What are the parameters that define a "good" driver. Going below the speed limit on a highway in the left lane. Being lucky when you don't look right or left making a turn onto a street? Taking way to long to brake?
I've been driving for decades, I've put over 300,000 miles under me, but I bet those damn things would label me a bad driver for I accelerate firmly coming onto a highway, I don't brake forever coming off a highway, I tend to exceed the posted speed limit by a few miles when in the left lane and certainly when passing and i do my best to maintain situational awareness when behind the wheel.
These devices will do nothing to bring about "safe" driving because that term is still relative to skill, conditions, and environment. Flo can take her device and shove it somewhere dark, just not in my car.
"However, the court left the door open for the agency to appeal the ruling.""
I never understand this thinking. I am under the impression that when a judgement goes against you, you can appeal the decision. The court is set up already for that thinking so what or how does this court do something different. When I read that I get the feeling that the "Court" felt ugly for their ruling and really really hopes that aggrieved party will appeal.
I do hope they don't or if they do, they fail for I would love to know about a switch that can "kill" the internet. A system designed to route around such devices.
But what I was expecting (hoping for) was that they went with the short story format, maybe tying then together from the viewpoint of a class learning the history of robots in a robot psychology 101 course taught by the renowned Susan Calvin. It was not that bad a movie. The stories are fantastic and could have translated well to the screen given the chance.
I love/. for just these types of justifications. Between a lawyer and a good/. poster, I'd take the/.'er for clearly they can think way outside the box. With that said, yes, Chess is a sport for not only do we need to exercise this mass of tissue, but like any good sport, we can also finds ways to dope it up for extreme gains and that "do anything to win" attitude. Eventually we change from "doing our best" to "I need to win no matter what"
As an aside, I thought my sport (Eventing), the one I compete in, would remain drug free for drugging a horse then going out and attempting to jump 4'+ solid jumps at approach speeds @ 22 mph would just be stupid...I was wrong. First comes money, then drugs, then it just goes downhill from there.
Yes, Chess is a sport, let's watch it slide into hell one move at a time.
Stop, don't write that again, there are just somethings not read before going to work. Now I'll have executive speak in my brain all day....damn you...damn you to HR.
How is this even a patent? Okay, besides the obvious "well they filed it". IT is describing the general practice of investigation for hiring that HR departments do across the country. So now what, when some checks out a person in google+ they have to pay for the license to do so?
So you know, I am with you on this, but our OP may have his head befuddled but certain news centers and are talented in twists separate bits into a new meme. Perhaps he/she was refering to this source. However you slice it, it is old, it is not true, and it is a reflection of how far down the road to fascism the US has gone.
What I ponder is if these patents were filed back in 1997 (did was have first to file back then or was it still based on issued), why did the owners not enforce the patent when Google unveiled their model for search/ad placement? I generally understand that with Trademark, if you do not actively enforce trademark protection you can lose it, but is that not relative to patents as well? From 1997 till 2013, over 14 years no one has sought to challenge Google's use of Search ad placement. The argument could be that since it was not defended, then the owners did not feel it important and thus is is removed and the idea placed into the public domain.
I take a bunch of sticks, plasterboard, and nails, all common items, and build a house. Amazing, I better patent house building as the process whereby sticks, sheathing, and combining materials are used to make a structure suitable to protecting objects, living, dead, inanimate, or ethereal from natural or non-natural elements.
It would be nice if they applied that thinking now and then. It seems to be trained out of them at some point so the end product is a profit driven asshat who cannot see much past the next quarter or consider what may really matter in life until its too late.
"Who exactly gets the absolute right to decide what's ultimately "wrongdoing" as opposed to just "secret"?"
The society we live in with laws for starters.
Your comment really does not make sense. Some guy works for the Mob. The mod just loves what it does, traffic in drugs, extortion, prostitution, and the occasional killing. They feel they are just "doing good". A fellow working in the mob stats to think "hey, what they are doing is in fact "not all right", because we are breaking laws, hurting and killing people. Thus he gathers incriminating evidence and turns it over to the proper authorities (one's that have not been corrupted). In the same instance he is labeled a hero and a stool pigeon, shunned by those who know him for fear of reprisal, squeezed out and thrown away by the "good guys".
