I alternately love and hate their recommendation system. Because of it, my queue has swelled to gigantic proportions and has now hit the queue limit. I have yet to regret cutting the cable cord, however.
That 'rampant, illegal material' is a part of the market. You don't get to declare that it no longer counts, economically, because you paid some Congressmen to make it illegal for you.
I'm 'completely wrong'? Are you missing a definition again? Because you've agreed with me on some parts, so even you can't honestly state that I'm 'completely wrong'.
I'm wrong that neither the gropes nor the scanners can see into a cavity? I'm completely wrong that behavior profiling is effective? I'm completely wrong that Israel-style security works? (Israelis would be surprised to hear that.) I'm completely wrong that people don't mind the magnetometers? I'm completely wrong that the magnetometers can't see you naked or grope you?
I could go on. Except that I'm completely right, and you're an idiot.
Why should I have to retype it, in different words, when the article I posted very perfectly explains what I think? There shouldn't be a problem with a Google search if the Google search is right, you idiot.
So, not only do you not know what the word 'hyperbole' means, but you're stumbling over the word 'illegal'. Huh. I know you have a real problem with looking things up yourself, but does that really extend to a prohibition against a dictionary?
The Supreme Court ruled that random searches need to be both minimally invasive and effective. The magnetometer meets those standards. I'm going to leave the definitions of those terms as an exercise for the student, since you obviously need some practice in using the Internet.
I find it funny seeing people (not all, but a distinct number) that try to twist and mold the First amendment to their own liking and are just as determined to eliminate the second amendment, but somehow find it convenient to pretend to appreciate the Constitution when its protections (in the fifth amendment) finally affect themselves.
No one is attempting to eliminate the Second Amendment. Contrary to popular belief, your Second Amendment rights are getting stronger, not weaker. See D.C. vs. Heller and McDonald vs. Chicago.
Gee, freedom of speech. It only matters with only the speech they want to hear. Ban all others (like eliminating FoxNews, or Rush Limbaugh, or Glenn Beck), no they can't hear opposing views, it interferes with their "tolerance" mantra.
No one is attempting to eliminate what Fox calls news, or Rush Limbaugh, or Glen Beck. In fact, it's that trifecta that regularly calls for the literal elimination of people like Julian Assuage, and the public elimination of all of the other folks who simply choose to disagree with them. Sure, plenty of people have called for boycotts against their advertisers, but all sides are guilty of that, and it's not quite the same thing as a death threat, anyway.
Gee, freedom of religion. No, they say religion must be banned. They don't believe in it, so nobody else can. Let's make up a Constitutional term like "Separation of Church and State" and teach it as if it really is in the Constitution instead of the truth that government can't establish its own religion.
Actually, the government can't make any laws respecting a religion, and that is in the Constitution. The phrase 'separation of Church and State' is one of those pesky phrases used in the writings of the Founding Fathers that you nutters always want to quote (Except when they disagree with you, of course.) and then used repeatedly by several Supreme Court judges in various cases, making it the word of law and a precedent.
Don't believe me? Look it up. Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists' Association rings just as true today.
They twist it more by establishing a government religion of Gaia (Earth) worship and demonize everyone that questions their motives or refuses to believe it (environmentalism, climate change, etc.).
Please reference any laws respecting the religion of this 'Gaia'.
They only want freedom of assembly for themselves. Yes, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Jon Stewart, etc. are the only legitimate public voices. All others are kooks or hate-mongers and must be stifled.
I don't know about you, but I saw Glenn Beck's crowd assembling several weeks before Jon Stewart's crowd. In terms of size and signs, though, Jon Stewart's corwd won. Too bad for you. Anyway, the point is that assembly is alive and well for every kind of crazy in the union.
They decry "profiling" and sue to their hearts content about the audacity of a law enforcement agency to use racial profiling to solve crimes. You know, common sense is a violation of "civil rights".
