I think the parent is saying that because the BBC was so heavily condemned for burying the story about Jimmy Savile being a predatory sex offender, it had no choice but air accusations against McAlpine. I agree that's why the BBC ran the story, but failing to uphold journalistic standards in one direction is not a reason to suspend those standards in the other.
I don't think Lord McAlpine will suffer any enduring harm to his reputation. The allegations were very quickly proven false.
But hopefully this will be enough to bring this sad chapter to an end. What had started with accusations against Savile (who is dead and thus beyond all prosecution) has turned into a hysteria-driven witch hunt, where the police are essentially sidelined in favour of investigative "journalists" looking to make a name themselves by catching the ever bigger fish.
McAlpine will likely sue and most certainly win and there can be a more rational approach to investigating pedophile accusations than wagging a list in the British Prime Minister's face on television.
You are absolutely right. Spending must be reduced. But wanton tax cuts done with the belief that the economy wi magically improve is little more than wishful thinking.
Morality is a bit too shifty. As to whether the federal government can levy a tax is a constitutional question. SCOTUS said elements of Obamacare was a legitimate Federal tax for instance (though obviously the Dems are not exactly pleased a spade got called a spade)
In the end the constitution and amendments give the government g pretty wide powers of taxation. I have no idea how you would like to apply morality to it, though I smell a Libertarian argument coming.
Obviously state revenues. In the current situation a combination of tax hikes and spending cuts are probably the only rational solution. Simply cutting taxes will rob the government of a meaningful way to bring down debt, particularly as a goodly portion of current economic problems are external to the US.
But why complain? Taxes were considerably higher in the good old days.
I would wager you are very wrong. Mos certainly US courts have ordered similar sanctions and most certainly defying the court order would lead to increasing sanctions. When you lose a case, civil or criminal, you lose a good many protections as they pertain to the case. That is the underlying notion of due process.
Most people have enough sense not to defy, directly or via playing games, the direct order of a judge. Judges in most jurisdictions, and most certainly in the British and American tradition, are afforded wide powers to force compliance. The Court must be obeyed, otherwise it loses all credibility.
I can only assume Apple overruled or ignored rather lawyers, who most certainly would tell them that playing this kind of game was only going to lead to more severe sanctions.
There is a third; portability. This is particularly true of Windows, which often doesn't play nicely when you move it to new hardware. Using the VM server as a hardware abstraction layer certainly costs some performance, but I can move guests from SATA to SCSI, Intel to AMD and the hardware is completely abstracted.
There is no lack of research on how large groups of normally decent people can behave in a highly immoral fashion. Peer pressure and dominance hierarchies are powerful forces for coercion, not to mention more mundane explanations like greed.
There was a very concerted effort to devalue Silver, and it was clearly coming from Republican-friendly sources. Some of the attacks were reasonably sophisticated word salads, others amounted to "Silver is a liberal poopoo head." Some have eaten crow, a few are insisting he got it right by accident, and others have simply disappeared.
The Electoral College system was never meant to represent "the will of the people". The House of Representatives is supposed to represent the will of the people. The presidency and the Senate had entirely different purposes and mandates.
Part of the problem was an obsession with national level polling. Silver was analyzing the races per state, which is the only legitimate way to analyze it in an electoral college system. National polling is at best only an extremely crude indicator, and to my mind, in most modern presidential elections is likely useless.
Indeed. There was an illusion of a close race to sell advertising. People love drama, and having a contest where the media reported "Obama's got it, Romney's cause is hopeless" would not have had the sexy urgency necessary to cash in on.
We are seeing the OJ simpson freeway chase kind of reporting being applied to elections.
And a future generation did, and swept away the Jeffersonian-madisonian state in the process. The notion that the Federal government should b small and impotent was swept away with the Confederacy.
Fucking hell, the Republicans have become so delusional they're channeling Jefferson Davis. As I recall, didn't your party refuse that particular invitation and end up going to war to preserve a united United States?
I think Nixon would be saddened to see what his Southern Strategy has morphed into.
One thing is clear, the Republicans have to recognize now that they have a serious problem. Yes, they've still got the House, but so weak, fractured and dominated by fringe special interests is the Republican Party that they could not even push over a President mired in economic woes, and whose major policy initiative (Obamacare) is still distrusted by over half of Americans.
To Republicans I say this. You will hear Tea Party and social conservative types blame Nate Silver and the other pollsters, talking about media conspiracies and so forth. It's time to tell Donald Trump to form his own party, time to tell the Tea Party that they're influence has been purely malign, a tumor on the Republican Party that is forcing poor compromise candidates who are then further shackled by having to try to find some way of convincing Americans they aren't social Neanderthals while still maintaining the support of these social regressives. If you cannot purge the party of these types, or at least put them back under the stone from whence they came, you will be denied the Presidency again in 2016. You have to decide what core conservative values are, and if you cannot align them with the national mood, then you're going to come back disappointed.
Slashdot Mirror
The singular advantage here will be the lack of Lucas's involvement.
What's with the fucking Ewoks? Every day with the fucking Ewoks.
I think the parent is saying that because the BBC was so heavily condemned for burying the story about Jimmy Savile being a predatory sex offender, it had no choice but air accusations against McAlpine. I agree that's why the BBC ran the story, but failing to uphold journalistic standards in one direction is not a reason to suspend those standards in the other.
