So you suggest that we leave the current system which allows the great red dragons to swim in power and money, because otherwise... we'd be conquered by the Mongols?
I guess you could be right, but frankly that is only an admission that our current republic is irreparably broken.
"It would increase the amount of power in the hands of the unelected bureaucrats that don't have terms at all."
I don't see how that follows. There would be no overall reduction in the amount of power that Congress wields, just a shorter duration for any particular person to wield it. Less time worrying about re-election campaigns. Less time redrawing district maps. In general, less time to get up to the shenanigans that has essentially broken our method of government.
I have to disagree: first, there wouldn't be any more congress critters, the way you and I mean it. No more professional politicians. Just people that come in, do a job for a short while, and then go back to their own job. I also think it would reduce the effect of lobbying, in that the good ol' boys network would not have enough time to grow strong.
I have a simpler idea: congressional term limits. Three terms, lifetime total, per person. That is, John Doe can only ever have up to three combined (not necessarily back to back) terms in the Senate and House of Representatives. This one simple change would eliminate vast swaths of corruption and hypocrisy. And please, no one spout that crap about not having enough time to "learn the job", you see what happens when they have enough time to learn the job... they never leave! This is not what our founding fathers intended. In fact, serving in Congress was supposed to be an obligation similar to jury duty, not seen as a benefit or plus in any way.
The new bill also says that you can be charged with racketeering related to CFAA violations, so long as the government can tie you to other people and claim that it's an "organized crime group."
We don't put carjackers on a list. We don't even put murderers on a list. So why do it just for sex crimes? And why do it with zero discretion for the judge in cases where it's clearly ridiculous?
Agreed, "sex-offender status" is the new scarlet letter. It's complete bullshit.
I'm going to join your partial derailment here. I too support jury nullification. However, there are a couple of major problems with the concept.
First, judges hate it. They won't discuss it, they won't allow it to be discussed, and in fact most judges' instructions could be read to deny the very existence of jury nullification.
Second, it takes a pattern of nullification for a particular law to be seen as needing change. How many cases have you heard of lately that were resolved on the basis of jury nullification? None? Yeah, me too.
I guess what I'm suggesting is that jury nullification is one of the best kept secrets of judiciary, and is likely to remain that way.
Can't the IRS "freeze" accounts? Surely that would be a better first step, before seizing an account.
Also:
deposit greater than 10000 -> trigger a report -> then what? deposit less than 10000 -> trigger a report that you are trying to avoid the "greater than 10000" report -> your money is seized
Mike, the proof is right there in front of your eyes. How can you say that the NSA's surveillance is not working? Have we had another 9/11 since 9/11? No. Was there a terrorist attack in the US yesterday or the day before? No. Clearly the surveillance is working.
Also, I have not been attacked by a tiger, not even ONCE, since I started carrying around this anti-tiger rock.
This is not rocket surgery folks, just look at the proof!
Mike, you should know as well as anyone the power of weasel words, and "may" is one of the worst. By definition, Hoyer doesn't have to "believe" that every American may be in contact with a turrist. He could state as fact that every American may be in contact with a turrist, and it is a true statement. Of course, another fact is that they may not be as well. Who knows? Who cares? Better safe than sorry, right?
For those linguists out there, I do not support the use of the word "may" in statements of fact, just pointing out that this is a common political loophole.
... Fox's COO, Chase Carey, claims that if they lose the Aereo case, they might shut down Fox, the network TV channel, and move all its content to cable TV channels.
On the post: Flimsy Last Ditch Effort To Derail Real Net Neutrality Protections Launches In Congress
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I guess you could be right, but frankly that is only an admission that our current republic is irreparably broken.
On the post: Flimsy Last Ditch Effort To Derail Real Net Neutrality Protections Launches In Congress
Re: Re: Re:
I don't see how that follows. There would be no overall reduction in the amount of power that Congress wields, just a shorter duration for any particular person to wield it. Less time worrying about re-election campaigns. Less time redrawing district maps. In general, less time to get up to the shenanigans that has essentially broken our method of government.
On the post: Flimsy Last Ditch Effort To Derail Real Net Neutrality Protections Launches In Congress
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Flimsy Last Ditch Effort To Derail Real Net Neutrality Protections Launches In Congress
Re:
On the post: Unlisted Publishing And The Burner Account: Responses To Online Surveillance?
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: President Obama's Plan For 'Securing Cyberspace' Has A Lot Of Problems
Racketeering...
On the post: High School Kids Staring Down Child Porn Charges In Sexting Scandal
Re:
On the post: Broadcasters And Cable Companies Trying Harder Than Ever To Annoy Paying Customers With Ugly Public Contract Disputes
Re: Re: Re: By the numbers: an analysis
On the post: A Dystopian Future Of Ads That Won't Stop Until You Say 'McDonald's' Could Be Avoided With More Transparency
Please drink a verification can
http://imgur.com/r/4chan/dgGvgKF
I'm sure there are text versions out there, for those that can't get to imgur...
On the post: IRS Also More Than Willing To Steal Money Under The Pretense Of Crime Fighting
Re: Re: Hinders Broke the Law
First, judges hate it. They won't discuss it, they won't allow it to be discussed, and in fact most judges' instructions could be read to deny the very existence of jury nullification.
Second, it takes a pattern of nullification for a particular law to be seen as needing change. How many cases have you heard of lately that were resolved on the basis of jury nullification? None? Yeah, me too.
I guess what I'm suggesting is that jury nullification is one of the best kept secrets of judiciary, and is likely to remain that way.
On the post: IRS Also More Than Willing To Steal Money Under The Pretense Of Crime Fighting
Better alternative
Also:
deposit greater than 10000 -> trigger a report -> then what?
deposit less than 10000 -> trigger a report that you are trying to avoid the "greater than 10000" report -> your money is seized
On the post: Texas Deputy Sues 911 Caller For Not 'Adequately Warning' Him Of Potential Danger Or 'Making The Premises Safe'
Re:
And while I know Tim was going for a mild comedic effect, I agree that the Hot Coffee case was a bad example.
On the post: Cameron's Anti-Porn Program Tells ISPs To Do The Impossible: Only Block Bad Content; Don't Block Good Content
Re: Remember...
On the post: President Obama: NSA Surveillance Was Necessary To Make Sure Boston Bombings Weren't Part Of Bigger Plot
Whatever
Also, I have not been attacked by a tiger, not even ONCE, since I started carrying around this anti-tiger rock.
This is not rocket surgery folks, just look at the proof!
On the post: Democratic Leadership Says NSA Data Collection Is Fine Because You 'May Be In Communication With Terrorists'
Re: Surveillance State Repeal Act
On the post: Democratic Leadership Says NSA Data Collection Is Fine Because You 'May Be In Communication With Terrorists'
Weasel words
For those linguists out there, I do not support the use of the word "may" in statements of fact, just pointing out that this is a common political loophole.
On the post: Eric Holder Claims Terrorists Are Involved In 'IP Theft'
Re: Re: Re: Re:and we all know
On the post: French Intelligence Agency Forces Wikipedia Volunteer to Delete Article; Re-Instated, It Becomes Most-Read Page On French Wikipedia
Re: Hmm
On the post: Hilarious And Ridiculous: Networks Threaten To Pull Channels Off The Air If Aereo & Dish Win Lawsuits
Too bad they didn't stop at "shut down Fox"
And nothing of value was lost.
On the post: DJs' 'Dihydrogen Monoxide' April Fool's Prank Results In Suspension And Possible Felony Charges
Re:
Next >>