1 I got pulled over 15 times, and I was only ticketed twice. Part of me wonders if my name and fear of my namesakes political power got me off the hook...
I suppose the 2 where when you got pulled over by cops who could spell;-)
Seriously though, I moved to Chicago recently and there is no possible way you couldn't know the names and spellings of all the elected officials since their names are on every freaking thing that could be even loosely associated with their office. Must be expensive when one of them gets replaced.
The mindset of large urban centers such as New York, LA and San Francisco is not the mindset of the rest of the country by a long shot.
Yet the large urban centers is where almost all of the economic, social, and technological progress has occured. The rural areas are so poor that they wouldn't even be able to support themselves without charity from the same urban centers on which they are trying to force the backwards ass "morals" which help hold them back.
Is it any surprise that the majority of the Bush supporters are in the poorest states with the worst education?
I pity the rest of us as they try to drag us down to their level.
Don't forget bearing false witness and mass murder. Every single one of the dead in Iraq is his responsibility as he lied to justify the invasion.
It's sad that these pukes are so ingorant of any sort of marality that they think it's right and moral to force people at gunpoint to have children they can not support and it's also good to murder thousands of innocent people on a basis of lies.
And they have the audacity to claim that they would even know a moral if it bit them on the ass.
They mocked our belief system, and hundreds of years of our religious and legal tradition, and for the most part they did this simply because it pissed religious people off.
Believe it or not people really don't give a fuck about oppressing you.
The fact is that marriage has existed far longer than your religion.
It isn't yours, and you have no right to deny it to anybody. Nobody said your ignorant little hate mongering church has to perform the ceremonies because it doesn't have a damn thing to do with your church.
Uh, the fact that the Bible-believing 50+% of Americans find homosexuality immoral. I disagree with them, completely and utterly and totally, but their moral code says that condoning homosexuality would be immoral, and that sanctioning a marriage between them would be condoning their behavior.
The really sad and pathetic thing about these people is that acting out against gay people is totally against their morals, or at least what they say their morals are. The only part of the bible that addresses gays directly also says eating pork or shellfish is just as bad and that burnt offerings should be offered to the lord.
But that's really only for the Jews. Jesus came along and turned a lot of this back. He specifically told them not to judge others as that is none of their business. Since these people claim to be Christian even though they clearly aren't they are going against their own stated moral code.
The fact that they think that they know better than God himself about what's right and wrong since he made them that way just makes their position that much more hypocritical and downright unChristian and unAmerican.
Most of the blue states are urban, and most of them only are able to live with food due to the charity of the red states which are where the majority of the agriculture occurs.
Wow, here's a first. A Repub claiming that paying for something twice at far above the market price is *receiving* charity. What next. No wonder Bush got voted in by these people if your brain could actually produce this thought without exploding.
Ok, the not human/american, Bush Sr said that, not Shrub.
Second, If you want to claim that marriage is a fundamental right, sure but gays can get married in a bisexual union just like heterosexuals. Oh, you want monosexual unions as well. well that isn't marriage. And marriage is NOT a fundamental right.
You're completely missing the point. Actions speak far louder than words.
Marriage has a very limited meaning as far as the government is concerned. It is essentially limited to filing taxes jointly, default inheritance, nad most importantly the ability to visit their spouse when they are dying in the hospital.
That is basically it. Unless, of course, that is you want the government coming into your church and telling you who and how you can marry? If you aren't in favor of that then only hypocricy would allow you to be in favor of this.
So are you denying that visiting your loved one on their death bed is a fundamental human right?
Those are the only things that the anti- gay marriage people are trying to deny them. To push a constitutional amendment to deny visitation rights to one segment of the population due to how they were born is truly sickening.
How would you feel if you were not allowed that right because you are blond (or whatever)
That is why it is flat out saying that they are less than human, because all it is intended to do is to limit basic rights to punish them for how they were born. Nothing else.
Wow, you and a lot of other posters are really having a hard time with these unequivocal election results, aren't you? Going so far as to claim that the blue states could/should make it on their own is pretty shortsighted and pathetic.
