ring strongly of those pamphlets I used to see at the county fair from the John Birch Society. I'm sure both the Catholic Church and the LDS regard themselves as Christians, insofar as they say and apparently believe that some guy whose example we should supposedly follow, got nailed to a cross about 2000 years ago. Their institutional lapses in following said example (e.g. by failing to prevent harm to children on some occasions) do nothing to alter what they believe/profess they only show that they, like all human institutions, are fallible. Were they to systematically abandon all attempts to conform human behavior to the agreed-on model (i.e. Christ), you might justifiably claim they were no longer "Christian", but I've seen no evidence of that.
Conversely, I went through three laptops in a row that all had dead pixels. I just successively returned them to where I bought them. The trick is to find one that doesn't have any dead pixels before the reseller's return policy expires (make sure you go somewhere where you can return it for any reason with no restocking/extortion fee). If you have to rely on the manufacturer's magnanimity you're truly screwed.
I was at a loss about how to prevent Amex from calling me. I explicitly requested a couple of times that they quit calling my phone (a cell # to boot), and they continued to do it. Finally I told them "Thank you for your continued interest in speaking with me. I must inform you, however, that further contact with me will be billed at the rate of $100 per minute and I will construe any further contact from this phone # as expressed consent to this billing arrangement. So please do not call me unless you intend to incur such charges." This resulted in a flustered and obviously supervisor-coached employee in haltingly stating that "it might take a couple weeks to get me off the list" and other lame excuses of that ilk. At any rate, I haven't received any calls since then....