And we wonder why more people don't speak up.
In the case of the NSA, What has been reveled shows that the Agency did lie, did break the law, did act outside the even loose legal requirements asked for by "The People". Snowden's actions only shine the light on that which was "wrong" by the standards set by our society. My own feeling is that more information will continue to be presented as long as Congress continues to look the other way and secretly allow the NSA t o spy on the world.
1 - Like a CP on this thread, I turn the voice way down for I find that more a distraction. Field of vision is enough to both take in the map and the road ahead. When I look at or glance at the moving map it is only when I am not in a high volume or needing quick reaction situation. Application differs across individuals so that you can use it without the map is okay, but don't dump on those that do. When we shift lanes we should always be checking our blind spots with a quick glance to the side, it that any different then a quick glance to the map?
2 - Don't we get back to the old argument of what people do behind the steering wheel. Glass does nothing more then provide a different way to do what people still do, something else but pay attention to the path of the car and its surroundings. People eat, drink, put on makeup, put on ties (I saw that once), read mail, written directions, turn and yell at kids....the list is long. Some I do myself, but with the understanding that driving is my first priority and if/when something happens in front of me it is time to focus. Anyone who has driven for many years is not driving with 100% focus all the time for much of what we do is subconscious, muscle memory which allows for the ability to perform limited multi-tasking.
This is the argument Boeing put forth about Airbus and its fly-by-wire planes...until the gave in. We cannot stop this type of progress, but it would be nice if there was still somewhere a killswitch that was manual and separate from the computer...just as a last resort if possible.
NASA had it easy. They only had to deal with Physics.
Social Sciences are messy, Social programs are messy and when it involves large groups of people, politicians get involved which makes a services program almost impossible to get right. Given current technology (at the time) there were just a limited number of ways the Moon mission could be completed. Creating a web site in a fractious, antagonist political world had/has too many variables to "get it right". It took close to 10 years to get a man on the moon, and somehow we're suppose to build a complicated heath management system in a few months...It is not a question of expertise, both environments have talent, but it was/is a question of Management, goals, and commitment. NASA employees were vested and proud of their work for they were a part of the whole. CGI Federal *contractors* don't give a shit about the whole, just their slice of the dollar pie. That is why we can put a man on the moon, but can't write a complex web site. (IMHO)
Hold on, she was the victim here. SHe doesn't need to do encryption because at one point thre was this thing called the constitution. You're making like a rape case. "Come on, she shouldn't have worn that dress, she was inviting it". No, the reporter was doing her job and whether she wrote on paper, plain text on a computer she had rights...and the Government raped them.
My horses would beg to differ. They very well know the meaning of time. Every morning at @ 6:30 they are lined up in their stalls waiting for breakfast. If I am late by even 15 minutes I get grief from at least one horse (the older mare is annoyed, but just looks at me funny). In the afternoons when I drive in to the farm, the horses know to line up at their stalls and if I'm not out within 15 minutes I get grief. Oh, they understand time, truly they do. Position of the Sun? No for they do this summer or winter. Stars? Same thing, Somehow they just "know" based on some rhythm of time/life. All's I know is, don't be late with food or the next rider may not be so pleasant.
Your "solutions" speak of someone more privileged then most and if not, your are delusional. Option 1 is not much an option in todays economy and most people don't take a job for the health coverage, but for the work offered. I worked for a company for 9 years. If one day they say "Hey, we're changing the HC coverage" I would not typically consider finding another job. Option 2, Fund it yourself? have you shopped for privately funded health care coverage? Even Cobra for crappy coverage was close to $500 a month and there are a lot of people to whom that is more then they can pay. Supplemental coverage? SO now I add another cost onto the existing cost.
