Manila envelope on the President's desk? Sure. Blow up the family? From what I understand they try to avoid that, and even pass on opportunities to shoot out of concerns about collateral damage. Blow up you (assuming you are a terrorist fighting with al Qaida) without police, judge, or jury? Sure, since they are in the same status as these other Americans that the Federal government shot dead without arrest, charge, trial, conviction, or sentence. Al Qaida is making war against the US, not picking pockets. The US is making war right back. Anyone that is fighting with al Qaida that doesn't want a visit from Hellfire on earth can surrender.
I assume then that you've never heard of Chechnya, Georgia, or Pussy Riot? Russia is a much better country than the Soviet Union was, so far. But Putin has them working back towards the Soviet model. If you think that Russia is a better friend toward Europe than the US, you are greatly mistaken. There is probably more than one thing you don't know.
Explicit threats to use nuclear weapons are generally considered a serious matter.
I'm not sure how you think that NSA would push some other country into a nuclear attack. The NSA's primary job is simply to listen and gather intelligence.
Angela Merkel spent most of her life with Soviet troops just across the border in East Germany, and Germany is part of the alliance that Russia threatens with nuclear weapons.
Russia's reaction to the scandal contains elements of "don't care" and glee. Russia is highly active with their own spying, including Germany, the UK, US, and many other nations. They also know that they get spied on. The Russians derive both advantage and amusement from the agitation in the West about this matter. If it hurts diplomatic relations between NATO/EU countries and the US, so much the better for Russia.
The NSA isn't an armed service, nor do they have police powers. Although they pose a great potential danger, as any intelligence service does in a democracy, as a practical matter, not so much.
The US Congress has both approaches. The House elections run every two years with the idea that it will be a closer representation of the voters views, and to some extent their passions. The Senate elections are for six years, and are staggered. The Senate is supposed to be the more deliberative body.
You're confused on some points. House electoral districts are decided at the state level, and every state has its own procedures. When those procedures are political, you generally have to have control of some key part of the state government to make decisions about the state's legislative districts. You are effectively complaining that the Republicans are winning at the national level because they are winning at the state level. Each district election is it's own race. Any so-called "national tally" of votes for either the House or Senate is essentially meaningless, the system doesn't work that way. The US doesn't use proportional representation on a national basis. There is no "gerrymandering" of the presidency - it is a single office. The only effort to alter presidential elections that is anywhere close to coming to fruition is the multistate compact that will assign Electoral College electors based on the popular vote once enough states sign up for it. There is little support to repeal the 17th Amendment, but what little support exists is a result of wanting to restrain the Federal government's overreach.
Maybe you could be more specific than claiming that I'm "wrong on all counts?" If I'm wrong on all counts, then the Constitution isn't a constitution, it says nothing about the form of government, and nothing about various rights and responsibilities. It would also have to specify the budget for the Marines for the last 200 years, and anticipate Social Security by about 140 years. I'm pretty certain that isn't true.
Elections still matter in the US, it's just that simple. The so called "Affordable Care Act," AKA "Obamacare" wouldn't have passed if the Republicans had held either one of the houses of Congress, or the presidency. If the Democrats held the House in addition to the Senate, the sequester which is resulting in significant budget reductions would be history already. Cynicism may be hip, but it doesn't necessarily provide the correct insight about all matters.
Will someone remember Snowden is pointing out info to everyone. The most important info. Heck, the Russians pale in comparison to the dangers of the NSA. Ever heard of transparency? Got a clue?
Interesting comment from an Anonymous Coward, and provably wrong. I think you would have to point to genuine transparency on the part of Russia. As to the danger of Russia compared to NSA, to start with, NSA doesn't have nuclear weapons aimed at NATO countries, Russia does, and that's not all. Russia has apparently continued the former Soviet practice of killing dissidents and defectors. Of course Snowden was welcomed to Russia after he made arrangements with the Russian consulate in Hong Kong.
The Russian government supported the murder of the former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko, it was reported last night.
A senior security official told BBC's Newsnight there were "very strong indications it was a state action" and that the Russian security services continued to have a "willingness to consider operations against people in the west".
Last year, the CPS issued an extradition warrant to bring Lugovoi back to the UK from Russia, but Putin refused to hand him over, saying it would be in breach of his country's constitution to do so.
Newsnight said it was told Russia's internal security organisation, the FSB, operated with far more autonomy than organisations usually entrusted with foreign espionage operations.