In the liberal states, we believe that people are adults and they are perfectly capable of making decisions about our own lives.
In the conservative states, they believe that everybody should be forced at gunpoint to follow their interpretation of the dictates of their religion.
It's hard to imagine a more fundamental difference.
Given that our love of freedom has contributed a great deal to our prosperity and people whose lifestyle is completely dependent upon our charity have decided that they want to try and take our freedom away in the interests of promoting their warped idea of morality that thinks it's ok to force people at gunpoint to have children because life is sacred yet it's still ok to make up lies to promote a war to commit mass murder on innocents it is a little fucking frightening to anybody with any sense.
It's sad that rather than move forward, they would rather drag us all down to their level.
So Since they are basically an anchor around our necks and provide basically nothing in the way of benefits, how is it a bad idea to split up?
They would deteriorate to 3rd world status in no time as do all fundamentalist societies and we would do even better, but without the welfare states dragging us down.
The states that are "backwards" is where people actually work. Where things like family and country are important,
So I'll add a little more stereotyping which, at least, is based on the facts much more than yours:
If they work, then why are we the Liberal states subsidizing your leaching asses? Most Republican states only live as well as they do due to the charity of the Liberal states which are where people actually work rather than get paid to sit on their asses and *not* farm.
Of course we have progressed morally, technologically, and socially which is a large part of the reason that we are so successful economically relative to the welfare states.
Too bad you guys hate freedom so much you want to drag us down to your level.
America is great because of its individuals and its morals.
But my morals tell me that it is wrong to make up lies as a justification to invade a country and murder 10s of thousands of its citizens who have never done anything to me.
My morals tell me that it is wrong to push my religion down other people's throats.
My morals tell me that it is wrong, in a free society, to call people who disagree with me traitors.
My morals tell me it is wrong to allow the energy industry to wirte our energy policy in closed meetings beyong the scrutiny of the public who said policy rightly belongs to.
You are right that America is great because of its morals, but it is these morals that make it so. Forcing unwilling people at gunpoint to have babies is not a moral action, and certainly nothing to base a country on.
So you see, in this election actual morals lost to forcing certain religious beliefs down peoples throats. That is why this country is so divided. It's the same attitude that caused freedom of religion to be put in the constitution in the first place. Oh well, it lasted 200 years which is much longer than they thought it would.
The biggest thing this nation needs is to become unified... The problems that we did have were created by Clinton in the first place.
Just fucking typical.
Kerry would have been the one to screw the future, sorry. The last things we need is a radical liberal in office who is going to elect up to 4 supreme court justices who will remain until the die or leave. It is quite crazy, but the media is trying to make it seem like having morals is a bad thing... how silly.
He's certainly not radical in any way shape or form. Were he, you would be able to provide examples rather than spitting hate. Oh yes, you are a uniter aren't you?
How would it be possible for having supreme court justices who believe that people are entitled to choose how they want to live their own lives to be a bad thing? Of course, it couldn't but that doesn't matter because your concern is shoving your religion down people's throats.
You honestly think it is better to have justices who feel individual rights are wrong and evil if they go agaionst a particularly wacked out interpretation of the bible?
The really sad thing is that the media is representing Bush supporters as having done so for moral purposes when they are the most immoral group this country has ever seen.
It's ok to murder thousands of Iraqis based on what we all now know for an absolute factto be falsified reasons and that's your idea of moral?
It's ok to strip basic human rights from people because the old book of the bible says so even though the new one directly contradicts it? Yeah, that's moral.
Yeah, supporting mass murder is ok, but not until they're out of the womb.
Don't you dare claim you have any sort of moral standing because you want to force your religion down my throat at gunpoint while you support unprovoked murder.
People like you are truly frightening and very very sick.
I'm one of the rare Republican Slashdotters, and have been shocked at the vitriol toward Bush and his supporters evidenced here.
First off, you're not rare.
Second, had you been paying attention to anything he did during his first term you would not be the least bit surprised.
