He's also had Bush's Congress to work with. As much as I wish he'd done better, I look at the GOP and it's fixation on introducing bills to ban abortions and I understand why the country is so fucked up. The folks making the laws are morons.
Bush's Congress? You mean control of both chambers of Congress with supermajority control of the Senate?
Sorry, Jack. That don't fly. Obama had absolute control of Congress and chose not to touch this issue.
That lasted for 6 weeks. The rest of the time the Republicans were busy setting the record for Cloture calls (modern filibustering). Your willful ignorance is impressive.
OK, but that doesn't mean it was "Bush's Congress".
It's irrelevant anyway. All it would have taken is an executive order as the NSA falls under the executive branch. That means that the NSA is under Obama's control, like the IRS, not Congress's. Congress passed the law ALLOWING the snooping. The law does not mandate it. No Congressional action needed, not that it would have been as hard as getting Obamacare passed.
You should really get your facts straight before you start calling other people ignorant. When they correct you, you just look like a douche bag.
Ask anyone in Europe if they think Obama is left-wing. They'll say "no". There's more to the world than the US population.
I'm not in Europe. Obama is not in Europe. The NSA is not a European agency. This is not a discussion about the NSA keeping European phone records. Nothing in this article is about Europe. Now, if this were a discussion about world politics or European leaders, your post may have merit. Since this is a discussion purely about American subjects, comparing Obama to Europeans is off topic at best.
Which is precisely the problem. We have a legitimate issue with pollution and climate change, but then we have assholes like Al Gore profiting off the whole mess and turning it into a political issue. Al Gore should have realized that he would turn the debate into a left verses right issue and kept his stupid mouth shut... if he really wanted to make a difference he should have secretly funded some non-profit to get some politically neutral members of the scientific community to spread the word.
You are correct. The fact that George W. Bush's home was "greener" than Al Gore's shows that this is not a left/right issue. It also shows that Al Gore does not truly believe global warming.
The best way to pull the left/right tension out of the issue would be to stop calling people names and using hyperbole. Capitalist pigs are not out to destroy the world or enslave the masses just as commie-tree-huggers are not out to destroy business (most of them anyway). For example, those who believe that GW is a real problem would make better headway selling money (energy) saving solutions to business rather than force regulations down their throats. Capitalists love money. Use that.
If you think that anyone would profit from even the average predicted scenario, you must be living comfortably on another planet. Droughts, floods, food shortages, heat waves, extreme weather patterns, economies destroyed? Where's "profit" in that, for any economy?
Obama's no centrist, he's thoroughly right-wing. Unfortunately, the Republicans are extreme right-wing, so your choices are 1) right-wing, and 2) even more right-wing.
People have a nasty habit of thinking that the definition of "centrist" is someone who believes the same way they do. I believe you are one of these people. The fact that you think Obama is right wing means that you think 95% of the American public is "right wing". A true centrist in America would be one that has 50% of the population to his right and 50% to his left. Sorry, but Obama is far to the left of that making him NOT "thoroughly right-wing".
Why are you not out there protesting? Why are you waiting for others to do it? Right there in the article is your call to arms: " I had been looking for leaders, but I realised that leadership is about being the first to act."
Grab your supplies, head out, start protesting. Don't wait for others to do it first. If our forefather's had, we'd not be here now.
Back when I was 25, I had nothing to lose. Now, I can't really afford to lose the house that my family depends on trying to fight off an IRS audit. Even though I've done nothing wrong, I can't afford what it would cost to prove that against a government agency with unlimited funds, time, and ruthlessness.
Sometimes people do vote for third parties, but I haven't seen major changes caused by that, either. Did Ross Perot have any lasting effects?
Well, we did have 8 years of President Bush as a result of a third party candidate bleeding votes away from Gore...
(Granted, Bush was more the GOP members of the Supreme Court being corrupt and helping Bush out, and Gore did win the eventual recount, long after the narrative was set, but, still.)
He's also had Bush's Congress to work with. As much as I wish he'd done better, I look at the GOP and it's fixation on introducing bills to ban abortions and I understand why the country is so fucked up. The folks making the laws are morons.
Bush's Congress? You mean control of both chambers of Congress with supermajority control of the Senate?
Sorry, Jack. That don't fly. Obama had absolute control of Congress and chose not to touch this issue.
Most of this stuff dates back to the Bush Jr. administration... But hey, go ahead and blame the black guy.
At least you are consistent: When Bush was president and we learned of secret courts used to authorize snooping under FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) when one of the ends of the connection was based overseas, you blamed Bush.
Now that Obama is president and he snoops on all calls within the US using the same FISA (FOREIGN Intelligence Surveillance Act) law, you blame Bush.