Given that you use the term Obamacare instead of its actual name, Affordable HealthCare Act tells me a lot. I truly hope you live a good life, you have no issues like low pay and bad health for I doubt you'd survive as well as those who've had to live like that their whole lives.
Yes, but they didn't fall all at the same time, thus not a threat . In one sense we are paying not for the lose of 3000+ people, but for the towers. The spectacle of the towers coming down is what is sealed in peoples minds. That made the event larger then it really was and shaped our actions since.
I think it is the "Mass" in mass hysteria that drives the security machine and the spending of Billions on a very low probability act. More people die from shootings in this country then 9/11 and again, in such small numbers, spread out that the attitude is, wont happen to me. People don't like random acts of violence that they can't control, so they turn to the Government and say, control it please. Government does not do small thus the TSA and HLS when all we really needed was just better communication. Until I fall, I believe I am safe in my house. Walking down a street in I have no control over what will happen. Personally, I don't care or I just adjust where I go, but most people....they accept the false security of Government oversight and die any way (Boston).
So your going to tell a minimum wage mother who just got injured in an accident she is responsible for all her costs? Or she just found out she has cancer and it will take more than she makes in her life to treat, sorry mam, you have to pay or you get nothing?
America, well most of it, cannot afford its own care and your solution is to say "don't want death panels, pay your own way"....brilliant (if your rich).
I generally agree with you, you and the parent post describe two very different paths in health services. You cite good examples where negotiation is impossible. Emergency room type stuff where critical care is required NOW and the last thing on people's minds is "How much?"
His/Her(?) viewpoint is from either preventive, or ambulatory care where a patient has time to check things out. This includes elective surgery along with doctor visits for checkups and minor medical issues. A person goes to a doctor (let us assume he/she has already negotiated or searched for a good visit price) and says, "My elbow hurts, what's wrong?" The doctor lists string of tests that could be run and the response is "how much?" and has the ability to pick and choose or walk out. Market driven health care (and not a good approach IMHO).
Later that day same person gets hit by a car. Lying on the ground unconscious with multiple injuries. EMTs come, haul him/her to the ER where they take x-rays (including the elbow), blood tests, and CAT scans. All needed to find out the extent of injury. Not market driven. At some point the patient could take over from doctors, deciding on what to pay, but by then its too little too late.
My own view is that there came a point in Society when healthcare became more of a right then privilege. It should not be a pick and choose based on "how much", but applied across all who need. That is why single payer systems are needed and why they work. It removes the fundamental choice of "should we help". What the US had was ugly and class based. The ACA attempts (poorly) to correct that, but NHS systems like in GB or other European countries is where we need to be. Breaking a leg should not ruin my life (due to costs), but just 2 months (due to healing). Side note, friend of mine broke her leg. After the bone healed she was told by the insurance Co they would not pay for PT. SHe tried on her own, cost too much and the result, she continues to limp around , not putting weight on the leg. Yet, my insurance would pay for PT. She cannot choose her provider (or could not till now), because of employment. That is a flawed system.
" a Republican is caught in the men's room insisting he's not gay.."
This was a really well thought out post, but for the quote above. It was not needed and did little to support your position. Granted this is off topic, but I see this from time to time (and have been guilty myself) where well thought out posts wind up with some editorializing that does little, but certainly weakens the presentation. It's like giving an inspirational speech, then mooning the audience.
The one point I'd address in your thoughtful post, is that the Constitution its self is not the cause, it is in the manner in which it has been abused by members of Congress. Other democratic political systems have their flaws as well. governments that are constantly called to question with constant voting is also a government in chaos as Private Enterprise steps in and capitalizes on the disarray. One need look at Italy or Greece for such instability.
Countries (governments) that see mroe stable or self correcting have a generally more stable minded population, stable economy, which allows the population to be more aware and informed when "something" wants to create unbalance. Here's a thought, perhaps it is not the constitution, but the size of the country that is the root of our issues. When you look at the size of the US, the vast change in demographics, economies, and environments, we're doomed to try and make this work any more. Perhaps there is a limit to how big an Empire/Country can be to be able to survive and provide stability to its people.