The source said: "We very strongly believe the Litvinenko case to have had some state involvement."
The source used an MI5 operation last summer in which officers arrested and deported a man they believed to be on a mission to kill another Russian dissident, Boris Berezovsky, as an example of "continued FSB willingness to consider operations against people in the west".
The most important info. Heck, the Russians pale in comparison to the dangers of the NSA. Ever heard of transparency? Got a clue?
Ah yes, the famous "transparency" of Russia. I'm pretty sure that the NSA has never threated to use nuclear weapons against NATO countries, but Russia has. Why you would think that nuclear armed Russia with its own intelligence services unchecked is somehow less dangerous than NSA is baffling. Are you posting from fantasyland, or Russia?
USA Freedom Act.... Isn't that what the Constitution is supposed to be?
No. The Constitution is exactly that, a constitution. It is a base governing document that lays out the form of government and various rights and responsibilities. It is silent on many things. It says nothing about how much money Social Security is getting next year, or the Marines, or if section 205 of the Patriot Act even exists.
We don't need another Law. The Laws that made this garbage legal are unconstitutional and criminal.
If you think they are unconstitutional, then can you show where they were struck down by a court as such? If they aren't struck down by a court, then they need to be repealed by the legislature.
We don't need another Law. We need to hunt down and incarcerate the criminals who created this mess.
You need another law to repeal or alter the aspects of the law that you don't like if a court doesn't strike it down. The criminals responsible for creating this mess have been the source of an active manhunt for 12 years. The ringleader is dead, and most of his original lieutenants are either captured or dead, some are in hiding. Since I'm sure you didn't mean that - you better wait until Congress repeals it, or it will still be on the books.
We don't need another Law. We need to hold government officials personally accountable for their flagrant and criminal violations of the Constitution.
An election is coming up. Do your worst.
We don't need another Law. We already have a USA Freedom Act. It is called "The Constitution of the United States."
We've covered this, but I'll add one more thing. The Constitution gave Congress the power to make laws. Congress made a law that resulted in this issue. Since the courts haven't struck it down, it is still the law of the land. How about we let Congress do their job and pass a law to try and resolve the issue instead of making specious claims that no law change is required?
... the corporatist warmongering pigs and the crypto-Zionists pulling their strings.
I've heard things like that before. You think the ^wJews Zionist are behind it all? Yes, I think I hear music, I'm just not sure if it's from a play like this, or a parade like that.
... it seems to me the Israeli government uses Judaism as a weapon against their detractors, since nobody can say anything about Israel's bad behavior without being accused of anti-semitism.
Many people use anti-Zionism against Israel as a cloak for anti-Semitism.
ivy league universities whose cultures are loaded with marxist philosophy
I was going to parody this comrade, but I couldn't think of any way to make it funnier.
What I see isn't so much funny as sad. Higher education has clearly been captured by the Left, and Cultural Marxism is dominant. Ideas springing from or influenced by Marxism are influential or dominant in many areas even when outright Marxism isn't. Chomsky is the most highly cited living author. Apparently you would deny this.
I think a lot of people would argue that the vast majority of "defensive use of firearms in deadly situations" would not even be necessary in a country where it is even slightly difficult to get your hands on automatic firearms.
I think you are making some faulty assumptions about defensive firearms use. They are used in many differ sorts of circumstances as you can see from a few of the stories at this link: Stories That Happened In MI
No, actually it doesn't. Toss out suicides and criminal-on-criminal violence and you're still left with outrageous numbers of cases of "defensive use of firearms" (which you mentioned in the first paragraph but had forgotten in the second?).
I think you will find some interesting commentary here: Murder by Numbers
Slashdot Mirror
Manila envelope on the President's desk? Sure. Blow up the family? From what I understand they try to avoid that, and even pass on opportunities to shoot out of concerns about collateral damage. Blow up you (assuming you are a terrorist fighting with al Qaida) without police, judge, or jury? Sure, since they are in the same status as these other Americans that the Federal government shot dead without arrest, charge, trial, conviction, or sentence. Al Qaida is making war against the US, not picking pockets. The US is making war right back. Anyone that is fighting with al Qaida that doesn't want a visit from Hellfire on earth can surrender.
I'd love to take a walk through that warehouse they have.
I prefer my metaphors shaken, not stirred.
