True, it wouldn't' be easy to get the drone in just the right place to get sucked up. But one successful attempt, and like you say, the media would be all over that.

I'm in full agreement, but I'm sure it's not just conservatives blocking that move. Comcast donates heavily to the left.

Comcast is deep in bed with the Democrats, not the Republicans. GE is the same. Educate yourself a little before spewing your kneejerk rhetoric. They donate heavily to the left, not the right. Just google, "comcast democrats".

Only if they're in controlled airspace, where they *clearly don't belong* and can be a real danger, or at least, a major inconvenience to hundreds of people.
I just had a 1500 mile flight last week on a 757, one engine's starter valve was defective, we all had to board a different jet, it caused a 2 hour delay. The people picking us up at the destination also had to reschedule. Multiply that by 200 to 300 passengers, and that's a best case scenario.
Put the tinfoil back, it's better used to keep celery fresh.

What if, say, an ISIS sympathizer strapped some explosives (C4, etc) and nails onto the drone, and successfully got it sucked up into the engine?
Granted most of these drones are the result of idiots - the same kind who shine 5mw or higher lasers at planes for kicks.. but drones could potentially be used as an effective terror weapon.

This has nothing to do with the free market, or competition between business enterprises.

Technically, no, they're not.. not yet. They only have the House, currently. The election is over but the changeover is still 6 weeks away.

I'd like to live in your universe.

You put you finger on what concerns me- that a smaller number can control the larger population. In that sense, even the moderate muslims could be considered "sleepers"; because if their community goes radical, they either aren't likely to buck the trend, or have much of an option. Many, due to their intense religious upbringing, might be shamed, bullied, or guilted into believing they aren't truly faithful muslims unless they follow the words of their cleric or imam, and judging by the numbers of psychos out there, ostensibly it's not all that difficult to (re)interpret many parts of the Qu'ran as a call to Jihad. When a small immigrated muslim community grows in population (and thus representation and power), they often start stirring the pot and calling for Sharia law, from London to Dearborn, Michigan. Here are just a few examples.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.co...
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-...
and this is really worth a watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

That is disturbing.

Glad to see someone else pointing this out, instead of listening to the apologist historical revisionists who cherry pick their history, and act as though nothing lead up to the Crusades except for "christian greed" (okay, that might have been *a* factor, but far from the only or main one); or that somehow 90% of middle east region had willingly, peacefully, converted to Islam, when the area was already the original home of Judaism and Christianity, as well as older pagan religions. Anyone who even read a sliver of the Qu'ran or Hadith would see that is simply not the case, else Mohammad would not have had to have his warriors and engage in battles. Anyone who read up on the Moorish invasions, Charles the Hammer, or the history of the Assassins or Mamluks would also realize this. How the hell did this ever get labeled the "religion of peace" ? No monotheistic religion can make that claim, least of all Islam.

Nobody with a brain cell takes that moonbat rag seriously. Your moniker is not inaccurate.
Comparing a dozen or two christian abortion-clinic bombers (who are scumbags, yes) to hundreds of thousands of deranged muslims (ISIS, Boko Haram, Al Qaida, Al Nusra, Taliban, etc.) who are raping and beheading thousands and thousands of perfectly innocent people, even their own kind, is a douche move at best with a clearly biased agenda.

Anyone who thinks that an instant of time, as represented by mere numbers, is actually a meaningful, complete metric is a simpleton who should work as a pointy haired boss. The current administration, much like Clinton's as well as others, has set in motion through action (executive orders) or negligence (ISIS, Benghazi), scenarios which will indeed be costly, in terms of lives, and the economy.
Just because your man is good at kicking the can down the road, or avoiding issues he shouldn't because it looks good in the short term, doesn't make him a good leader.
FWIW, I don't dislike Bill Clinton all that much, but in all honesty, he wasn't singlehandedly responsible for the boom of the '90s, if any "Bill" was responsible for that, it was Bill Gates and Bill Joy (of Sun); it was the IT boom that fueled the economy, up until the point that the bubble inevitably burst.. which also happened before Clinton even left office.

Yeah, but that doesn't stir the pot half as much, which is good for business. Better to whip all the demagogues (on either side of the argument) into a frenzy and enjoy the fireworks...apparently.

I'm glad we're not discussing noun declensions and inflection, I'd be totally out of my depth. I gave up on teaching myself latin at that point.

lol .. yes.. OMG, I forgot about the Ferengi. I knew that sounded familiar..