It seems sarcastic wit is your norm so I was just returning the favor. You are seemingly blind to the fact the the general Democratic platform is different from the republican platform and that it does not matter if the name at the top is Obama or Bush, the parties do seek different agendas at times. Obama has pushed through programs that would never have been presented by Bush. He has continued some nasty programs started by Bush, but then he's not been able to focus on much more then the economy, thanks in part to the Tea Party and the norquist pledge that has bound republicans to a self-destructive path.
Of course they are, them who controls the masses, controls the wealth and the power. That is not lost on me. Still they have to work with the system they created. A party sets the tone for how the masses can be controlled. The problem is that when the public apparatus gets out of control it can break things and can do so without discrimination. Think mob mentality gone wild (Lord of the Flies). We would be better off with a party that governs from the left and allows moments of radical right commentary to help adjust law then a radicalized public leadership that incites primal actions instead of conservative, thoughtful ideas to governing.
Stop using plain language, it does not suit you and really obfuscates your point.
"I'm just not naive about how the game is being played"
Nor am I and we already do know this is how they play the game. We also know how to fix it, but We Don't. As a Ninetofiver do you vote for representatives and work to help protect economic stability? I can easily state that I support actions by the FCC to stop the overthrow of net neutrality. I support that actions of the SEC and other agencies that work to stop mergers that would have a negative impact on society. Simply put, I support a government that works to actively protect society from greedy fucks.
You say "that's the way it works" like it is game over. I say "the way it works is bad, let's fix it". You make it to complex. This is about greed, this is about power. The west does not have a patent on either and the western way of life is not based on pure exploitation. Again, that is universal and practiced by all bad people. The way to fix it is to call it out, stop it, and then present a better model. At the least I try to something more then a fatalistic stance of "that's just how it is".
Slashdot Mirror
What are the parameters that define a "good" driver. Going below the speed limit on a highway in the left lane. Being lucky when you don't look right or left making a turn onto a street? Taking way to long to brake?
I've been driving for decades, I've put over 300,000 miles under me, but I bet those damn things would label me a bad driver for I accelerate firmly coming onto a highway, I don't brake forever coming off a highway, I tend to exceed the posted speed limit by a few miles when in the left lane and certainly when passing and i do my best to maintain situational awareness when behind the wheel.
These devices will do nothing to bring about "safe" driving because that term is still relative to skill, conditions, and environment. Flo can take her device and shove it somewhere dark, just not in my car.
"However, the court left the door open for the agency to appeal the ruling.""
I never understand this thinking. I am under the impression that when a judgement goes against you, you can appeal the decision. The court is set up already for that thinking so what or how does this court do something different. When I read that I get the feeling that the "Court" felt ugly for their ruling and really really hopes that aggrieved party will appeal.
I do hope they don't or if they do, they fail for I would love to know about a switch that can "kill" the internet. A system designed to route around such devices.
But what I was expecting (hoping for) was that they went with the short story format, maybe tying then together from the viewpoint of a class learning the history of robots in a robot psychology 101 course taught by the renowned Susan Calvin. It was not that bad a movie. The stories are fantastic and could have translated well to the screen given the chance.
I love /. for just these types of justifications. Between a lawyer and a good /. poster, I'd take the /.'er for clearly they can think way outside the box. With that said, yes, Chess is a sport for not only do we need to exercise this mass of tissue, but like any good sport, we can also finds ways to dope it up for extreme gains and that "do anything to win" attitude. Eventually we change from "doing our best" to "I need to win no matter what"
As an aside, I thought my sport (Eventing), the one I compete in, would remain drug free for drugging a horse then going out and attempting to jump 4'+ solid jumps at approach speeds @ 22 mph would just be stupid...I was wrong. First comes money, then drugs, then it just goes downhill from there.
Yes, Chess is a sport, let's watch it slide into hell one move at a time.