See! Your reaction is the same. No partisan bias at all.
How much tech can you have in an industry with profit margins of 1 or 2%?
1% of a lot of money is still a lot of money. Businesses that do more business can afford to take smaller profit margins because they deal with such larger volumes. For example, a convenience store that does $10,000 worth of business over a weekend won't make it on 1% profit. That's a mere $100. But a grocery store that does $1,000,000 over that same weekend will do just fine on the same 1% as that is $10,000 profit.
$10,000 buys a lot more technical investment than $100.
Aided and abetted by resources made available by the Bush Administration.
This is why rabid partisans - among others - should be careful what they wish for. They may get it, only to discover that it ends up in the hands of the other side.
But no matter which side holds them, we all lose.
Actually, no. Frankly, if this were to catch terrorists, as they claim, I don't think I'd have a problem with it. The Bush administration had these powers, and as far as we know, they used them to monitor terrorists. If the Bush administration had been caught abusing federal power to oppress political opponents, he would have never been granted these powers. If he had abused other powers after granting them, they would have been stripped away. There were checks and balances.
Bush was watched and when he screwed up or even appeared to overstep his bounds, he was hammered. There were those screaming for his impeachment over the Valerie Plame affair, which was merely leaking the name of an operative who had been sitting at a desk in Washington for over five years. The administration didn't even have anything to do with leaking the name! Scooter Libbey went to jail over the matter because he said he couldn't remember a conversation he had that was unrelated to the case. The actual leaker, Richard Armitage faced no jail time. He wasn't even charged. The Bush presidency didn't need to push boundaries to see where the limits were. They were punished for petty crimes they had nothing to do with.
Compare that with the current administration. The Obama administration has been pushing boundaries since it came into office. Fast and Furious, lies and demonization of opponents of Obamacare, lying over Benghazi, using the IRS to oppress opposing political groups, phone tapping the AP, fake charges to get a warrant of the Fox News reporter AND HIS PARENTS, lying about knowledge of the fake charges over the warrant, and many many other abuses of power. The administration has not been held to account for any of them. The Republicans try, but when the press goes against them, Republicans lose votes and are labeled as racists.
This administration has been pushing the boundaries from the beginning and has not found the edge yet. They will keep pushing until people go to jail, and even then, as long as it's low level people, they won't care. This is extremely dangerous, and all Obama's supporters can do is continue to blame Bush.
It isn't possible, because you can no longer have any reasonable guarantee that there was no coercion. You need to control the location the vote is cast.
Shouldn't that disqualify absentee voting? Frankly, I see no difference between Internet voting and voting by mail when it comes to security. The best way to eliminate voter fraud is to have all votes be in person with ID checked and visible mark (purple finger, for example) that can be used to identify who has already voted and can not be removed within the time frame that the polls are open. The only excuse for voting remotely should be if the voter is physically unable to make it to the polls, and even then, physical confirmation must be made of the handicap in question and the vote should be cast with a verified poll worker present.
Perhaps we need a new form or encryption which offers two views of the encrypted storage. One view hides the content, the other exposes it normally.
Or, perhaps the second password offers a self destruct.
I guarantee you they have a bit level copy of the drive. I'm sure these guys are smart enough to not work on the original drive. Destroying one wouldn't do much but make them start working on another backup.
Actually the IRS conducted a multi-year investigation of the NAACP during Bush2
You are correct. However, the NAACP is a 501(c)3. The conservative groups that were targeted by the IRS were applying for 501(c)4 status. 501(c)4's are allowed to lobby, endorse candidates, campaign, all that good stuff, provided that politics is not their primary purpose. 501(c)3's are only allowed to deal with policy issues and are NOT allowed to endorse a candidate or many of the other things that 501(c)4's are allowed to do. Churches are examples of 501(c)3's, and as I'm sure you are aware, they are not allowed to endorse a candidate. The NAACP went way beyond what was allowed by a 501(c)3.
So take this one, singular victory. Have it, it's yours. You can feel righteous for a bit now -- you have a right to be upset. But I'm not going to lose sight over the many thousands of pages of fuckups from the last time you assclowns were in power -- Obama and Co. still have a loooooooooooooong way to go before they'll equal the level of incepid governance that his predecessors engaged in.
Fast and Furious ring a bell? How about the lying to Congress that resulted from that. Executive Privilege to protect the President from having to divulge communications, that he said never existed just a week before?
Oh, and say what you will about Bush, his administration never used the power of the IRS, the EPA, OSHA and the FBI to attack political opponents for no other reason than their politics.