As for racial profiling, even your favorite president, George W., stated that racial profiling was both ineffetive and wrong. Now, behaviour profiling, that's works and wouldn't violate anyone's rights.
Now, when the very system they have twisted to conform to their ideals starts to feast upon not only those they redesigned it to feast on, but now turns on its creator and becomes the very beast the original Constitution was designed to protect against, they cry foul and invoke the very document they despise.
Lulwhut? Can you translate that from Batshit to English, please, for those of us with sanity?
I call that karma (or you reap what you sow) and now perhaps these idiots will understand why liberty is so much more important than political correctness or so-called "social justice". The only way you protect liberty and bring about real justice is to favor nobody, yet use common sense, your eyes, and most importantly your brain. Stop expecting the government to solve the world's problems. Government's cause problems, they never solve them, no matter the good intentions.
So you agree that racial profiling is bad, then? Because using your common sense, eyes, and brains would tell you that anyone can be a terrorist and wasting time with all of the brown folks isn't going to help anyone.
The TSA should be dissolved. Leave security up to each individual airline, and make appropriate legal penalties for not making reasonable attempts to protect their consumers. Take examples from El Al Airlines.
Actually, each airline is allowed to use whatever security organization they like. No one if forcing them to use the TSA, although they do have to follow TSA policies.
A society willing to giving up liberty for safety, ends up having neither, and deserving neither. I believe Benjamin Franklin said something similar.
Yes, that's who he was quoting, you crazy, crazy, nutjob.
I did. I provided an article that clearly referenced the issues with American-style security theater, and the Israeli alternative. Not my fault you can't read or, apparently, think.
On the post: PC Mag Responds To Legacy Recording Industry's 'Complaint' Letter
Re: Re:
On the post: PC Mag Responds To Legacy Recording Industry's 'Complaint' Letter
Re:
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stop whining!
On the post: PC Mag Responds To Legacy Recording Industry's 'Complaint' Letter
It's time for these music execs to pull their collective heads out of... the sand.
You know what they wanted to say, right? :P
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Oh, so NOW you like the Constitution...
That's what I said, idiot. Now you're just parroting me, which is funny considering that you think I'm 'completely wrong'.
I guess that's better than 'directly' wrong. :)
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stop whining!
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Oh, so NOW you like the Constitution...
Yes, that's what I've stated repeatedly, you idiot.
If it were based on what people look like, it would be racial profiling, which is what you were against several posts back.
Yes, I've always been against it because it's wrong and doesn't work, as I explained above.
Did you ever read my posts?
Can you read at all?
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stop whining!
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stop whining!
The pornoscanners and molestation doesn't detect bomb residue or vapor concentrations, either.
Take a moment to not be as idiotic as possible.
On the post: Just Because 'National Opt-Out Day' Didn't Do Much, Does It Mean People Don't Care About TSA Searches?
Re: Re: Let this non-story die
So... You're okay with spending billions of dollars for machines that don't work, instead of spending it on techniques that do work? Really?
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re: Re: Oh, so NOW you like the Constitution...
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stop whining!
I'm wrong that neither the gropes nor the scanners can see into a cavity? I'm completely wrong that behavior profiling is effective? I'm completely wrong that Israel-style security works? (Israelis would be surprised to hear that.) I'm completely wrong that people don't mind the magnetometers? I'm completely wrong that the magnetometers can't see you naked or grope you?
I could go on. Except that I'm completely right, and you're an idiot.
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re: Oh, so NOW you like the Constitution...
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re: Re: Stop whining!
You're an idiot.
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stop whining!
The Supreme Court ruled that random searches need to be both minimally invasive and effective. The magnetometer meets those standards. I'm going to leave the definitions of those terms as an exercise for the student, since you obviously need some practice in using the Internet.
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re: Re: Oh, so NOW you like the Constitution...
And how would that work anyway? The people who want to blow up Israelis look like Israelis. :)
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re: Oh, so NOW you like the Constitution...
