Notices
Current Events, News, Politics Keep the politics here.

The Current Events, News, and Politics Thread

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 7, 2014 | 11:57 PM
  #4901  
cordycord's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,400
Total Cats: 560
From: SoCal
Default

Originally Posted by z31maniac
^Couldn't the Feds then just pass a law requiring utility service to intelligence agencies, overriding the state law, and exposing this for the time wasting grandstanding that it is?

Or threaten highway funding?

Or threaten education funding?

Or any of the other ways in which the Feds coerce states into complying?
The FEDS threaten states with funding all the time. It's one of the reasons why our government is so out of balance, as the affected parties either are afraid to fight back, or they're being run by people who believe in central planning.
Old Jan 8, 2014 | 08:05 AM
  #4902  
z31maniac's Avatar
Elite Member
 
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 3,693
Total Cats: 222
From: OKC, OK
Default

Originally Posted by cordycord
The FEDS threaten states with funding all the time. It's one of the reasons why our government is so out of balance, as the affected parties either are afraid to fight back, or they're being run by people who believe in central planning.
I'm well aware, hence my post.

But until state politicians quit bending to the will of the Feds, it will continue to happen. Then at the next election the opposing candidate will say, "Think of all those jobs he let leave because he wanted a make a point, the children, baby jeebus, etc"

Until the avg American can learn to see through the bullshit, it will not change.

And I'm not confident the drooling, Dancing with the Stars watching masses will ever get involved with what the gov't is doing.
Old Jan 8, 2014 | 08:30 AM
  #4903  
Braineack's Avatar
Thread Starter
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Default

they dont care so long as the gub extends unemployment benefits so they can continue to pay their car note so they can make it to interviews and pay their cell phone bill so they can get calls back from potential employers and have "affordable" healthcare subsidized by the healthy.
Old Jan 8, 2014 | 08:37 AM
  #4904  
z31maniac's Avatar
Elite Member
 
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 3,693
Total Cats: 222
From: OKC, OK
Default

Originally Posted by Braineack
they dont care so long as the gub extends unemployment benefits so they can continue to pay their car note so they can make it to interviews and pay their cell phone bill so they can get calls back from potential employers and have "affordable" healthcare subsidized by the healthy.
There are plenty of people who aren't on unemployment who have no clue, or don't give two ***** about what the gov't is doing. I'd bet of the 30ish people here in the Engineering dept, there are less than 5 who have any real idea what is going on, and the "poorest" person up probably makes $17-18/hr + benefits.


Also, healthcare has always been subsidized by the healthy. Take a look at the Lipitor gobbling fatasses in your office.

They are paying the same premium as you.
Old Jan 8, 2014 | 08:50 AM
  #4905  
Braineack's Avatar
Thread Starter
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Default

I was making a jab at the president's speech the other day.



in such, he tells a story about how this girl wants to find a job, but without unemployment she can't pay for her car and cell phone to be able to get a job to pay for her car and cell phone.

he also says unemployment benefits is a jobs creator and improves the economy, because people have more money to spend and that boosts the local economy and sparks buisnesses to hire more. and plenty of other classic remarks.


btw, the 7 Rs that voted for this bill are just doing it to secure their job...not because they actually believe it's beneficial in any way (beyond themselves).
Old Jan 8, 2014 | 09:09 AM
  #4906  
z31maniac's Avatar
Elite Member
 
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 3,693
Total Cats: 222
From: OKC, OK
Default

^Yes, that is all ridiculous.

I'm just tired of the constant "poor bashing." It's getting old and is counterproductive. Especially when a majority of welfare recipients are old people and children.
Old Jan 8, 2014 | 09:09 AM
  #4907  
z31maniac's Avatar
Elite Member
 
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 3,693
Total Cats: 222
From: OKC, OK
Default

Yay double post.
Old Jan 9, 2014 | 07:35 AM
  #4908  
Braineack's Avatar
Thread Starter
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Default

Insane Clown Posse Sue FBI and Department of Justice Over Juggalos' Gang Classification | Music News | Rolling Stone

Horrorcore-rap duo Insane Clown Posse, along with four fans, are suing the Department of Justice and the FBI, demanding that the agencies purge the fan name "Juggalos" from their list of gang members. "Organized crime is by no means part of the Juggalo culture," reads the complaint, filed this morning in federal court in Detroit.

The suit stems from the FBI's National Gang Intelligence Center classification of Juggalos as "a loosely-organized hybrid gang," one with multiple affiliations. Lawyers for ICP and the ACLU claim that the profiling of Juggalos — based on their distinctive clown makeup and Hatchetman tattoos — lacks reasonable suspicion of gang affiliation. As a result, the "unconstitutionally vague" designation has since intimidated many from expressing themselves and denied them protection from unreasonable searches, according to the filing.
Old Jan 9, 2014 | 11:10 PM
  #4909  
triple88a's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,522
Total Cats: 1,830
From: Chicago, IL
Default

I really hope this is true lol.

Jennifer McCarthy Pulls Gun From Vagina After Dispute Over Space Aliens: Cops
Old Jan 9, 2014 | 11:38 PM
  #4910  
Joe Perez's Avatar
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 34,402
Total Cats: 7,523
From: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Default

Originally Posted by cordycord
Will California splinter into 6 states?
No, it will not.

