"We reject - you've heard Assange say earlier that he's sort of marooned in Russia. That's not true. We're prepared to issue one-entry travel document. He's still a US citizen. He still enjoys the rights of his US citizenship, which include the right to a free and fair trial for the crimes he's been accused of," the State Department spokesperson, Patrick Ventrell, told reporters at his daily news conference yesterday.
"We reject the notion that this is some sort of political prosecution. Indeed, it's not. These are serious crimes, serious violations of his obligations, and as somebody who had access to classified information, and so our position is that he needs to face a free and fair trial and not be a fugitive," Ventrell said.
Today? Well, you either Google it or look it up on Wikipedia. You'll have your answer in minutes and you can then get on and apply that knowledge. Now, tell me how that is NOT progress?
All that progress and yet people seem to be about as uninformed as ever. In some cases they are worse off since the opinions of charlatans and cranks are more available than ever. We'll leave the tendency of people to avoid unpleasant facts for another time.
It isn't just the potential energy savings. It may offer ways to build compounds that aren't feasible to create today since part or all of it may decompose at higher temperatures. I think that is quite interesting. Of course the energy savings could be important in some specialized applications such as synthesis of compounds on space missions, undersea, a few other things I can think of, etc. Depending on the range of reaction temperatures, there may be some very curious possible interactions between chemistry and physics to play with.
I think your username is well chosen. Once again I'm struck by the sort of parallelism that arises between a username that person's post.
There is no meaningful support for that in the US, and it isn't compatible with the Constitution. It isn't going to happen. You're worrying about the wrong thing.
Go figure. Fan boy of communism thinks his country, the capitalist USA, needs "a swift kick in the balls from the rest of the world," and the citizens need to get it too. News at 11. The revolution starts at midnight, purges at dawn.
Communism has been a bloody failure worldwide. The problem isn't that it has never been implemented properly, the problem is it isn't possible to implement "properly." It is based on a fundamental misreading of human nature, bad economics, and class warfare leading to the extermination of various social classes. (Round up all the bankers and shoot them, then keep moving down the list.) It is a genocidal creed.
If you think that everyone is a terrorist, you may be a terrorist yourself. That could mean that you, as an innocent victim, are endangered by yourself as a terrorist. Here is a helpful suggestion: Go talk to the police and tell them that you think you may be a danger to yourself. They should be able to arrange help with that.
Agribusiness loves cheap labor from Mexico. Keep 'em coming, but keep that deportation threat over their heads so they don't get uppity about those "wages" and "working conditions" things.
You're hardly the one to complain. You apparently outsource your "Comment Subject" writing to the Caribbean, Jamaica, from the looks of it, or maybe Minnesota.
In the past there have been very suspicious deals where for example in China an Airbus contract was at last minute handed to Boeing, we don't need more of this crap were government organisations are doing dirty legwork for corporation.
There may be a different explanation. And, as noted below: "95% of U.S. economic intelligence comes from open sources."
What is the recent flap regarding Echelon and U.S. spying on European industries all about? We'll begin with some candor from the American side. Yes, my continental European friends, we have spied on you. And it's true that we use computers to sort through data by using keywords. Have you stopped to ask yourselves what we're looking for?
The European Parliament's recent report on Echelon, written by British journalist Duncan Campbell, has sparked angry accusations from continental Europe that U.S. intelligence is stealing advanced technology from European companies so that we can -- get this -- give it to American companies and help them compete. My European friends, get real. True, in a handful of areas European technology surpasses American, but, to say this as gently as I can, the number of such areas is very, very, very small. Most European technology just isn't worth our stealing.
Why, then, have we spied on you? The answer is quite apparent from the Campbell report -- in the discussion of the only two cases in which European companies have allegedly been targets of American secret intelligence collection. Of Thomson-CSF, the report says: "The company was alleged to have bribed members of the Brazilian government selection panel." Of Airbus, it says that we found that "Airbus agents were offering bribes to a Saudi official." These facts are inevitably left out of European press reports.
That's right, my continental friends, we have spied on you because you bribe. Your companies' products are often more costly, less technically advanced or both, than your American competitors'. As a result you bribe a lot. So complicit are your governments that in several European countries bribes still are tax-deductible.