No one is attempting to eliminate the Second Amendment. Contrary to popular belief, your Second Amendment rights are getting stronger, not weaker. See D.C. vs. Heller and McDonald vs. Chicago.
Gee, freedom of speech. It only matters with only the speech they want to hear. Ban all others (like eliminating FoxNews, or Rush Limbaugh, or Glenn Beck), no they can't hear opposing views, it interferes with their "tolerance" mantra.
No one is attempting to eliminate what Fox calls news, or Rush Limbaugh, or Glen Beck. In fact, it's that trifecta that regularly calls for the literal elimination of people like Julian Assuage, and the public elimination of all of the other folks who simply choose to disagree with them. Sure, plenty of people have called for boycotts against their advertisers, but all sides are guilty of that, and it's not quite the same thing as a death threat, anyway.
Gee, freedom of religion. No, they say religion must be banned. They don't believe in it, so nobody else can. Let's make up a Constitutional term like "Separation of Church and State" and teach it as if it really is in the Constitution instead of the truth that government can't establish its own religion.
Actually, the government can't make any laws respecting a religion, and that is in the Constitution. The phrase 'separation of Church and State' is one of those pesky phrases used in the writings of the Founding Fathers that you nutters always want to quote (Except when they disagree with you, of course.) and then used repeatedly by several Supreme Court judges in various cases, making it the word of law and a precedent.
Don't believe me? Look it up. Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists' Association rings just as true today.
They twist it more by establishing a government religion of Gaia (Earth) worship and demonize everyone that questions their motives or refuses to believe it (environmentalism, climate change, etc.).
Please reference any laws respecting the religion of this 'Gaia'.
They only want freedom of assembly for themselves. Yes, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Jon Stewart, etc. are the only legitimate public voices. All others are kooks or hate-mongers and must be stifled.
I don't know about you, but I saw Glenn Beck's crowd assembling several weeks before Jon Stewart's crowd. In terms of size and signs, though, Jon Stewart's corwd won. Too bad for you. Anyway, the point is that assembly is alive and well for every kind of crazy in the union.
They decry "profiling" and sue to their hearts content about the audacity of a law enforcement agency to use racial profiling to solve crimes. You know, common sense is a violation of "civil rights".
As for racial profiling, even your favorite president, George W., stated that racial profiling was both ineffetive and wrong. Now, behaviour profiling, that's works and wouldn't violate anyone's rights.
Now, when the very system they have twisted to conform to their ideals starts to feast upon not only those they redesigned it to feast on, but now turns on its creator and becomes the very beast the original Constitution was designed to protect against, they cry foul and invoke the very document they despise.
Lulwhut? Can you translate that from Batshit to English, please, for those of us with sanity?
I call that karma (or you reap what you sow) and now perhaps these idiots will understand why liberty is so much more important than political correctness or so-called "social justice". The only way you protect liberty and bring about real justice is to favor nobody, yet use common sense, your eyes, and most importantly your brain. Stop expecting the government to solve the world's problems. Government's cause problems, they never solve them, no matter the good intentions.
So you agree that racial profiling is bad, then? Because using your common sense, eyes, and brains would tell you that anyone can be a terrorist and wasting time with all of the brown folks isn't going to help anyone.
The TSA should be dissolved. Leave security up to each individual airline, and make appropriate legal penalties for not making reasonable attempts to protect their consumers. Take examples from El Al Airlines.
Actually, each airline is allowed to use whatever security organization they like. No one if forcing them to use the TSA, although they do have to follow TSA policies.
A society willing to giving up liberty for safety, ends up having neither, and deserving neither. I believe Benjamin Franklin said something similar.
Yes, that's who he was quoting, you crazy, crazy, nutjob.
On the post: Why The TSA's Searches Are Unconstitutional
Re:
Or admit when you're flat-out wrong.
Next >>