You know, until that happened, you'd just be a tin-foil hat wearer, without a shred of credibility to you. Actually, you still are. But thanks to the colossal mistake of a couple of people in the IRS
You speak of credibility and then tell a lie. It has been proven that the IRS scandal goes well beyond just a "couple of people in the IRS". You should know this. If you don't, then you are completely ignorant of things you try so hard to sound knowledgeable about. If you do know this, then you are a liar and you blew whatever credibility you had in the very same sentence you claimed that I had none. Is that irony or projection?
Tell me, what was Article II of the Nixon Articles of Impeachment?
The Obama administration STILL calls the Ft. Hood shooting "Workplace Violence". This prevents the victims of that shooting from receiving Purple Heart benefits. These people are struggling to make ends meet while the US Army is still paying Nadal Hassan hundreds of thousands of dollars. Again, all Obama would have to do is say, "it was terrorism". Three words could change the lives of true American heroes who became the victims of terrorism. I guess you don't think that's very important either, do you? I guess that somehow makes me "a tin-foil hat wearer" for wanting the best for our soldiers. (Disclaimer, I was a soldier stationed at Ft. Hood)
Seizing AP phone records to catch a leaker after they knew who the leak was? The AG saying under oath before Congress he knew nothing about any actions against anyone in the media AFTER signing the search warrant to secretly read a Fox News Reporters email, tap his phone and follow his movements? Oh, they also spied on his fricken PARENTS!!! He also claimed that Rosen had committed a crime in order to get the warrant and used tried three judges before one decided to sign the warrant. Oh, did I mention that Eric Holder signed the request for this warrant after claiming ignorance before Congress, UNDER OATH? Obama's response? He has asked Eric Holder to investigate.
Benghazi ring a bell? Are you OK being lied to by the President? He did lie, you know. That's common knowledge. His administration lied more, from Hillary on down. And don't pull that "Bush lied" crap either. That's a fallacy of "Two wrongs make a right." If Bush were a murderer, would that make it OK for Obama to just be a rapist?
80% of stimulus funds going to unions? Head of the treasury a tax cheat? Accepting campaign donations from Visa Gift Cards? Releasing Mitt Romney's tax records to liberal media outlets? Listing name of conservative donors on the web so they may be targeted? You're OK with all this or do you simply deny that any of it happened?
You seem to think that there are no scandals in the Obama administration. You haven't been paying attention. I can't say I blame you as you really have had to search for them since no one in the press will report them with the exception of FoxNews, and I'm sure you don't watch FoxNews. Well, there's just a few to get you started. And don't worry. These investigations are just beginning and they will probably be reported by some media outlets. Th
Ted Cruz was born in Canada, and therefore Constitutionally prohibited from running for President of the United States.
He was born to two American citizens, making him a naturalized citizen of the United States. That's something that the "birthers" could never quite grasp. Even if Obama had been born in Kenya, it would not have kept him from being President as his mother was an American Citizen.
You forgot #1 in refining, which would account for the vast majority of the issues you site (if true). Also, being such a big damn state, it doesn't surprise that Texas pollutes more than, say, Rhode Island. Do you like that plastic keyboard you are typing on? Odds are that the oil used to make it was in part either pumped from or refined in Texas. That makes you part of the problem. Stop using your keyboard, computer or anything else that uses plastic or anything else made from those evil, polluting fossil fuels or STFU.
As for children in poverty and illiteracy, again, if true, it would be due to the large number of immigrants living in the state. For example, Hidalgo County, in far South Texas is number 1 for percentage of people on food stamps at 29%. By the way, that county has to share it's #1 status with the Bronx. Hidalgo County Texas can blame immigration from Mexico. What's the Bronx's excuse? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidalgo_County,_Texas)
#1 in executions? Yeah, we are proud of that one.
And again, with these and the others, (Citation Needed).
Lots of folks like to mis-characterize Texas and Texans, but as a foreigner they seem to be doing plenty of things right. Their state economy is not borked like California, they have low tax, they value individual rights more than overbearing 'nanny' governance, and they have good political leadership. Ted Cruz for Prez 2016 would not be a bad choice it seems - he's very smart and would stop the current rot in DC.
You are correct. I work with people from all over the country. These people have had to move to Texas because they couldn't find jobs in their original state. All of the, ALL of them absolutely love it here, even though they hate the weather nine months out of the year (Michiganders don't do well at 105). Most simply can't believe the freedom that they have here that they never knew they missed where they came from. "You mean I can just walk into a Walmart and buy a shotgun?" "I won't get arrested for having a gun rack on my truck?" "My state vehicle inspection was only $15. Where do I pay the rest of it?" "Why do people keep calling me offering me jobs that pay more money. Is this some sort of scam?" And finally, "I think there is a mistake. The company didn't take out for my state income tax."