When we have caught you at it, you might be interested, we haven't said a word to the U.S. companies in the competition. Instead we go to the government you're bribing and tell its officials that we don't take kindly to such corruption. They often respond by giving the most meritorious bid (sometimes American, sometimes not) all or part of the contract. This upsets you, and sometimes creates recriminations between your bribers and the other country's bribees, and this occasionally becomes a public scandal. . .
Why do you bribe? It's not because your companies are inherently more corrupt. Nor is it because you are inherently less talented at technology. It is because your economic patron saint is still Jean Baptiste Colbert, whereas ours is Adam Smith. In spite of a few recent reforms, your governments largely still dominate your economies, so you have much greater difficulty than we in innovating, encouraging labor mobility, reducing costs, attracting capital to fast-moving young businesses and adapting quickly to changing economic circumstances. You'd rather not go through the hassle of moving toward less dirigisme. It's so much easier to keep paying bribes.
The Central Intelligence Agency collects other economic intelligence, but the vast majority of it is not stolen secrets. The Aspin-Brown Commission four years ago found that about 95% of U.S. economic intelligence comes from open sources. --- more
Apparently there is more than one form of corrupt practice.
I suspect that True Patriots interpret "national security" to include economic hegemony.
I'm not sure about that, but I am sure of the fact that international terrorism involves more than one country. Terrorists in country E can plot, plan, and prepare to attack targets in country U. Sometimes country U is just next door, and sometimes country U is overseas. In either case the terrorists travel from country E to country U to attack.
It might be nice to see that coming. If you aren't in country U, you can warn countries E & U. If you are in country U, you can warn country E and prepare for the attack in country U.
I don't know how to break this to you, but the BND does gather electronic data as well, including e-mails, text messages and other telecommunications data. The amounts have varied over time.
I'm sure you know that Germany also faces problems with terrorists.
No offense to you, but the person you are quoting, "RADACK," is a nitwit. The FISA court is a federal court that deals with secret material, not a secret court. Issuing search warrants is not an adversarial process to begin with, and wouldn't be at any other court. There is more.
Michael Mukasey, who was attorney general under President George W. Bush, said in an interview that the lack of rejections by the FISA court doesn't mean the court is a rubber stamp. He notes the court sometimes modifies orders and that the Justice Department's national-security division is careful about the applications it presents to the court.
Of 1,856 FISA applications the Justice Department made in 2012, the court denied none but modified 40, the Justice Department reported.
Timothy Edgar, who was a top lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union, said he believed the FISA court was a rubber stamp until he saw the process firsthand when he became a senior civil-liberties official in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in 2006. "It's definitely not a rubber stamp," he said in an interview Sunday. "On a very superficial level, they tend to approve pretty much everything that comes before them. They do meet in secret. It's just more complicated than that."
The reason so many orders are approved, he said, is that the Justice Department office that manages the process vets the applications rigorously. The lawyers there see themselves not as government advocates so much as neutral arbiters of the law between the executive branch and the courts, he said, so getting the order approved by the Justice Department lawyers is perhaps the biggest hurdle to approval. "The culture of that office is very reluctant to get a denial," he said.-- more
Since we are talking about TOP SECRET data here I can conclude one of two things. You may have either just violated a secrecy agreement, which I doubt, or you don't know what you are talking about. Being has I just corrected you on the meaning of "social welfare" programs, I'm betting on the later. But feel free to expound on the nature of classified networks if you care to - not that I would advise it.
Social welfare programs are also known as social programs. Both Social Security and Welfare, as well as various other programs are social welfare aka social programs.
Sometimes things that seem stupid to you are an indication that you are the one that doesn't understand. You might want to write that down, and then pick up your A**.
A student of the period? Really? If that's true it raises some interesting questions. I assume your interest is in literature then? Lermontov, Pushkin, commentaries on them, Bunin, Gorky, that sort of thing? If not, then I really have to wonder.
Wounded Knee versus Katyn? The US Civil War Andersonville atrocity versus the Ukraine terror famine that killed 7,000,000? That is some pretty weak broth you're offering, in more than one respect. That doesn't even take into account the normal mass executions, deals with Nazi Germany, aggression against Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Finland, and others, Soviet anti-Semitism, the Gulag system.