(feeling dark humor today)
Stop, don't write that again, there are just somethings not read before going to work. Now I'll have executive speak in my brain all day....damn you...damn you to HR.
How is this even a patent? Okay, besides the obvious "well they filed it". IT is describing the general practice of investigation for hiring that HR departments do across the country. So now what, when some checks out a person in google+ they have to pay for the license to do so?
The system was broken...now it is defiled.
So you know, I am with you on this, but our OP may have his head befuddled but certain news centers and are talented in twists separate bits into a new meme. Perhaps he/she was refering to this source. However you slice it, it is old, it is not true, and it is a reflection of how far down the road to fascism the US has gone.
What I ponder is if these patents were filed back in 1997 (did was have first to file back then or was it still based on issued), why did the owners not enforce the patent when Google unveiled their model for search/ad placement? I generally understand that with Trademark, if you do not actively enforce trademark protection you can lose it, but is that not relative to patents as well? From 1997 till 2013, over 14 years no one has sought to challenge Google's use of Search ad placement. The argument could be that since it was not defended, then the owners did not feel it important and thus is is removed and the idea placed into the public domain.
I take a bunch of sticks, plasterboard, and nails, all common items, and build a house. Amazing, I better patent house building as the process whereby sticks, sheathing, and combining materials are used to make a structure suitable to protecting objects, living, dead, inanimate, or ethereal from natural or non-natural elements.
It would be nice if they applied that thinking now and then. It seems to be trained out of them at some point so the end product is a profit driven asshat who cannot see much past the next quarter or consider what may really matter in life until its too late.
"Who exactly gets the absolute right to decide what's ultimately "wrongdoing" as opposed to just "secret"?"
The society we live in with laws for starters.
Your comment really does not make sense. Some guy works for the Mob. The mod just loves what it does, traffic in drugs, extortion, prostitution, and the occasional killing. They feel they are just "doing good". A fellow working in the mob stats to think "hey, what they are doing is in fact "not all right", because we are breaking laws, hurting and killing people. Thus he gathers incriminating evidence and turns it over to the proper authorities (one's that have not been corrupted). In the same instance he is labeled a hero and a stool pigeon, shunned by those who know him for fear of reprisal, squeezed out and thrown away by the "good guys".
And we wonder why more people don't speak up.
In the case of the NSA, What has been reveled shows that the Agency did lie, did break the law, did act outside the even loose legal requirements asked for by "The People". Snowden's actions only shine the light on that which was "wrong" by the standards set by our society. My own feeling is that more information will continue to be presented as long as Congress continues to look the other way and secretly allow the NSA t o spy on the world.
and your asking from a poster named "oldhack"? Desperate times my friend, desperate times.
1 - Like a CP on this thread, I turn the voice way down for I find that more a distraction. Field of vision is enough to both take in the map and the road ahead. When I look at or glance at the moving map it is only when I am not in a high volume or needing quick reaction situation. Application differs across individuals so that you can use it without the map is okay, but don't dump on those that do. When we shift lanes we should always be checking our blind spots with a quick glance to the side, it that any different then a quick glance to the map?
2 - Don't we get back to the old argument of what people do behind the steering wheel. Glass does nothing more then provide a different way to do what people still do, something else but pay attention to the path of the car and its surroundings. People eat, drink, put on makeup, put on ties (I saw that once), read mail, written directions, turn and yell at kids....the list is long. Some I do myself, but with the understanding that driving is my first priority and if/when something happens in front of me it is time to focus. Anyone who has driven for many years is not driving with 100% focus all the time for much of what we do is subconscious, muscle memory which allows for the ability to perform limited multi-tasking.
This is the argument Boeing put forth about Airbus and its fly-by-wire planes...until the gave in. We cannot stop this type of progress, but it would be nice if there was still somewhere a killswitch that was manual and separate from the computer...just as a last resort if possible.
NASA had it easy. They only had to deal with Physics.
