Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:We're so screwed. (Score 1) 237

How about we disregard what EVERYONE thinks and go by what the law says. How's that 4th amendment go again?

Thanks, you've just demonstrated my point, pretty much exactly. Can we get some chants for Articles II and III? I'm sure that will be far less popular, but highly relevant.

You can chant "4th Amendment" till you're blue in the face, as is common here, but if the issue at hand isn't covered by the 4th Amendment then the 4th Amendment is irrelevant. Even if the 4th Amendment does apply, its application may not be what you expected.

The 4th Amendment to the US Constitution is simply law, not a magic talisman able to repel all things people here find unpleasant.

Comment Re:We're so screwed. (Score 1) 237

I disagree. They are not tasked with keeping us safe; they are tasked with safeguarding our liberties.

I guess you aren't a big believer in the US Constitution then. There seem to be things like the army, navy, militia, and common defense mentioned. I also see that the President is given the power to grant Pardons. Might some people be in jail for breach of peace, reducing the "safety" of others? You might think so.

Preamble to the United States Constitution

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Clause 1: Command of military; Opinions of cabinet secretaries; Pardons

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

Your oversight is understandable. People here are all about Amendments 1, 2, 4, and 5. They don't really care much about any other part of the Constitution, and that inattention shows.

Comment Re:We're so screwed. (Score 1) 237

It just goes to show how completely terrible human beings are at estimate the risk of extremely rare events.

As you have just demonstrated again. It is only "extremely rare" (for some values of "extremely) in the West, at present, and not necessarily in other parts of the world. This is subject to change.

Comment Re:The Real Question (Score 1) 237

Senator Rand Paul, a Republican presidential candidate who has made opposition to overbroad surveillance central to his platform, tweeted: “The phone records of law abiding citizens are none of the NSA’s business! Pleased with the ruling this morning.”

How fast would his attitude towards surveillance change if were elected president?

Probably either after his first National Intelligence briefing, or after the first massacre.

Comment Re:For those who can read... (Score 1) 237

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The issue here isn't the ability to read, but applying the law, which in this case is the Constitution.

Previous court cases have settled the question regarding the treatment of phone records: they are ordinary business records.

Here is what they are not: your person, your papers, your effects. They aren't kept in your home.

If you don't like the law, work to get it changed. Mod bombing me will have no effect on the law.

Since we're quoting the US Constitution, there is another part of it that applies to these questions that for some reason nobody wants to pay attention to:

Clause 1: Command of military; Opinions of cabinet secretaries; Pardons
 

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

As noted above the previous section from Wikipedia:

In the landmark decision Nixon v. General Services Administration Justice William Rehnquist, afterwards the Chief Justice, declared in his dissent the need to "fully describe the preeminent position that the President of the United States occupies with respect to our Republic. Suffice it to say that the President is made the sole repository of the executive powers of the United States, and the powers entrusted to him as well as the duties imposed upon him are awesome indeed."

Comment Re:Did a paid shill write this summary? (Score 2) 179

Seriously. The real story with this bill is that the republicans are defunding the climate monitoring programs. It will take decades to regain the capabilities we'll lose by defunding them now. There's no turf war between NASA and NOAA, just one between republicans and science.

Decades to regain capabilities you say? You mean like the current US capability for manned space flight? Or are you all jazzed up about the first and only country to put astronauts on the moon and return them safely to earth being reduced to having its astronauts hitchhike a ride into space from other countries like Russia (under embargo for aggression, probing the US with nuclear bombers and subs), China (nuclear threats against US), or maybe India?

If you want to beat the gong about "wars on science" you better include Democrats & Progressives. There is no shortage of unscientific nonsense to be found there.

Nice job trying to write a summary for geeks that attempts to bury the real story.

No, the real story, that the US is going to reinvigorate its moribund manned space capability is clearly mentioned. Or don't you think geeks interested in that?

Comment Re:Damn... (Score 1) 494

That wasn't a statement from a "historian" but from the former head of the Mormon church. Your facts aren't in order yet again. You're trying to hide behind a fig leaf instead of acknowledge that the LDS faith has banned polygamy for a very long time, and you can't admit that you are wrong.

Its kind of amusing that you think wikipedia.org would be more relevant on this issue than mormon.org.

Have you thought about contacting the Mormon church to inform it how wrong it is on its position banning polygamy? Maybe if you quote Wikipedia you'll convince them.