I'm not completely ignorant of various aspects of Soviet history and I learned a thing or two from the first video. You must be accomplished indeed to be so confident you have nothing to learn, especially with the Soviet archives only being really accessible to varying degrees for the last 20 years or so. Well, neither Lermontov nor Lenin has written anything in a very long time. With Lermontov you're on safe ground. But for Lenin, the bloody legacy of his revolution and the bloody results of Soviet communism in governing are still being uncovered and digested. I hope for your sake that you aren't a devotee of Lenin or Stalin.
That is really a pretty weak response, sad really. I assume that you didn't bother to watch so much as the first video since the time of your posting wouldn't have allowed that. It goes without saying the others must have been unwatched as well.
The My Lai Massacre is instructive. The massacre was not ordered by central political authority but was the result of low level soldiers engaging in misconduct. Although that misconduct was initially covered up by the lower levels of their chain of command, when word got out, the Army investigated. The Inspector General turned it over to the Army Criminal Investigation Division which pursued detailed investigation to prepare criminal charges. A number of people were charged, and some were tried. A complicating factor was the statue of limitations. Ultimately the officer in charge at the massacre, Lieutenant Calley, was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment at hard labor. Due to widespread protest and political pressure, including that instigated by Democratic Governor, later US President, Jimmy Carter, Calley's sentence was reduced. The only medals awarded were to a couple of soldiers that did what they could to stop the massacre. You can read more here.
This is a marked contrast with the Katyn massacre of the Polish officer corp. The Katyn massacre was ordered by the national government, and followed the Soviet aggression of invading Poland as part of a secret pact with Nazi Germany to invade and divide Poland between them. It was not treated as a criminal act. In fact medals were awarded to the killers for the massacre. There were probably 22,000 people killed as part of that massacre, versus 300-500 at My Lai. The Katyn massacre was not unusual behavior for the Soviets, My Lai was exceptionally unusual for the United States. You try to compare very atypical criminal behavior that was treated as such by the United States with common behavior that was rewarded (mass murder) by the Soviet government. My Lai was one or two nights work for the NKVD in just one limited area of the Soviet Union - and they were busy on many, many nights across the country.
As bad as My Lai was, it was by no means the worst massacre of the Vietnam war, not even close. The Dak Son Massacre (250+ dead, 400 missing, 1,300 refugees) is quite gruesome, although it is dwarfed by the Hue Massacre ( 2,800 to 6,000 killed). Both of those were massacres by Communist forces of innocent civilians. I doubt anyone was punished for those massacres.
If you bothered to watch the first video, you might have an idea why Americans were averse to communism taking root in the United States. Mass executions, abuse, and government confiscation of food to create a famine resulting in the killing of millions of people will do that. And so you aren't confused about that point, there are several different communist parties in the United States. The CPUSA was shown to be taking orders from Moscow.
And bringing up Senator McCarthy is once again sad testimony to the imbalance here. He was a member of the senate, not in the executive branch. His power was very limited indeed. Trying to balance his limited actions for a relatively short time against the long period of Soviet mass murder and repression is ridiculous.
What you've really demonstrated isn't "cheap easy & lazy wins" so much as cheap and stupid. You really have no clue.
If you make the difference big enough then the resemblance becomes inconsequential, and likely uninstructive. I doubt that anyone that watches those two programs would confuse the US for the USSR while both countries existed any more than they would confuse me for Lionel Messi when playing football. And that might be considered a generous narrowing of the difference since the actual difference runs in the millions - roughly 20,000,000.
The US has left-wing parties, including several communist parties. The difference is that few if any voters in the US will vote for them. Don't confuse lack of voter interest with non-existence of a political party.
Slashdot Mirror
Having a passport canceled doesn't effect citizenship. Snowden's statement is rubbish on that point.
Prepared to issue one-entry travel document to Snowden: US
"We reject - you've heard Assange say earlier that he's sort of marooned in Russia. That's not true. We're prepared to issue one-entry travel document. He's still a US citizen. He still enjoys the rights of his US citizenship, which include the right to a free and fair trial for the crimes he's been accused of," the State Department spokesperson, Patrick Ventrell, told reporters at his daily news conference yesterday.
"We reject the notion that this is some sort of political prosecution. Indeed, it's not. These are serious crimes, serious violations of his obligations, and as somebody who had access to classified information, and so our position is that he needs to face a free and fair trial and not be a fugitive," Ventrell said.
Socialists wear organic copper threaded wool hats.
The copper hats come in his and hers.
The tin foil hat.
Don't forget the witnesses, and the video recording (in which the other guy and the exculpatory evidence will be just out of frame).