Do, or do not. There is no spoon.
That was mommy 1.0. Mommy 2.0 replaces the 3rd eye with a digital camera.
It depends, are they people years, dog years, dog star years, star wars years, or puppet years?
Dell also has an IT services arm that could do well over the long term.
Cannibal Korea is best Korea.
It damaged a decommissioned space shuttle on earth
Summary is misleading.
It is pretty "rare" for oceanic / atmospheric events to reach into space. Besides, all of the space shuttles are decommissioned.
So, now we know who Yoda is, as well as the Jedi Knights.
I assume then that you've never heard of Chechnya, Georgia, or Pussy Riot? Russia is a much better country than the Soviet Union was, so far. But Putin has them working back towards the Soviet model. If you think that Russia is a better friend toward Europe than the US, you are greatly mistaken. There is probably more than one thing you don't know.
The question was which was more dangerous, and people were choosing badly. Isn't that plain?
Explicit threats to use nuclear weapons are generally considered a serious matter.
I'm not sure how you think that NSA would push some other country into a nuclear attack. The NSA's primary job is simply to listen and gather intelligence.
Angela Merkel spent most of her life with Soviet troops just across the border in East Germany, and Germany is part of the alliance that Russia threatens with nuclear weapons.
Russia's reaction to the scandal contains elements of "don't care" and glee. Russia is highly active with their own spying, including Germany, the UK, US, and many other nations. They also know that they get spied on. The Russians derive both advantage and amusement from the agitation in the West about this matter. If it hurts diplomatic relations between NATO/EU countries and the US, so much the better for Russia.
The NSA isn't an armed service, nor do they have police powers. Although they pose a great potential danger, as any intelligence service does in a democracy, as a practical matter, not so much.
The US Congress has both approaches. The House elections run every two years with the idea that it will be a closer representation of the voters views, and to some extent their passions. The Senate elections are for six years, and are staggered. The Senate is supposed to be the more deliberative body.
You're confused on some points. House electoral districts are decided at the state level, and every state has its own procedures. When those procedures are political, you generally have to have control of some key part of the state government to make decisions about the state's legislative districts. You are effectively complaining that the Republicans are winning at the national level because they are winning at the state level. Each district election is it's own race. Any so-called "national tally" of votes for either the House or Senate is essentially meaningless, the system doesn't work that way. The US doesn't use proportional representation on a national basis. There is no "gerrymandering" of the presidency - it is a single office. The only effort to alter presidential elections that is anywhere close to coming to fruition is the multistate compact that will assign Electoral College electors based on the popular vote once enough states sign up for it. There is little support to repeal the 17th Amendment, but what little support exists is a result of wanting to restrain the Federal government's overreach.
I give you high marks for successfully reading my username.
Maybe you could be more specific than claiming that I'm "wrong on all counts?" If I'm wrong on all counts, then the Constitution isn't a constitution, it says nothing about the form of government, and nothing about various rights and responsibilities. It would also have to specify the budget for the Marines for the last 200 years, and anticipate Social Security by about 140 years. I'm pretty certain that isn't true.
You may want to review the article on the Bonus Bill of 1817, especially the final paragraph, , and possibly the referenced document: Special Message to the House of Representatives Containing the Views of the President of the United States on the Subject of Internal Improvements.
There may be some history you are unaware of.
Elections still matter in the US, it's just that simple. The so called "Affordable Care Act," AKA "Obamacare" wouldn't have passed if the Republicans had held either one of the houses of Congress, or the presidency. If the Democrats held the House in addition to the Senate, the sequester which is resulting in significant budget reductions would be history already. Cynicism may be hip, but it doesn't necessarily provide the correct insight about all matters.
Will someone remember Snowden is pointing out info to everyone. The most important info. Heck, the Russians pale in comparison to the dangers of the NSA. Ever heard of transparency? Got a clue?
Interesting comment from an Anonymous Coward, and provably wrong. I think you would have to point to genuine transparency on the part of Russia. As to the danger of Russia compared to NSA, to start with, NSA doesn't have nuclear weapons aimed at NATO countries, Russia does, and that's not all. Russia has apparently continued the former Soviet practice of killing dissidents and defectors. Of course Snowden was welcomed to Russia after he made arrangements with the Russian consulate in Hong Kong.