And if you'd care to place a wager on that, I'll bet you $10,000 that California will not be subdivided into six states as the result of a ballot measure voted on in Nov 2014, as indicated by that article.
Old Jan 10, 2014 | 09:08 AM
  #4911  
Braineack's Avatar
Thread Starter
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Default

Originally Posted by cordycord
The really funny thing is that Mr. Maddow might just be the most sane person as MSNBC. I think they have four viewers at this point. Four DUMB viewers. This is the latest lie they've tried to pass:

Rachel Maddow Is Crazy, Too | Power Line
more on this:

MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow hunkers down on Koch Bros. claim
Old Jan 10, 2014 | 09:10 AM
  #4912  
Braineack's Avatar
Thread Starter
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Default

Court rules YELP must ID negative reviewers; no constitutional protection - Washington Times

In a decision that could reshape the rules for online consumer reviews, a Virginia court has ruled that the popular website Yelp must turn over the names of seven reviewers who anonymously criticized a prominent local carpet cleaning business.

The case revolves around negative feedback against Virginia-based Hadeed Carpet Cleaning. The owner, Joe Hadeed, said the users leaving bad reviews were not real customers of the cleaning service — something that would violate Yelp’s terms of service. His attorneys issued a subpoena demanding the names of seven anonymous reviewers, and a judge in Alexandria ruled that Yelp had to comply.

...

In a 25-page majority opinion, Judge William G. Petty said, “Generally, a Yelp review is entitled to First Amendment protection because it is a person’s opinion about a business that they patronized.

“The anonymous speaker has the right to express himself on the Internet without the fear that his veil of anonymity will be pierced for no other reason than because another person disagrees with him,” Judge Petty wrote.

However, the court said that First Amendment rights do not cover deliberately false statements and agreed that Mr. Hadeed provided sufficient reason to think the users might not have been customers.

If “the reviewer was never a customer of the business, then the review is not an opinion; instead, the review is based on a false statement” and not subject to First Amendment protection, the opinion stated.
Old Jan 10, 2014 | 09:28 AM
  #4913  
Ryan_G's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,568
Total Cats: 217
From: Tampa, Florida
Default

Seems like a solid line of reasoning to me.
Old Jan 10, 2014 | 09:42 AM
  #4914  
Braineack's Avatar
Thread Starter
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Default

where's the not opinion clause in the 1st amendment?
Old Jan 10, 2014 | 09:54 AM
  #4915  
z31maniac's Avatar
Elite Member
 
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 3,693
Total Cats: 222
From: OKC, OK
Default

Originally Posted by Braineack
where's the not opinion clause in the 1st amendment?
Yelling "Fire!" in a theater?

/sarcasm
Old Jan 10, 2014 | 09:56 AM
  #4916  
olderguy's Avatar
AFM Crusader
iTrader: (19)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,716
Total Cats: 364
From: Wayne, NJ
Default

Originally Posted by Braineack
where's the not opinion clause in the 1st amendment?
It's right in there like scary black guns in the 2d Amendment.
Old Jan 10, 2014 | 09:58 AM
  #4917  
Braineack's Avatar
Thread Starter
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Default

Originally Posted by z31maniac
Yelling "Fire!" in a theater?

/sarcasm
that's your opinion. Almost ever word out of my mouth is a deliberate false statement; I'd expect that to be protected just as much as the truth.



and just because i like this video:

Old Jan 10, 2014 | 10:21 AM
  #4918  
Ryan_G's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,568
Total Cats: 217
From: Tampa, Florida
Default

Originally Posted by Braineack
where's the not opinion clause in the 1st amendment?
He was able to present the court with enough evidence to convince them that the reviewer was likely not a real customer. It would then follow that these statements are knowingly false and damaging. There is a charge for just this action. It is called libel and is in place because you are not allowed to use the protection of your own rights to violate someone else's rights.
Old Jan 10, 2014 | 10:37 AM
  #4919  
olderguy's Avatar
AFM Crusader
iTrader: (19)
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,716
Total Cats: 364
From: Wayne, NJ
Default

Originally Posted by Braineack
that's your opinion. Almost ever word out of my mouth is a deliberate false statement; I'd expect that to be protected just as much as the truth.



and just because i like this video:

Really admire the Judge, but it is sad that he has been showing his age so quickly. Maybe he is sick.
Old Jan 10, 2014 | 10:51 AM
  #4920  
Braineack's Avatar
Thread Starter
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Default

Originally Posted by Ryan_G
He was able to present the court with enough evidence to convince them that the reviewer was likely not a real customer. It would then follow that these statements are knowingly false and damaging. There is a charge for just this action. It is called libel and is in place because you are not allowed to use the protection of your own rights to violate someone else's rights.
okay, then the judge should have ordered that the statements be removed, not that yelp has to give up the identify of people that used their site to publish libel (which already took place). That's a huge bag o worms.

This dude told the judge: I dont like these reviews on yelp, im not going to prove they aren't untrue, but i don't think they are real, here look I have a list of real names of customers, and these anonymous ones who don't want to be identified don't match my records.

judge says, okay, yelp! you gotta name them peeps now.

it's dangerous.

so let's say they get named, and they are found to be a combo of both real and fake? now what? now the business owner will sue these people? how does that help the defamation suit against yelp? they didn't write the reviews...and again, all reviews that are questioned into being fake/libel are hidden by yelp policy, all these reviews in question in this suit are no longer available to see online already.

Last edited by Braineack; Jan 10, 2014 at 11:05 AM.



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:27 PM.