Whether or not you agree with his policies, he did go well out of his way to take sides on the most divisive issues around essentially telling half the nation that he didn't give a flying fuck what they thought. This after claiming to be both a moderate and a uniter while he turned out to be an extremist and a divider.
So seriously, how could you be the least bit surprised that people are angry about that?
We already have a 1-party system. Republicans and Democrats are securly united in their loyalty to corporations and special interests. Laws are in place, established by the 1-party system, to ensure that no other parties can challenge their power.
True as far as it goes, but there are substantial moral differences between the parties that make it a horrible thing for freedom that the election went the way it did.
The Republicans believe wholeheartedly that it is their right to invade every persons home and inspect their private lives. Who are they fucking, how are they fucking. Can't afford to raise a kid? Toguh shit have it and when it turns out bad we'll execute it.
Yeah, they need to save fetuses, but murdering thousands in Iraq is ok because all those dirt niggers aren't good wholesome Christians like us.
Give me a break.
America voted against any sense of morality in this election and it will bite us in the ass.
I'm sorry, but as a member of a government that is supposed to represent *all* Americans, not just the one's who share religious beliefs with them for him to say anything of the sort does damn well equal evil.
He said flat out that he wants to destroy the voice of half the country.
If it weren't for the fact that the blue states essentially subsidize the red ones
Sure. And the red states feed the blue states. I'd call it a fair trade.
No, the fair trade is us paying for the food. In addition to that, we pay for the lazy fuckers in those states not to farm. On top of that we subsidize their modern amenities. Like phones and electricity.
The fact is that the liberal states could do quite well without the backwards ass states, but the reverse is not true. Those states survive solely through charity.
The fact that it's their backwards ass social attitudes that do a lot to hold them back doesn't stop them from trying to drag down the part of the country that can actually afford to pay their own way.
FOr someone who you can count on to be pro-gay, he sure gave Lynn Cheney a hard time.
No he didn't.
He was pointing out the utter hypocricy of the Bush administration. They claim to be all about family values, yet Cheney is perfectly happy to sit there and allow Bush to push a constitutional amendment stating flat out that Cheney's own fucking daughter is not a human, not an American, and thus should be stripped of basic fundamental human rights just because of how their own fucking god made her.
It is relevant, it is topical, and it clearly demonstrated that these people are ruled primarily by ignorant hatred. The sad fact we see now is that so are most Americans.
Amazing. People who hold their values over their job. I'll be damned. What will they think of next?
People who fight for them? Die for them?
Sure, that sounds decent at first, until you actually think about it and realise that the only "values" that they are voting based on is that they be allowed to oppress others at gunpoint because they aren't the same as them.
Seriously, the people who are voting on so-called moral issues are the most immoral people around. Their idea of morality is stopping others from living their lives how they see fit.
you need to take a critical look at your implicit trust of ANY party.
Oh, I do. I have no trust whatsoever for any of our politicians.
You pulled that partisan bullshit out and I responded in kind.
When the current administration is backed by the most anti-freedom segment of the population, they are the ones who enacted it and they are the ones who stepped out of the way which enabled the attacks that casued it to be accepted and you whine about how Hillary is the real problem, your priorities are so out of whack it is insane.
I told the banker I'd changed my mind and didn't want to open an account after all. His demeanor immediately changed -- he didn't say anything, but the suspicious look he gave me clearly said that only someone with something to hide would refuse to let the government check up on them.
Well, actually he might not have had any suspicion any way, but he was required to fill out a report on you about the incident since you refused to submit. Yes I work at a financial institution, and yes we were all informed that this was a new requirement.
I *am* very worried about how a hillary '08 administration would use this broad, overreaching power though . ..
Then you're an idiot.
A Democratic administration couldn't get away with this because their base is people who love freedom and understand that allowing government to impose their will into your private lives is as unAmerican as it is possible to get.
The Republicans on the other hand are mainly supported by people who belive it is not just ok, but a glorious and holy thing for the government to invade even the most private aspects of you life, who you fuck, how you fuck them and what goes on inside your own fucking body.
There is no possible way to even draw a reasonable comparison. They are orders of magnitude apart on issues of personal liberty and freedom. This is exactly what happens every time that religion is allowed into government.