Russian general says Poland a nuclear 'target'
Number of Russian spies in the UK back to Cold War levels, say security services
Russia supported Litvinenko murder, says security official
The Russian government supported the murder of the former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko, it was reported last night.
A senior security official told BBC's Newsnight there were "very strong indications it was a state action" and that the Russian security services continued to have a "willingness to consider operations against people in the west".
Last year, the CPS issued an extradition warrant to bring Lugovoi back to the UK from Russia, but Putin refused to hand him over, saying it would be in breach of his country's constitution to do so.
Newsnight said it was told Russia's internal security organisation, the FSB, operated with far more autonomy than organisations usually entrusted with foreign espionage operations.
The source said: "We very strongly believe the Litvinenko case to have had some state involvement."
The source used an MI5 operation last summer in which officers arrested and deported a man they believed to be on a mission to kill another Russian dissident, Boris Berezovsky, as an example of "continued FSB willingness to consider operations against people in the west".
The most important info. Heck, the Russians pale in comparison to the dangers of the NSA. Ever heard of transparency? Got a clue?
Ah yes, the famous "transparency" of Russia. I'm pretty sure that the NSA has never threated to use nuclear weapons against NATO countries, but Russia has. Why you would think that nuclear armed Russia with its own intelligence services unchecked is somehow less dangerous than NSA is baffling. Are you posting from fantasyland, or Russia?
USA Freedom Act .... Isn't that what the Constitution is supposed to be?
No. The Constitution is exactly that, a constitution. It is a base governing document that lays out the form of government and various rights and responsibilities. It is silent on many things. It says nothing about how much money Social Security is getting next year, or the Marines, or if section 205 of the Patriot Act even exists.
We don't need another Law. The Laws that made this garbage legal are unconstitutional and criminal.
If you think they are unconstitutional, then can you show where they were struck down by a court as such? If they aren't struck down by a court, then they need to be repealed by the legislature.
We don't need another Law. We need to hunt down and incarcerate the criminals who created this mess.
You need another law to repeal or alter the aspects of the law that you don't like if a court doesn't strike it down. The criminals responsible for creating this mess have been the source of an active manhunt for 12 years. The ringleader is dead, and most of his original lieutenants are either captured or dead, some are in hiding. Since I'm sure you didn't mean that - you better wait until Congress repeals it, or it will still be on the books.
We don't need another Law. We need to hold government officials personally accountable for their flagrant and criminal violations of the Constitution.
An election is coming up. Do your worst.
We don't need another Law. We already have a USA Freedom Act. It is called "The Constitution of the United States."
We've covered this, but I'll add one more thing. The Constitution gave Congress the power to make laws. Congress made a law that resulted in this issue. Since the courts haven't struck it down, it is still the law of the land. How about we let Congress do their job and pass a law to try and resolve the issue instead of making specious claims that no law change is required?
... the corporatist warmongering pigs and the crypto-Zionists pulling their strings.
I've heard things like that before. You think the ^wJews Zionist are behind it all? Yes, I think I hear music, I'm just not sure if it's from a play like this, or a parade like that.
The European Left and Its Trouble With Jews
If you are the real "Ethanol-fueled," it's time for treatment.
... it seems to me the Israeli government uses Judaism as a weapon against their detractors, since nobody can say anything about Israel's bad behavior without being accused of anti-semitism.
Many people use anti-Zionism against Israel as a cloak for anti-Semitism.
The European Left and Its Trouble With Jews
ivy league universities whose cultures are loaded with marxist philosophy
I was going to parody this comrade, but I couldn't think of any way to make it funnier.
What I see isn't so much funny as sad. Higher education has clearly been captured by the Left, and Cultural Marxism is dominant. Ideas springing from or influenced by Marxism are influential or dominant in many areas even when outright Marxism isn't. Chomsky is the most highly cited living author. Apparently you would deny this.
I think a lot of people would argue that the vast majority of "defensive use of firearms in deadly situations" would not even be necessary in a country where it is even slightly difficult to get your hands on automatic firearms.
I think you are making some faulty assumptions about defensive firearms use. They are used in many differ sorts of circumstances as you can see from a few of the stories at this link: Stories That Happened In MI
No, actually it doesn't. Toss out suicides and criminal-on-criminal violence and you're still left with outrageous numbers of cases of "defensive use of firearms" (which you mentioned in the first paragraph but had forgotten in the second?).
I think you will find some interesting commentary here: Murder by Numbers