Don't listen to these other yahoos. They are mad because the majority of Texans value freedom and values over a strong central government and political correctness. Our education system is fine. The negative numbers they'll throw at you is due to the fact that Texas has one of the largest non-English speaking student population in the country. As for property tax, yeah, it's high, but it's nothing compared to the income taxes paid in other states. And to the AC that said that Texas is anti-science has no idea what he's talking about. Texas has one of the largest tech sectors in the country. "Texas" is even in the name of many of these tech companies. "Texas Instruments" ring a Dell... I mean BELL?
Texas is an awesome place to live, provided all our imports don't use their voting power to turn Texas into the places they came from.
and yes, Ted Cruz would make an awesome president. It's amazing how these people try to paint him as the new leader of the Republican party. Cruz challenged and defeated Rick Perry's hand pick successor for Kay Bailey Hutchinson's Senate seat. He took on the Texas Republican political machine and won. It's funny that these liberals constantly scream for someone to change the Republican party, but as soon as someone does so, they do everything they can to vilify him. Ted Cruz is the child of Cuban immigrants. He was born in Cuba and educated at Princeton. But because he is the Texas Senator and his name ends with an (R), they paint him as some sort of ignorant, backwoods, hick.
If you think that Ted Cruz would be a serious presidential contender then you have no idea what you are talking about. I am a Texan and he is a joke to most of the state. As much eye rolling as he causes within the state, he would cause even more than Rick Perry did on the national stage. I am not saying your completely wrong, but please do a bit more research before thinking Cruz (or Perry) are responsible for much of anything that is right with our state.
Ted Cruz is a "joke to most of the state"? Tell me, genius, how did he win his Senatorial election by such a wide margin? He may be a joke in YOUR circles, but everyone I speak to thinks the man is brilliant, with the exception of the most rabid liberals who think that it is OK for the IRS to target conservatives for no other reason than they are conservatives.
Which might reassure the person wearing the glasses that he has some control. It does nothing to reassure other people. They're already called Glassholes for a reason. And nobody trusts assholes.
So someone is an asshole because they have the ability to record a video of you? I hate to tell you this, but everyone you see has the ability to record a video of you; EVERYONE! And you may not even know they have a camera.
I think part of the problem here is that people are afraid that things they do in public will be made public. Do people not know that things they do in public is already public? If you are worried about it being on youtube and your brainfart becoming your YouTube Moment, relax, odds are people don't find you that interesting. Nothing against you personally. Nearly all of us are extremely boring people. Only a few are interesting enough to watch and they are already on YouTube.
He chooses what to post on to the internet. If somebody wearing Glass walks up to you, your property, or your workplace, you have no choice in the matter as to which of your activities gets uploaded to Google.
First, if someone walks up to your property, you may firmly order them to leave. If someone walks up to your workplace wearing one... well, so what. Ask him to take a picture of the camera in the corner that is already filming everything you do. If it still bothers you, take it up with whoever is in charge. And although you didn't mention it, if it bothers you when someone wears on in public, you should already be bothered. Google "public web cam" for just a small smidgen of cameras that already out there, recording your movements 24/7.
Also, Glass is not filming ALL the time. The user has to turn it on. It's also not automatically uploaded to Google unless the user tells it to, and even then it's not made public, again, unless the user makes it public.
Finally, it's not like Glass is a hidden camera. You know it's there and with an LED, you know when it's recording. Stop making excuses to hate things other people enjoy.
If TEA Party members and people who belong to groups with "Patriot" in the name were statistically more apt to apply for tax exempt status where it is not justified, then you would have a point. So you can't claim profiling. Remember, this was not an audit. This was an application for tax exempt status, all of which were granted, by the way, AFTER THE ELECTION. Hell, the IRS didn't even follow their own guidelines:
IRS agents singled out dozens of organizations for additional reviews because they included the words "tea party" or "patriot" in their exemption applications, said Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt groups. In some cases, groups were asked for lists of donors, which violates IRS policy in most cases, she said.
See, these groups can't operate until they receive the blessing from the IRS. What the IRS did was use the power of the federal government to effectively shut down political opposition until after Obama's reelection.
Slashdot Mirror
Obama's had 4.5 years now to fix Bush's problems
He's also had Bush's Congress to work with. As much as I wish he'd done better, I look at the GOP and it's fixation on introducing bills to ban abortions and I understand why the country is so fucked up. The folks making the laws are morons.
Bush's Congress? You mean control of both chambers of Congress with supermajority control of the Senate?
Sorry, Jack. That don't fly. Obama had absolute control of Congress and chose not to touch this issue.
That lasted for 6 weeks. The rest of the time the Republicans were busy setting the record for Cloture calls (modern filibustering). Your willful ignorance is impressive.