Bush and the scum who support him are the fucking reason freedom of religion was put into the bill of rights in the first place.
Oh well, it worked for a couple hundred years which is better than they hoped when they wrote it.
There have been many criticisms lately regarding the electoral college. Many people are calling for it to be removed in favor of a "popular vote" system. The obvious counter-argument is that, were this to happen, presidential candidates would completely ignore those in rural areas (where there weren't enough votes to matter), in favor of campaigning in big cities (where the majority of the votes lie).
The real problem with your counter argument is that it causes all the campaigning to be done in the swing states which have far less relevance to the nation in every way except this one.
Personally, I believe thwat the electoral college should be abolished and a straight popular vote put in its plcae because this would far more accurately reflect the contributions to America made by the people living in these areas.
Most of the red states are rural, and most of them only are able to live with modern ammenities due to the charity of the blue states which are where the majority of the economic activity goes on and where most social and technological progress occurs.
What the electoral college does is give a bunch of ignorant slime who think that imposing a fundamentalist theocracy on America is a good idea an amount of power disproportinate to both their numbers and to the benefit they provide to this country.
It really makes me sick that these people who have the lifestyles they do solely through charity from me and the rest of the people in the liberal states have the audacity to try and impose their archaic, ignorant hate based lifestyles on the part of the country that is so successful in large part due to the fact that they actually have progressed socially.
Way to drag down the people who are supplying your poor states with their welfare checks.
Slashdot Mirror
If Slashdot was short of stories, the editors would have done the most logical thing that comes to mind: deliberately dupe some of the old stories.
Yeah, but even they would have a hard time screwing up badly enough to duplicate something this time sensitive don't you think?
Yeah, never mind.
And the media which has been lambasting Bush for years
Bwahahahahha. Oh crap, that is about the funniest thing I have ever heard in my life.
Compare their treatment of Bush to their rabid attacks on Clinton.
What a seriously insane person you are.
1 I got pulled over 15 times, and I was only ticketed twice. Part of me wonders if my name and fear of my namesakes political power got me off the hook...
;-)
I suppose the 2 where when you got pulled over by cops who could spell
Seriously though, I moved to Chicago recently and there is no possible way you couldn't know the names and spellings of all the elected officials since their names are on every freaking thing that could be even loosely associated with their office.
Must be expensive when one of them gets replaced.
Does this happen anywhere else?
I say we give both candidates a pretzel and let it go from there, to see whether they can undo themselves.
What if they both choked on their pretzels?
Could we just do without a President for a few years?
The mindset of large urban centers such as New York, LA and San Francisco is not the mindset of the rest of the country by a long shot.
Yet the large urban centers is where almost all of the economic, social, and technological progress has occured. The rural areas are so poor that they wouldn't even be able to support themselves without charity from the same urban centers on which they are trying to force the backwards ass "morals" which help hold them back.
Is it any surprise that the majority of the Bush supporters are in the poorest states with the worst education?
I pity the rest of us as they try to drag us down to their level.
Don't forget bearing false witness and mass murder.
Every single one of the dead in Iraq is his responsibility as he lied to justify the invasion.
It's sad that these pukes are so ingorant of any sort of marality that they think it's right and moral to force people at gunpoint to have children they can not support and it's also good to murder thousands of innocent people on a basis of lies.
And they have the audacity to claim that they would even know a moral if it bit them on the ass.
They mocked our belief system, and hundreds of years of our religious and legal tradition, and for the most part they did this simply because it pissed religious people off.
Believe it or not people really don't give a fuck about oppressing you.
The fact is that marriage has existed far longer than your religion.
It isn't yours, and you have no right to deny it to anybody.
Nobody said your ignorant little hate mongering church has to perform the ceremonies because it doesn't have a damn thing to do with your church.
Uh, the fact that the Bible-believing 50+% of Americans find homosexuality immoral. I disagree with them, completely and utterly and totally, but their moral code says that condoning homosexuality would be immoral, and that sanctioning a marriage between them would be condoning their behavior.