Today? Well, you either Google it or look it up on Wikipedia. You'll have your answer in minutes and you can then get on and apply that knowledge. Now, tell me how that is NOT progress?
All that progress and yet people seem to be about as uninformed as ever. In some cases they are worse off since the opinions of charlatans and cranks are more available than ever. We'll leave the tendency of people to avoid unpleasant facts for another time.
It isn't just the potential energy savings. It may offer ways to build compounds that aren't feasible to create today since part or all of it may decompose at higher temperatures. I think that is quite interesting. Of course the energy savings could be important in some specialized applications such as synthesis of compounds on space missions, undersea, a few other things I can think of, etc. Depending on the range of reaction temperatures, there may be some very curious possible interactions between chemistry and physics to play with.
A very interesting result indeed.
I think your username is well chosen. Once again I'm struck by the sort of parallelism that arises between a username that person's post.
There is no meaningful support for that in the US, and it isn't compatible with the Constitution. It isn't going to happen. You're worrying about the wrong thing.
I wonder if there is any opportunity for public participation?
seti@home
folding@home
GIMPS
cern@home ????
Go figure. Fan boy of communism thinks his country, the capitalist USA, needs "a swift kick in the balls from the rest of the world," and the citizens need to get it too. News at 11. The revolution starts at midnight, purges at dawn.
Communism has been a bloody failure worldwide. The problem isn't that it has never been implemented properly, the problem is it isn't possible to implement "properly." It is based on a fundamental misreading of human nature, bad economics, and class warfare leading to the extermination of various social classes. (Round up all the bankers and shoot them, then keep moving down the list.) It is a genocidal creed.
The Black Book of Communism
The Black Book of Communism - (book review) by Daniel J. Mahoney
Reflections on Communism - Twenty Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall
Although this centers on the Soviet Union, some of it sheds light on some common aspects of communist regimes.
The Soviet Story (2008)
If you think that everyone is a terrorist, you may be a terrorist yourself. That could mean that you, as an innocent victim, are endangered by yourself as a terrorist. Here is a helpful suggestion: Go talk to the police and tell them that you think you may be a danger to yourself. They should be able to arrange help with that.
Dey took are jerbs!!!
Agribusiness loves cheap labor from Mexico. Keep 'em coming, but keep that deportation threat over their heads so they don't get uppity about those "wages" and "working conditions" things.
You're hardly the one to complain. You apparently outsource your "Comment Subject" writing to the Caribbean, Jamaica, from the looks of it, or maybe Minnesota.
No worries man!
These kinds of contracts are supposed to be bid out to the lowest bidder.
Not necessarily. Another common standard is, "best value."
Cheapest "up front" doesn't always equal cheapest total cost.
Cheapest doesn't necessarily mean you are getting a good deal.
Also, read this excellent post by brit74.
In the past there have been very suspicious deals where for example in China an Airbus contract was at last minute handed to Boeing, we don't need more of this crap were government organisations are doing dirty legwork for corporation.
There may be a different explanation. And, as noted below: "95% of U.S. economic intelligence comes from open sources."
Why We Spy on Our Allies - R. James Woolsey - March 17, 2000 (Also available here )
What is the recent flap regarding Echelon and U.S. spying on European industries all about? We'll begin with some candor from the American side. Yes, my continental European friends, we have spied on you. And it's true that we use computers to sort through data by using keywords. Have you stopped to ask yourselves what we're looking for?
The European Parliament's recent report on Echelon, written by British journalist Duncan Campbell, has sparked angry accusations from continental Europe that U.S. intelligence is stealing advanced technology from European companies so that we can -- get this -- give it to American companies and help them compete. My European friends, get real. True, in a handful of areas European technology surpasses American, but, to say this as gently as I can, the number of such areas is very, very, very small. Most European technology just isn't worth our stealing.
Why, then, have we spied on you? The answer is quite apparent from the Campbell report -- in the discussion of the only two cases in which European companies have allegedly been targets of American secret intelligence collection. Of Thomson-CSF, the report says: "The company was alleged to have bribed members of the Brazilian government selection panel." Of Airbus, it says that we found that "Airbus agents were offering bribes to a Saudi official." These facts are inevitably left out of European press reports.
That's right, my continental friends, we have spied on you because you bribe. Your companies' products are often more costly, less technically advanced or both, than your American competitors'. As a result you bribe a lot. So complicit are your governments that in several European countries bribes still are tax-deductible.