OK, but that doesn't mean it was "Bush's Congress".
It's irrelevant anyway. All it would have taken is an executive order as the NSA falls under the executive branch. That means that the NSA is under Obama's control, like the IRS, not Congress's. Congress passed the law ALLOWING the snooping. The law does not mandate it. No Congressional action needed, not that it would have been as hard as getting Obamacare passed.
You should really get your facts straight before you start calling other people ignorant. When they correct you, you just look like a douche bag.
Ask anyone in Europe if they think Obama is left-wing. They'll say "no". There's more to the world than the US population.
I'm not in Europe. Obama is not in Europe. The NSA is not a European agency. This is not a discussion about the NSA keeping European phone records. Nothing in this article is about Europe. Now, if this were a discussion about world politics or European leaders, your post may have merit. Since this is a discussion purely about American subjects, comparing Obama to Europeans is off topic at best.
Which is precisely the problem. We have a legitimate issue with pollution and climate change, but then we have assholes like Al Gore profiting off the whole mess and turning it into a political issue. Al Gore should have realized that he would turn the debate into a left verses right issue and kept his stupid mouth shut... if he really wanted to make a difference he should have secretly funded some non-profit to get some politically neutral members of the scientific community to spread the word.
You are correct. The fact that George W. Bush's home was "greener" than Al Gore's shows that this is not a left/right issue. It also shows that Al Gore does not truly believe global warming.
The best way to pull the left/right tension out of the issue would be to stop calling people names and using hyperbole. Capitalist pigs are not out to destroy the world or enslave the masses just as commie-tree-huggers are not out to destroy business (most of them anyway). For example, those who believe that GW is a real problem would make better headway selling money (energy) saving solutions to business rather than force regulations down their throats. Capitalists love money. Use that.
people who stand to profit from climate change
If you think that anyone would profit from even the average predicted scenario, you must be living comfortably on another planet. Droughts, floods, food shortages, heat waves, extreme weather patterns, economies destroyed? Where's "profit" in that, for any economy?
Al Gore seems to have done quite well.
Obama's no centrist, he's thoroughly right-wing. Unfortunately, the Republicans are extreme right-wing, so your choices are 1) right-wing, and 2) even more right-wing.
People have a nasty habit of thinking that the definition of "centrist" is someone who believes the same way they do. I believe you are one of these people. The fact that you think Obama is right wing means that you think 95% of the American public is "right wing". A true centrist in America would be one that has 50% of the population to his right and 50% to his left. Sorry, but Obama is far to the left of that making him NOT "thoroughly right-wing".
Why are you not out there protesting? Why are you waiting for others to do it? Right there in the article is your call to arms: " I had been looking for leaders, but I realised that leadership is about being the first to act."
Grab your supplies, head out, start protesting. Don't wait for others to do it first. If our forefather's had, we'd not be here now.
Back when I was 25, I had nothing to lose. Now, I can't really afford to lose the house that my family depends on trying to fight off an IRS audit. Even though I've done nothing wrong, I can't afford what it would cost to prove that against a government agency with unlimited funds, time, and ruthlessness.
Sometimes people do vote for third parties, but I haven't seen major changes caused by that, either. Did Ross Perot have any lasting effects?
Well, we did have 8 years of President Bush as a result of a third party candidate bleeding votes away from Gore...
(Granted, Bush was more the GOP members of the Supreme Court being corrupt and helping Bush out, and Gore did win the eventual recount, long after the narrative was set, but, still.)
And Ross Perot gave us eight years of Clinton.
Obama's had 4.5 years now to fix Bush's problems
He's also had Bush's Congress to work with. As much as I wish he'd done better, I look at the GOP and it's fixation on introducing bills to ban abortions and I understand why the country is so fucked up. The folks making the laws are morons.
Bush's Congress? You mean control of both chambers of Congress with supermajority control of the Senate?
Sorry, Jack. That don't fly. Obama had absolute control of Congress and chose not to touch this issue.
Most of this stuff dates back to the Bush Jr. administration... But hey, go ahead and blame the black guy.
At least you are consistent:
When Bush was president and we learned of secret courts used to authorize snooping under FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) when one of the ends of the connection was based overseas, you blamed Bush.
Now that Obama is president and he snoops on all calls within the US using the same FISA (FOREIGN Intelligence Surveillance Act) law, you blame Bush.
See! Your reaction is the same. No partisan bias at all.
How much tech can you have in an industry with profit margins of 1 or 2%?