Social Sciences are messy, Social programs are messy and when it involves large groups of people, politicians get involved which makes a services program almost impossible to get right. Given current technology (at the time) there were just a limited number of ways the Moon mission could be completed. Creating a web site in a fractious, antagonist political world had/has too many variables to "get it right". It took close to 10 years to get a man on the moon, and somehow we're suppose to build a complicated heath management system in a few months...It is not a question of expertise, both environments have talent, but it was/is a question of Management, goals, and commitment. NASA employees were vested and proud of their work for they were a part of the whole. CGI Federal *contractors* don't give a shit about the whole, just their slice of the dollar pie. That is why we can put a man on the moon, but can't write a complex web site. (IMHO)
Hold on, she was the victim here. SHe doesn't need to do encryption because at one point thre was this thing called the constitution. You're making like a rape case. "Come on, she shouldn't have worn that dress, she was inviting it". No, the reporter was doing her job and whether she wrote on paper, plain text on a computer she had rights...and the Government raped them.
Yes, I enjoyed that one...and agreed.
My horses would beg to differ. They very well know the meaning of time. Every morning at @ 6:30 they are lined up in their stalls waiting for breakfast. If I am late by even 15 minutes I get grief from at least one horse (the older mare is annoyed, but just looks at me funny). In the afternoons when I drive in to the farm, the horses know to line up at their stalls and if I'm not out within 15 minutes I get grief. Oh, they understand time, truly they do. Position of the Sun? No for they do this summer or winter. Stars? Same thing, Somehow they just "know" based on some rhythm of time/life. All's I know is, don't be late with food or the next rider may not be so pleasant.
Epic. Don't get that too often.
Your "solutions" speak of someone more privileged then most and if not, your are delusional. Option 1 is not much an option in todays economy and most people don't take a job for the health coverage, but for the work offered. I worked for a company for 9 years. If one day they say "Hey, we're changing the HC coverage" I would not typically consider finding another job. Option 2, Fund it yourself? have you shopped for privately funded health care coverage? Even Cobra for crappy coverage was close to $500 a month and there are a lot of people to whom that is more then they can pay. Supplemental coverage? SO now I add another cost onto the existing cost.
Given that you use the term Obamacare instead of its actual name, Affordable HealthCare Act tells me a lot. I truly hope you live a good life, you have no issues like low pay and bad health for I doubt you'd survive as well as those who've had to live like that their whole lives.
Yes, but they didn't fall all at the same time, thus not a threat . In one sense we are paying not for the lose of 3000+ people, but for the towers. The spectacle of the towers coming down is what is sealed in peoples minds. That made the event larger then it really was and shaped our actions since.
I think it is the "Mass" in mass hysteria that drives the security machine and the spending of Billions on a very low probability act. More people die from shootings in this country then 9/11 and again, in such small numbers, spread out that the attitude is, wont happen to me. People don't like random acts of violence that they can't control, so they turn to the Government and say, control it please. Government does not do small thus the TSA and HLS when all we really needed was just better communication. Until I fall, I believe I am safe in my house. Walking down a street in I have no control over what will happen. Personally, I don't care or I just adjust where I go, but most people....they accept the false security of Government oversight and die any way (Boston).
So your going to tell a minimum wage mother who just got injured in an accident she is responsible for all her costs? Or she just found out she has cancer and it will take more than she makes in her life to treat, sorry mam, you have to pay or you get nothing?
America, well most of it, cannot afford its own care and your solution is to say "don't want death panels, pay your own way"....brilliant (if your rich).
I generally agree with you, you and the parent post describe two very different paths in health services. You cite good examples where negotiation is impossible. Emergency room type stuff where critical care is required NOW and the last thing on people's minds is "How much?"
His/Her(?) viewpoint is from either preventive, or ambulatory care where a patient has time to check things out. This includes elective surgery along with doctor visits for checkups and minor medical issues. A person goes to a doctor (let us assume he/she has already negotiated or searched for a good visit price) and says, "My elbow hurts, what's wrong?" The doctor lists string of tests that could be run and the response is "how much?" and has the ability to pick and choose or walk out. Market driven health care (and not a good approach IMHO).