When we have caught you at it, you might be interested, we haven't said a word to the U.S. companies in the competition. Instead we go to the government you're bribing and tell its officials that we don't take kindly to such corruption. They often respond by giving the most meritorious bid (sometimes American, sometimes not) all or part of the contract. This upsets you, and sometimes creates recriminations between your bribers and the other country's bribees, and this occasionally becomes a public scandal. . .
Why do you bribe? It's not because your companies are inherently more corrupt. Nor is it because you are inherently less talented at technology. It is because your economic patron saint is still Jean Baptiste Colbert, whereas ours is Adam Smith. In spite of a few recent reforms, your governments largely still dominate your economies, so you have much greater difficulty than we in innovating, encouraging labor mobility, reducing costs, attracting capital to fast-moving young businesses and adapting quickly to changing economic circumstances. You'd rather not go through the hassle of moving toward less dirigisme. It's so much easier to keep paying bribes.
The Central Intelligence Agency collects other economic intelligence, but the vast majority of it is not stolen secrets. The Aspin-Brown Commission four years ago found that about 95% of U.S. economic intelligence comes from open sources. --- more
Apparently there is more than one form of corrupt practice.
I suspect that True Patriots interpret "national security" to include economic hegemony.
I'm not sure about that, but I am sure of the fact that international terrorism involves more than one country. Terrorists in country E can plot, plan, and prepare to attack targets in country U. Sometimes country U is just next door, and sometimes country U is overseas. In either case the terrorists travel from country E to country U to attack.
It might be nice to see that coming. If you aren't in country U, you can warn countries E & U. If you are in country U, you can warn country E and prepare for the attack in country U.
I don't know how to break this to you, but the BND does gather electronic data as well, including e-mails, text messages and other telecommunications data. The amounts have varied over time.
I'm sure you know that Germany also faces problems with terrorists.
No offense to you, but the person you are quoting, "RADACK," is a nitwit. The FISA court is a federal court that deals with secret material, not a secret court. Issuing search warrants is not an adversarial process to begin with, and wouldn't be at any other court. There is more.
Secret Court's Oversight Gets Scrutiny
Michael Mukasey, who was attorney general under President George W. Bush, said in an interview that the lack of rejections by the FISA court doesn't mean the court is a rubber stamp. He notes the court sometimes modifies orders and that the Justice Department's national-security division is careful about the applications it presents to the court.
Of 1,856 FISA applications the Justice Department made in 2012, the court denied none but modified 40, the Justice Department reported.
Timothy Edgar, who was a top lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union, said he believed the FISA court was a rubber stamp until he saw the process firsthand when he became a senior civil-liberties official in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in 2006. "It's definitely not a rubber stamp," he said in an interview Sunday. "On a very superficial level, they tend to approve pretty much everything that comes before them. They do meet in secret. It's just more complicated than that."
The reason so many orders are approved, he said, is that the Justice Department office that manages the process vets the applications rigorously. The lawyers there see themselves not as government advocates so much as neutral arbiters of the law between the executive branch and the courts, he said, so getting the order approved by the Justice Department lawyers is perhaps the biggest hurdle to approval. "The culture of that office is very reluctant to get a denial," he said.-- more
Since we are talking about TOP SECRET data here I can conclude one of two things. You may have either just violated a secrecy agreement, which I doubt, or you don't know what you are talking about. Being has I just corrected you on the meaning of "social welfare" programs, I'm betting on the later. But feel free to expound on the nature of classified networks if you care to - not that I would advise it.
Social Security isn't "welfare." L M A O
Social welfare programs are also known as social programs. Both Social Security and Welfare, as well as various other programs are social welfare aka social programs.
Sometimes things that seem stupid to you are an indication that you are the one that doesn't understand. You might want to write that down, and then pick up your A**.
A student of the period? Really? If that's true it raises some interesting questions. I assume your interest is in literature then? Lermontov, Pushkin, commentaries on them, Bunin, Gorky, that sort of thing? If not, then I really have to wonder.
Wounded Knee versus Katyn? The US Civil War Andersonville atrocity versus the Ukraine terror famine that killed 7,000,000? That is some pretty weak broth you're offering, in more than one respect. That doesn't even take into account the normal mass executions, deals with Nazi Germany, aggression against Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Finland, and others, Soviet anti-Semitism, the Gulag system.