1% of a lot of money is still a lot of money. Businesses that do more business can afford to take smaller profit margins because they deal with such larger volumes. For example, a convenience store that does $10,000 worth of business over a weekend won't make it on 1% profit. That's a mere $100. But a grocery store that does $1,000,000 over that same weekend will do just fine on the same 1% as that is $10,000 profit.
$10,000 buys a lot more technical investment than $100.
Aided and abetted by resources made available by the Bush Administration.
This is why rabid partisans - among others - should be careful what they wish for. They may get it, only to discover that it ends up in the hands of the other side.
But no matter which side holds them, we all lose.
Actually, no. Frankly, if this were to catch terrorists, as they claim, I don't think I'd have a problem with it. The Bush administration had these powers, and as far as we know, they used them to monitor terrorists. If the Bush administration had been caught abusing federal power to oppress political opponents, he would have never been granted these powers. If he had abused other powers after granting them, they would have been stripped away. There were checks and balances.
Bush was watched and when he screwed up or even appeared to overstep his bounds, he was hammered. There were those screaming for his impeachment over the Valerie Plame affair, which was merely leaking the name of an operative who had been sitting at a desk in Washington for over five years. The administration didn't even have anything to do with leaking the name! Scooter Libbey went to jail over the matter because he said he couldn't remember a conversation he had that was unrelated to the case. The actual leaker, Richard Armitage faced no jail time. He wasn't even charged. The Bush presidency didn't need to push boundaries to see where the limits were. They were punished for petty crimes they had nothing to do with.
Compare that with the current administration. The Obama administration has been pushing boundaries since it came into office. Fast and Furious, lies and demonization of opponents of Obamacare, lying over Benghazi, using the IRS to oppress opposing political groups, phone tapping the AP, fake charges to get a warrant of the Fox News reporter AND HIS PARENTS, lying about knowledge of the fake charges over the warrant, and many many other abuses of power. The administration has not been held to account for any of them. The Republicans try, but when the press goes against them, Republicans lose votes and are labeled as racists.
This administration has been pushing the boundaries from the beginning and has not found the edge yet. They will keep pushing until people go to jail, and even then, as long as it's low level people, they won't care. This is extremely dangerous, and all Obama's supporters can do is continue to blame Bush.
News? TFS is flamebait.
This Fucking Site?
The Friendly Summary.
It isn't possible, because you can no longer have any reasonable guarantee that there was no coercion. You need to control the location the vote is cast.
Shouldn't that disqualify absentee voting? Frankly, I see no difference between Internet voting and voting by mail when it comes to security. The best way to eliminate voter fraud is to have all votes be in person with ID checked and visible mark (purple finger, for example) that can be used to identify who has already voted and can not be removed within the time frame that the polls are open. The only excuse for voting remotely should be if the voter is physically unable to make it to the polls, and even then, physical confirmation must be made of the handicap in question and the vote should be cast with a verified poll worker present.
Perhaps we need a new form or encryption which offers two views of the encrypted storage. One view hides the content, the other exposes it normally.
Or, perhaps the second password offers a self destruct.
I guarantee you they have a bit level copy of the drive. I'm sure these guys are smart enough to not work on the original drive. Destroying one wouldn't do much but make them start working on another backup.
Actually the IRS conducted a multi-year investigation of the NAACP during Bush2
You are correct. However, the NAACP is a 501(c)3. The conservative groups that were targeted by the IRS were applying for 501(c)4 status. 501(c)4's are allowed to lobby, endorse candidates, campaign, all that good stuff, provided that politics is not their primary purpose. 501(c)3's are only allowed to deal with policy issues and are NOT allowed to endorse a candidate or many of the other things that 501(c)4's are allowed to do. Churches are examples of 501(c)3's, and as I'm sure you are aware, they are not allowed to endorse a candidate. The NAACP went way beyond what was allowed by a 501(c)3.
TLDR? You are comparing Apples and PC's.
So take this one, singular victory. Have it, it's yours. You can feel righteous for a bit now -- you have a right to be upset. But I'm not going to lose sight over the many thousands of pages of fuckups from the last time you assclowns were in power -- Obama and Co. still have a loooooooooooooong way to go before they'll equal the level of incepid governance that his predecessors engaged in.
Fast and Furious ring a bell? How about the lying to Congress that resulted from that. Executive Privilege to protect the President from having to divulge communications, that he said never existed just a week before?
Oh, and say what you will about Bush, his administration never used the power of the IRS, the EPA, OSHA and the FBI to attack political opponents for no other reason than their politics.
You know, until that happened, you'd just be a tin-foil hat wearer, without a shred of credibility to you. Actually, you still are. But thanks to the colossal mistake of a couple of people in the IRS
You speak of credibility and then tell a lie. It has been proven that the IRS scandal goes well beyond just a "couple of people in the IRS". You should know this. If you don't, then you are completely ignorant of things you try so hard to sound knowledgeable about. If you do know this, then you are a liar and you blew whatever credibility you had in the very same sentence you claimed that I had none. Is that irony or projection?