The really sad and pathetic thing about these people is that acting out against gay people is totally against their morals, or at least what they say their morals are. The only part of the bible that addresses gays directly also says eating pork or shellfish is just as bad and that burnt offerings should be offered to the lord.
But that's really only for the Jews. Jesus came along and turned a lot of this back. He specifically told them not to judge others as that is none of their business.
Since these people claim to be Christian even though they clearly aren't they are going against their own stated moral code.
The fact that they think that they know better than God himself about what's right and wrong since he made them that way just makes their position that much more hypocritical and downright unChristian and unAmerican.
Sad really.
Most of the blue states are urban, and most of them only are able to live with food due to the charity of the red states which are where the majority of the agriculture occurs.
Wow, here's a first. A Repub claiming that paying for something twice at far above the market price is *receiving* charity. What next.
No wonder Bush got voted in by these people if your brain could actually produce this thought without exploding.
Wow.
Ok, the not human/american, Bush Sr said that, not Shrub.
Second, If you want to claim that marriage is a fundamental right, sure but gays can get married in a bisexual union just like heterosexuals. Oh, you want monosexual unions as well. well that isn't marriage. And marriage is NOT a fundamental right.
You're completely missing the point. Actions speak far louder than words.
Marriage has a very limited meaning as far as the government is concerned.
It is essentially limited to filing taxes jointly, default inheritance, nad most importantly the ability to visit their spouse when they are dying in the hospital.
That is basically it. Unless, of course, that is you want the government coming into your church and telling you who and how you can marry?
If you aren't in favor of that then only hypocricy would allow you to be in favor of this.
So are you denying that visiting your loved one on their death bed is a fundamental human right?
Those are the only things that the anti- gay marriage people are trying to deny them. To push a constitutional amendment to deny visitation rights to one segment of the population due to how they were born is truly sickening.
How would you feel if you were not allowed that right because you are blond (or whatever)
That is why it is flat out saying that they are less than human, because all it is intended to do is to limit basic rights to punish them for how they were born. Nothing else.
Wow, you and a lot of other posters are really having a hard time with these unequivocal election results, aren't you? Going so far as to claim that the blue states could/should make it on their own is pretty shortsighted and pathetic.
In the liberal states, we believe that people are adults and they are perfectly capable of making decisions about our own lives.
In the conservative states, they believe that everybody should be forced at gunpoint to follow their interpretation of the dictates of their religion.
It's hard to imagine a more fundamental difference.
Given that our love of freedom has contributed a great deal to our prosperity and people whose lifestyle is completely dependent upon our charity have decided that they want to try and take our freedom away in the interests of promoting their warped idea of morality that thinks it's ok to force people at gunpoint to have children because life is sacred yet it's still ok to make up lies to promote a war to commit mass murder on innocents it is a little fucking frightening to anybody with any sense.
It's sad that rather than move forward, they would rather drag us all down to their level.
So Since they are basically an anchor around our necks and provide basically nothing in the way of benefits, how is it a bad idea to split up?
They would deteriorate to 3rd world status in no time as do all fundamentalist societies and we would do even better, but without the welfare states dragging us down.
The states that are "backwards" is where people actually work.
Where things like family and country are important,
So I'll add a little more stereotyping which, at least, is based on the facts much more than yours:
If they work, then why are we the Liberal states subsidizing your leaching asses?
Most Republican states only live as well as they do due to the charity of the Liberal states which are where people actually work rather than get paid to sit on their asses and *not* farm.
Of course we have progressed morally, technologically, and socially which is a large part of the reason that we are so successful economically relative to the welfare states.
Too bad you guys hate freedom so much you want to drag us down to your level.
America is great because of its individuals and its morals.
But my morals tell me that it is wrong to make up lies as a justification to invade a country and murder 10s of thousands of its citizens who have never done anything to me.
My morals tell me that it is wrong to push my religion down other people's throats.
My morals tell me that it is wrong, in a free society, to call people who disagree with me traitors.
My morals tell me it is wrong to allow the energy industry to wirte our energy policy in closed meetings beyong the scrutiny of the public who said policy rightly belongs to.