I'm not completely ignorant of various aspects of Soviet history and I learned a thing or two from the first video. You must be accomplished indeed to be so confident you have nothing to learn, especially with the Soviet archives only being really accessible to varying degrees for the last 20 years or so. Well, neither Lermontov nor Lenin has written anything in a very long time. With Lermontov you're on safe ground. But for Lenin, the bloody legacy of his revolution and the bloody results of Soviet communism in governing are still being uncovered and digested. I hope for your sake that you aren't a devotee of Lenin or Stalin.
Cheers
That is really a pretty weak response, sad really. I assume that you didn't bother to watch so much as the first video since the time of your posting wouldn't have allowed that. It goes without saying the others must have been unwatched as well.
The My Lai Massacre is instructive. The massacre was not ordered by central political authority but was the result of low level soldiers engaging in misconduct. Although that misconduct was initially covered up by the lower levels of their chain of command, when word got out, the Army investigated. The Inspector General turned it over to the Army Criminal Investigation Division which pursued detailed investigation to prepare criminal charges. A number of people were charged, and some were tried. A complicating factor was the statue of limitations. Ultimately the officer in charge at the massacre, Lieutenant Calley, was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment at hard labor. Due to widespread protest and political pressure, including that instigated by Democratic Governor, later US President, Jimmy Carter, Calley's sentence was reduced. The only medals awarded were to a couple of soldiers that did what they could to stop the massacre. You can read more here.
This is a marked contrast with the Katyn massacre of the Polish officer corp. The Katyn massacre was ordered by the national government, and followed the Soviet aggression of invading Poland as part of a secret pact with Nazi Germany to invade and divide Poland between them. It was not treated as a criminal act. In fact medals were awarded to the killers for the massacre. There were probably 22,000 people killed as part of that massacre, versus 300-500 at My Lai. The Katyn massacre was not unusual behavior for the Soviets, My Lai was exceptionally unusual for the United States. You try to compare very atypical criminal behavior that was treated as such by the United States with common behavior that was rewarded (mass murder) by the Soviet government. My Lai was one or two nights work for the NKVD in just one limited area of the Soviet Union - and they were busy on many, many nights across the country.
As bad as My Lai was, it was by no means the worst massacre of the Vietnam war, not even close. The Dak Son Massacre (250+ dead, 400 missing, 1,300 refugees) is quite gruesome, although it is dwarfed by the Hue Massacre ( 2,800 to 6,000 killed). Both of those were massacres by Communist forces of innocent civilians. I doubt anyone was punished for those massacres.
If you bothered to watch the first video, you might have an idea why Americans were averse to communism taking root in the United States. Mass executions, abuse, and government confiscation of food to create a famine resulting in the killing of millions of people will do that. And so you aren't confused about that point, there are several different communist parties in the United States. The CPUSA was shown to be taking orders from Moscow.
And bringing up Senator McCarthy is once again sad testimony to the imbalance here. He was a member of the senate, not in the executive branch. His power was very limited indeed. Trying to balance his limited actions for a relatively short time against the long period of Soviet mass murder and repression is ridiculous.
What you've really demonstrated isn't "cheap easy & lazy wins" so much as cheap and stupid. You really have no clue.
So you're reaching back ~ 120-150 for a limited number of people?
Why don't you watch at least the first, if not first two, of those videos and get back to me?
If you make the difference big enough then the resemblance becomes inconsequential, and likely uninstructive. I doubt that anyone that watches those two programs would confuse the US for the USSR while both countries existed any more than they would confuse me for Lionel Messi when playing football. And that might be considered a generous narrowing of the difference since the actual difference runs in the millions - roughly 20,000,000.
The US has left-wing parties, including several communist parties. The difference is that few if any voters in the US will vote for them. Don't confuse lack of voter interest with non-existence of a political party.
Communist Party USA
And no, the democratic party is not hardcore right-wing. Unless there is wide agreement the American system effectively forces incrementalism.
The only reasonable explanation for someone believing that the US resembles the USSR is nearly total ignorance of Soviet history.
The Soviet Story (2008)
A Portrait of Stalin: Secret Police
Katyn massacre
Your problem may be solved by means of a most ingenious proof I have, which the margin of your ad is too small to contain.
I have to go lie down now, I'm not feeling well.