Later that day same person gets hit by a car. Lying on the ground unconscious with multiple injuries. EMTs come, haul him/her to the ER where they take x-rays (including the elbow), blood tests, and CAT scans. All needed to find out the extent of injury. Not market driven. At some point the patient could take over from doctors, deciding on what to pay, but by then its too little too late.
My own view is that there came a point in Society when healthcare became more of a right then privilege. It should not be a pick and choose based on "how much", but applied across all who need. That is why single payer systems are needed and why they work. It removes the fundamental choice of "should we help". What the US had was ugly and class based. The ACA attempts (poorly) to correct that, but NHS systems like in GB or other European countries is where we need to be. Breaking a leg should not ruin my life (due to costs), but just 2 months (due to healing). Side note, friend of mine broke her leg. After the bone healed she was told by the insurance Co they would not pay for PT. SHe tried on her own, cost too much and the result, she continues to limp around , not putting weight on the leg. Yet, my insurance would pay for PT. She cannot choose her provider (or could not till now), because of employment. That is a flawed system.
" a Republican is caught in the men's room insisting he's not gay.."
This was a really well thought out post, but for the quote above. It was not needed and did little to support your position. Granted this is off topic, but I see this from time to time (and have been guilty myself) where well thought out posts wind up with some editorializing that does little, but certainly weakens the presentation. It's like giving an inspirational speech, then mooning the audience.
The one point I'd address in your thoughtful post, is that the Constitution its self is not the cause, it is in the manner in which it has been abused by members of Congress. Other democratic political systems have their flaws as well. governments that are constantly called to question with constant voting is also a government in chaos as Private Enterprise steps in and capitalizes on the disarray. One need look at Italy or Greece for such instability.
Countries (governments) that see mroe stable or self correcting have a generally more stable minded population, stable economy, which allows the population to be more aware and informed when "something" wants to create unbalance. Here's a thought, perhaps it is not the constitution, but the size of the country that is the root of our issues. When you look at the size of the US, the vast change in demographics, economies, and environments, we're doomed to try and make this work any more. Perhaps there is a limit to how big an Empire/Country can be to be able to survive and provide stability to its people.
hmmmmm...have to chew more on that one.
It seems sarcastic wit is your norm so I was just returning the favor. You are seemingly blind to the fact the the general Democratic platform is different from the republican platform and that it does not matter if the name at the top is Obama or Bush, the parties do seek different agendas at times. Obama has pushed through programs that would never have been presented by Bush. He has continued some nasty programs started by Bush, but then he's not been able to focus on much more then the economy, thanks in part to the Tea Party and the norquist pledge that has bound republicans to a self-destructive path.
Of course they are, them who controls the masses, controls the wealth and the power. That is not lost on me. Still they have to work with the system they created. A party sets the tone for how the masses can be controlled. The problem is that when the public apparatus gets out of control it can break things and can do so without discrimination. Think mob mentality gone wild (Lord of the Flies). We would be better off with a party that governs from the left and allows moments of radical right commentary to help adjust law then a radicalized public leadership that incites primal actions instead of conservative, thoughtful ideas to governing.
Stop using plain language, it does not suit you and really obfuscates your point.
"I'm just not naive about how the game is being played"
Nor am I and we already do know this is how they play the game. We also know how to fix it, but We Don't. As a Ninetofiver do you vote for representatives and work to help protect economic stability? I can easily state that I support actions by the FCC to stop the overthrow of net neutrality. I support that actions of the SEC and other agencies that work to stop mergers that would have a negative impact on society. Simply put, I support a government that works to actively protect society from greedy fucks.
You say "that's the way it works" like it is game over. I say "the way it works is bad, let's fix it". You make it to complex. This is about greed, this is about power. The west does not have a patent on either and the western way of life is not based on pure exploitation. Again, that is universal and practiced by all bad people. The way to fix it is to call it out, stop it, and then present a better model. At the least I try to something more then a fatalistic stance of "that's just how it is".