You are right that America is great because of its morals, but it is these morals that make it so.
Forcing unwilling people at gunpoint to have babies is not a moral action, and certainly nothing to base a country on.
So you see, in this election actual morals lost to forcing certain religious beliefs down peoples throats.
That is why this country is so divided. It's the same attitude that caused freedom of religion to be put in the constitution in the first place.
Oh well, it lasted 200 years which is much longer than they thought it would.
The biggest thing this nation needs is to become unified... The problems that we did have were created by Clinton in the first place.
Just fucking typical.
Kerry would have been the one to screw the future, sorry. The last things we need is a radical liberal in office who is going to elect up to 4 supreme court justices who will remain until the die or leave. It is quite crazy, but the media is trying to make it seem like having morals is a bad thing... how silly.
He's certainly not radical in any way shape or form. Were he, you would be able to provide examples rather than spitting hate. Oh yes, you are a uniter aren't you?
How would it be possible for having supreme court justices who believe that people are entitled to choose how they want to live their own lives to be a bad thing? Of course, it couldn't but that doesn't matter because your concern is shoving your religion down people's throats.
You honestly think it is better to have justices who feel individual rights are wrong and evil if they go agaionst a particularly wacked out interpretation of the bible?
The really sad thing is that the media is representing Bush supporters as having done so for moral purposes when they are the most immoral group this country has ever seen.
It's ok to murder thousands of Iraqis based on what we all now know for an absolute factto be falsified reasons and that's your idea of moral?
It's ok to strip basic human rights from people because the old book of the bible says so even though the new one directly contradicts it?
Yeah, that's moral.
Yeah, supporting mass murder is ok, but not until they're out of the womb.
Don't you dare claim you have any sort of moral standing because you want to force your religion down my throat at gunpoint while you support unprovoked murder.
People like you are truly frightening and very very sick.
I'm one of the rare Republican Slashdotters, and have been shocked at the vitriol toward Bush and his supporters evidenced here.
First off, you're not rare.
Second, had you been paying attention to anything he did during his first term you would not be the least bit surprised.
Whether or not you agree with his policies, he did go well out of his way to take sides on the most divisive issues around essentially telling half the nation that he didn't give a flying fuck what they thought. This after claiming to be both a moderate and a uniter while he turned out to be an extremist and a divider.
So seriously, how could you be the least bit surprised that people are angry about that?
We already have a 1-party system. Republicans and Democrats are securly united in their loyalty to corporations and special interests. Laws are in place, established by the 1-party system, to ensure that no other parties can challenge their power.
True as far as it goes, but there are substantial moral differences between the parties that make it a horrible thing for freedom that the election went the way it did.
The Republicans believe wholeheartedly that it is their right to invade every persons home and inspect their private lives.
Who are they fucking, how are they fucking.
Can't afford to raise a kid? Toguh shit have it and when it turns out bad we'll execute it.
Yeah, they need to save fetuses, but murdering thousands in Iraq is ok because all those dirt niggers aren't good wholesome Christians like us.
Give me a break.
America voted against any sense of morality in this election and it will bite us in the ass.
It doesn't automatically equal evil.
I'm sorry, but as a member of a government that is supposed to represent *all* Americans, not just the one's who share religious beliefs with them for him to say anything of the sort does damn well equal evil.
He said flat out that he wants to destroy the voice of half the country.
If it weren't for the fact that the blue states essentially subsidize the red ones
Sure. And the red states feed the blue states. I'd call it a fair trade.
No, the fair trade is us paying for the food.
In addition to that, we pay for the lazy fuckers in those states not to farm.
On top of that we subsidize their modern amenities. Like phones and electricity.
The fact is that the liberal states could do quite well without the backwards ass states, but the reverse is not true.
Those states survive solely through charity.
The fact that it's their backwards ass social attitudes that do a lot to hold them back doesn't stop them from trying to drag down the part of the country that can actually afford to pay their own way.
Vote Barak Obama.
Actually, I'm in his district but I didn't vote for him.