Tell me, what was Article II of the Nixon Articles of Impeachment?
The Obama administration STILL calls the Ft. Hood shooting "Workplace Violence". This prevents the victims of that shooting from receiving Purple Heart benefits. These people are struggling to make ends meet while the US Army is still paying Nadal Hassan hundreds of thousands of dollars. Again, all Obama would have to do is say, "it was terrorism". Three words could change the lives of true American heroes who became the victims of terrorism. I guess you don't think that's very important either, do you? I guess that somehow makes me "a tin-foil hat wearer" for wanting the best for our soldiers. (Disclaimer, I was a soldier stationed at Ft. Hood)
Seizing AP phone records to catch a leaker after they knew who the leak was? The AG saying under oath before Congress he knew nothing about any actions against anyone in the media AFTER signing the search warrant to secretly read a Fox News Reporters email, tap his phone and follow his movements? Oh, they also spied on his fricken PARENTS!!! He also claimed that Rosen had committed a crime in order to get the warrant and used tried three judges before one decided to sign the warrant. Oh, did I mention that Eric Holder signed the request for this warrant after claiming ignorance before Congress, UNDER OATH? Obama's response? He has asked Eric Holder to investigate.
Benghazi ring a bell? Are you OK being lied to by the President? He did lie, you know. That's common knowledge. His administration lied more, from Hillary on down. And don't pull that "Bush lied" crap either. That's a fallacy of "Two wrongs make a right." If Bush were a murderer, would that make it OK for Obama to just be a rapist?
80% of stimulus funds going to unions? Head of the treasury a tax cheat? Accepting campaign donations from Visa Gift Cards? Releasing Mitt Romney's tax records to liberal media outlets? Listing name of conservative donors on the web so they may be targeted? You're OK with all this or do you simply deny that any of it happened?
You seem to think that there are no scandals in the Obama administration. You haven't been paying attention. I can't say I blame you as you really have had to search for them since no one in the press will report them with the exception of FoxNews, and I'm sure you don't watch FoxNews. Well, there's just a few to get you started. And don't worry. These investigations are just beginning and they will probably be reported by some media outlets. Th
Ted Cruz was born in Canada, and therefore Constitutionally prohibited from running for President of the United States.
He was born to two American citizens, making him a naturalized citizen of the United States. That's something that the "birthers" could never quite grasp. Even if Obama had been born in Kenya, it would not have kept him from being President as his mother was an American Citizen.
I think that makes you #1 in (Citation Needed)'s
You forgot #1 in refining, which would account for the vast majority of the issues you site (if true). Also, being such a big damn state, it doesn't surprise that Texas pollutes more than, say, Rhode Island. Do you like that plastic keyboard you are typing on? Odds are that the oil used to make it was in part either pumped from or refined in Texas. That makes you part of the problem. Stop using your keyboard, computer or anything else that uses plastic or anything else made from those evil, polluting fossil fuels or STFU.
As for children in poverty and illiteracy, again, if true, it would be due to the large number of immigrants living in the state. For example, Hidalgo County, in far South Texas is number 1 for percentage of people on food stamps at 29%. By the way, that county has to share it's #1 status with the Bronx. Hidalgo County Texas can blame immigration from Mexico. What's the Bronx's excuse? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidalgo_County,_Texas)
#1 in executions? Yeah, we are proud of that one.
And again, with these and the others, (Citation Needed).
Lots of folks like to mis-characterize Texas and Texans, but as a foreigner they seem to be doing plenty of things right. Their state economy is not borked like California, they have low tax, they value individual rights more than overbearing 'nanny' governance, and they have good political leadership. Ted Cruz for Prez 2016 would not be a bad choice it seems - he's very smart and would stop the current rot in DC.
You are correct. I work with people from all over the country. These people have had to move to Texas because they couldn't find jobs in their original state. All of the, ALL of them absolutely love it here, even though they hate the weather nine months out of the year (Michiganders don't do well at 105). Most simply can't believe the freedom that they have here that they never knew they missed where they came from. "You mean I can just walk into a Walmart and buy a shotgun?" "I won't get arrested for having a gun rack on my truck?" "My state vehicle inspection was only $15. Where do I pay the rest of it?" "Why do people keep calling me offering me jobs that pay more money. Is this some sort of scam?" And finally, "I think there is a mistake. The company didn't take out for my state income tax."