Comment Re:Damn... (Score 1) 494

And polygamy? Is that still practiced as well?

Why would a Mormon practice polygamy? Perhaps you are misinformed on this matter as well?

Do Mormons practice polygamy?

President Gordon B. Hinckley, prior president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints made the following statement in 1998 about the Church’s position on plural marriage:

“This Church has nothing whatever to do with those practicing polygamy. They are not members of this Church.... If any of our members are found to be practicing plural marriage, they are excommunicated, the most serious penalty the Church can impose. Not only are those so involved in direct violation of the civil law, they are in violation of the law of this Church.”

Comment Re:News about a dumb, selfish bitch. Prob a slut t (Score 2, Interesting) 95

Where are you getting this world view of liberals running around rampant calling conservative women sluts inbetween feminist protests?

Where indeed?

Why It's Not Smart to Call Women Conservatives 'Whores'

When Alan Grayson called a female corporate lobbyist a "K-Street whore" -- and was attacked as crude and sexist at the same time that he was lauded as gutsy and honest -- he played a role in a familiar script: hero of the left (MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, Bill Maher) attacks female villain (Hillary Rodham Clinton, Sarah Palin, Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin) using sexist language. Progressive feminists soul-search about liberal misogyny. Mainstream media talk about sexism for 5 seconds. Then the media move on, and no one learns a thing. Repeat.

It happened again just two weeks ago, when Olbermann called Malkin a "big mashed-up bag of meat with lipstick on it" during the "Worst Person in the World" segment of Countdown. The creepily fleshy insult followed Olbermann's rendition of Malkin's e-mails....

So there's obvious problem No. 1 with leftist firebrands dipping into sexist imagery and language to bash conservative women: nothing's more fun than highlighting the hypocrisy of your opponents.

The war on conservative women

If I had a dollar for every time libs have called me a "Manila whore" and "Subic Bay bar girl," Iâ(TM)d be able to pay for a ticket to a Hollywood-for-Obama fundraiser. To the HuffPo left, whore is my middle name.

Self-serving opponents argue that such attacks do not represent "respectable," "mainstream" liberal opinion about their conservative female counterparts. But it was feminist godmother Gloria Steinem who called Texas Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison a "female impersonator." It was NOW leader Patricia Ireland who commanded her flock to only vote for "authentic" female political candidates. It was Al Gore consultant Naomi Wolf who accused the late Jeane Kirkpatrick of being "uninflected by the experiences of the female body."

It was Matt Taibbi, now of Rolling Stone magazine, who mocked my early championing of the tea party movement by jibing: "Now when I read her stuff, I imagine her narrating her text, book-on-tape style, with a big, hairy set of (redacted) in her mouth. It vastly improves her prose."

It was Keith Olbermann, then at MSNBC and now at Al Goreâ(TM)s Current TV, who wrote on Twitter that columnist S.E. Cupp was "a perfect demonstration of the necessity of the work Planned Parenthood does" and who called me a "mashed up bag of meat with lipstick on it." He stands by those remarks. Olbermann has been a special guest at the White House.

Some of us have not forgotten when liberal Wisconsin radio host John "Sly" Sylvester outrageously accused GOP Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch of performing "fellatio on all the talk-show hosts in Milwaukee" and sneered that she had "pulled a train" (a crude phrase for gang sex). (Earlier, he called former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice a "black trophy" and "Aunt Jemima.")

Or when MSNBC misogynist Ed Schultz called talk show host Laura Ingraham a "talk slut" for criticizing Obamaâ(TM)s petty beer summit. Or when Playboy published a list of the top 10 conservative women who deserved to be "hate-f**ked." The article, which was promoted by Anne Schroeder Mullins at Politico.com, included Ingraham, "The View's" Elisabeth Hasselbeck, former Bush spokeswoman Dana Perino, GOP Rep. Michele Bachmann and others. Yours truly topped the list with the following description: a "highly f**kable Filipina" and âoea regular on Fox News, where her tight body and get-off-my-lawn stare just scream, 'Do me!'"

And then thereâ(TM)s the leftâ(TM)s war on Sarah Palin, which would require an entire national forest of trees to publish.

You've got me curious as to how it is that you miss this kind of stuff?

Slashdot Top Deals

"Luke, I'm yer father, eh. Come over to the dark side, you hoser." -- Dave Thomas, "Strange Brew"

Working...