He was a shoo in so I voted Libertarian. They didn't even register on the news though.
Keyes is quite obviously a completely insane person and it is frightening that he got any votes at all.
FOr someone who you can count on to be pro-gay, he sure gave Lynn Cheney a hard time.
No he didn't.
He was pointing out the utter hypocricy of the
Bush administration.
They claim to be all about family values, yet Cheney is perfectly happy to sit there and allow Bush to push a constitutional amendment stating flat out that Cheney's own fucking daughter is not a human, not an American, and thus should be stripped of basic fundamental human rights just because of how their own fucking god made her.
It is relevant, it is topical, and it clearly demonstrated that these people are ruled primarily by ignorant hatred.
The sad fact we see now is that so are most Americans.
Amazing. People who hold their values over their job. I'll be damned. What will they think of next?
People who fight for them? Die for them?
Sure, that sounds decent at first, until you actually think about it and realise that the only "values" that they are voting based on is that they be allowed to oppress others at gunpoint because they aren't the same as them.
Seriously, the people who are voting on so-called moral issues are the most immoral people around.
Their idea of morality is stopping others from living their lives how they see fit.
Bunch of ignorant immoral slimebags.
you need to take a critical look at your implicit trust of ANY party.
Oh, I do.
I have no trust whatsoever for any of our politicians.
You pulled that partisan bullshit out and I responded in kind.
When the current administration is backed by the most anti-freedom segment of the population, they are the ones who enacted it and they are the ones who stepped out of the way which enabled the attacks that casued it to be accepted and you whine about how Hillary is the real problem, your priorities are so out of whack it is insane.
I told the banker I'd changed my mind and didn't want to open an account after all. His demeanor immediately changed -- he didn't say anything, but the suspicious look he gave me clearly said that only someone with something to hide would refuse to let the government check up on them.
Well, actually he might not have had any suspicion any way, but he was required to fill out a report on you about the incident since you refused to submit.
Yes I work at a financial institution, and yes we were all informed that this was a new requirement.
Welcome to the home of freedom.
I *am* very worried about how a hillary '08 administration would use this broad, overreaching power though . . .
Then you're an idiot.
A Democratic administration couldn't get away with this because their base is people who love freedom and understand that allowing government to impose their will into your private lives is as unAmerican as it is possible to get.
The Republicans on the other hand are mainly supported by people who belive it is not just ok, but a glorious and holy thing for the government to invade even the most private aspects of you life, who you fuck, how you fuck them and what goes on inside your own fucking body.
There is no possible way to even draw a reasonable comparison. They are orders of magnitude apart on issues of personal liberty and freedom.
This is exactly what happens every time that religion is allowed into government.
Bush and the scum who support him are the fucking reason freedom of religion was put into the bill of rights in the first place.
Oh well, it worked for a couple hundred years which is better than they hoped when they wrote it.
There have been many criticisms lately regarding the electoral college. Many people are calling for it to be removed in favor of a "popular vote" system. The obvious counter-argument is that, were this to happen, presidential candidates would completely ignore those in rural areas (where there weren't enough votes to matter), in favor of campaigning in big cities (where the majority of the votes lie).
The real problem with your counter argument is that it causes all the campaigning to be done in the swing states which have far less relevance to the nation in every way except this one.
Personally, I believe thwat the electoral college should be abolished and a straight popular vote put in its plcae because this would far more accurately reflect the contributions to America made by the people living in these areas.
Most of the red states are rural, and most of them only are able to live with modern ammenities due to the charity of the blue states which are where the majority of the economic activity goes on and where most social and technological progress occurs.
What the electoral college does is give a bunch of ignorant slime who think that imposing a fundamentalist theocracy on America is a good idea an amount of power disproportinate to both their numbers and to the benefit they provide to this country.
It really makes me sick that these people who have the lifestyles they do solely through charity from me and the rest of the people in the liberal states have the audacity to try and impose their archaic, ignorant hate based lifestyles on the part of the country that is so successful in large part due to the fact that they actually have progressed socially.
Way to drag down the people who are supplying your poor states with their welfare checks.