Don't listen to these other yahoos. They are mad because the majority of Texans value freedom and values over a strong central government and political correctness. Our education system is fine. The negative numbers they'll throw at you is due to the fact that Texas has one of the largest non-English speaking student population in the country. As for property tax, yeah, it's high, but it's nothing compared to the income taxes paid in other states. And to the AC that said that Texas is anti-science has no idea what he's talking about. Texas has one of the largest tech sectors in the country. "Texas" is even in the name of many of these tech companies. "Texas Instruments" ring a Dell... I mean BELL?
Texas is an awesome place to live, provided all our imports don't use their voting power to turn Texas into the places they came from.
and yes, Ted Cruz would make an awesome president. It's amazing how these people try to paint him as the new leader of the Republican party. Cruz challenged and defeated Rick Perry's hand pick successor for Kay Bailey Hutchinson's Senate seat. He took on the Texas Republican political machine and won. It's funny that these liberals constantly scream for someone to change the Republican party, but as soon as someone does so, they do everything they can to vilify him. Ted Cruz is the child of Cuban immigrants. He was born in Cuba and educated at Princeton. But because he is the Texas Senator and his name ends with an (R), they paint him as some sort of ignorant, backwoods, hick.
If you think that Ted Cruz would be a serious presidential contender then you have no idea what you are talking about. I am a Texan and he is a joke to most of the state. As much eye rolling as he causes within the state, he would cause even more than Rick Perry did on the national stage. I am not saying your completely wrong, but please do a bit more research before thinking Cruz (or Perry) are responsible for much of anything that is right with our state.
Ted Cruz is a "joke to most of the state"? Tell me, genius, how did he win his Senatorial election by such a wide margin? He may be a joke in YOUR circles, but everyone I speak to thinks the man is brilliant, with the exception of the most rabid liberals who think that it is OK for the IRS to target conservatives for no other reason than they are conservatives.
No, that's only if they're on your property.
Right. That is exactly what I said.
Which might reassure the person wearing the glasses that he has some control. It does nothing to reassure other people. They're already called Glassholes for a reason. And nobody trusts assholes.
So someone is an asshole because they have the ability to record a video of you? I hate to tell you this, but everyone you see has the ability to record a video of you; EVERYONE! And you may not even know they have a camera.
I think part of the problem here is that people are afraid that things they do in public will be made public. Do people not know that things they do in public is already public? If you are worried about it being on youtube and your brainfart becoming your YouTube Moment, relax, odds are people don't find you that interesting. Nothing against you personally. Nearly all of us are extremely boring people. Only a few are interesting enough to watch and they are already on YouTube.
He chooses what to post on to the internet. If somebody wearing Glass walks up to you, your property, or your workplace, you have no choice in the matter as to which of your activities gets uploaded to Google.
First, if someone walks up to your property, you may firmly order them to leave. If someone walks up to your workplace wearing one... well, so what. Ask him to take a picture of the camera in the corner that is already filming everything you do. If it still bothers you, take it up with whoever is in charge. And although you didn't mention it, if it bothers you when someone wears on in public, you should already be bothered. Google "public web cam" for just a small smidgen of cameras that already out there, recording your movements 24/7.
Also, Glass is not filming ALL the time. The user has to turn it on. It's also not automatically uploaded to Google unless the user tells it to, and even then it's not made public, again, unless the user makes it public.
Finally, it's not like Glass is a hidden camera. You know it's there and with an LED, you know when it's recording. Stop making excuses to hate things other people enjoy.
[...]which destroys the privacy of anyone around you [...]
Spot on. That's the main issue with me. And don't tell me "oh but we've got smartphones already".
Glass is a whole new level of invasivity.
Says the guy posting his thoughts publicly on the Internet. Want privacy? Stay home with your blinds closed and your computer unplugged.
It always cracks me up to see people PUBLICLY screaming about PRIVACY. If privacy were your goal, you wouldn't be posting.
Because they make the wearer look like a dork (not a geek or even a nerd).
I rank it right up there with Beats headphones.
So? Why would YOU hate a device that makes ME look like a dork? Why do you care what I look like?
If TEA Party members and people who belong to groups with "Patriot" in the name were statistically more apt to apply for tax exempt status where it is not justified, then you would have a point. So you can't claim profiling. Remember, this was not an audit. This was an application for tax exempt status, all of which were granted, by the way, AFTER THE ELECTION. Hell, the IRS didn't even follow their own guidelines:
IRS agents singled out dozens of organizations for additional reviews because they included the words "tea party" or "patriot" in their exemption applications, said Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt groups. In some cases, groups were asked for lists of donors, which violates IRS policy in most cases, she said.
See, these groups can't operate until they receive the blessing from the IRS. What the IRS did was use the power of the federal government to effectively shut down political opposition until after Obama's reelection.