I don't think Lord McAlpine will suffer any enduring harm to his reputation. The allegations were very quickly proven false.
But hopefully this will be enough to bring this sad chapter to an end. What had started with accusations against Savile (who is dead and thus beyond all prosecution) has turned into a hysteria-driven witch hunt, where the police are essentially sidelined in favour of investigative "journalists" looking to make a name themselves by catching the ever bigger fish.
McAlpine will likely sue and most certainly win and there can be a more rational approach to investigating pedophile accusations than wagging a list in the British Prime Minister's face on television.
Indeed. The BBC has fallen very low indeed.
Americans overall paid far more taxes fifty years ago than today, and were the undisputed industrial giants of the world.
The world is far more complex than Libertarians like to pretend it is.
You are absolutely right. Spending must be reduced. But wanton tax cuts done with the belief that the economy wi magically improve is little more than wishful thinking.
Morality is a bit too shifty. As to whether the federal government can levy a tax is a constitutional question. SCOTUS said elements of Obamacare was a legitimate Federal tax for instance (though obviously the Dems are not exactly pleased a spade got called a spade)
In the end the constitution and amendments give the government g pretty wide powers of taxation. I have no idea how you would like to apply morality to it, though I smell a Libertarian argument coming.
Obviously state revenues. In the current situation a combination of tax hikes and spending cuts are probably the only rational solution. Simply cutting taxes will rob the government of a meaningful way to bring down debt, particularly as a goodly portion of current economic problems are external to the US.
But why complain? Taxes were considerably higher in the good old days.
Raising taxes can most certainly raise revenues. Don't confuse your political ideology with actual economics.
I would wager you are very wrong. Mos certainly US courts have ordered similar sanctions and most certainly defying the court order would lead to increasing sanctions. When you lose a case, civil or criminal, you lose a good many protections as they pertain to the case. That is the underlying notion of due process.
Most people have enough sense not to defy, directly or via playing games, the direct order of a judge. Judges in most jurisdictions, and most certainly in the British and American tradition, are afforded wide powers to force compliance. The Court must be obeyed, otherwise it loses all credibility.
I can only assume Apple overruled or ignored rather lawyers, who most certainly would tell them that playing this kind of game was only going to lead to more severe sanctions.
Oh nonsense. The intent of the ruling is clear, and continually defying a judge will lead to ever greater sanctions.
If you start from fundamentally rational positions you cannot be considered a rational actor. You may be considered consistent, but not rational.
There is a third; portability. This is particularly true of Windows, which often doesn't play nicely when you move it to new hardware. Using the VM server as a hardware abstraction layer certainly costs some performance, but I can move guests from SATA to SCSI, Intel to AMD and the hardware is completely abstracted.
There is no lack of research on how large groups of normally decent people can behave in a highly immoral fashion. Peer pressure and dominance hierarchies are powerful forces for coercion, not to mention more mundane explanations like greed.
Truly one of the best posts ever. Brilliant. Absolutely fucking brilliant.
There was a very concerted effort to devalue Silver, and it was clearly coming from Republican-friendly sources. Some of the attacks were reasonably sophisticated word salads, others amounted to "Silver is a liberal poopoo head." Some have eaten crow, a few are insisting he got it right by accident, and others have simply disappeared.
The Electoral College system was never meant to represent "the will of the people". The House of Representatives is supposed to represent the will of the people. The presidency and the Senate had entirely different purposes and mandates.
Part of the problem was an obsession with national level polling. Silver was analyzing the races per state, which is the only legitimate way to analyze it in an electoral college system. National polling is at best only an extremely crude indicator, and to my mind, in most modern presidential elections is likely useless.
Indeed. There was an illusion of a close race to sell advertising. People love drama, and having a contest where the media reported "Obama's got it, Romney's cause is hopeless" would not have had the sexy urgency necessary to cash in on.
We are seeing the OJ simpson freeway chase kind of reporting being applied to elections.
If the Europeans and Africans moved away, you would be left with Amerindians.
And a future generation did, and swept away the Jeffersonian-madisonian state in the process. The notion that the Federal government should b small and impotent was swept away with the Confederacy.
Fucking hell, the Republicans have become so delusional they're channeling Jefferson Davis. As I recall, didn't your party refuse that particular invitation and end up going to war to preserve a united United States?
I think Nixon would be saddened to see what his Southern Strategy has morphed into.
One thing is clear, the Republicans have to recognize now that they have a serious problem. Yes, they've still got the House, but so weak, fractured and dominated by fringe special interests is the Republican Party that they could not even push over a President mired in economic woes, and whose major policy initiative (Obamacare) is still distrusted by over half of Americans.
To Republicans I say this. You will hear Tea Party and social conservative types blame Nate Silver and the other pollsters, talking about media conspiracies and so forth. It's time to tell Donald Trump to form his own party, time to tell the Tea Party that they're influence has been purely malign, a tumor on the Republican Party that is forcing poor compromise candidates who are then further shackled by having to try to find some way of convincing Americans they aren't social Neanderthals while still maintaining the support of these social regressives. If you cannot purge the party of these types, or at least put them back under the stone from whence they came, you will be denied the Presidency again in 2016. You have to decide what core conservative values are, and if you cannot align them with the national mood, then you're going to come back disappointed.