Why do we have 435 people in the legislature?

To distribute the blame so they can all point to each other.

Not as weird as celebrating Christmas in summer, to a northern type.

It's hard to tell if you're being serious, or trying (vainly) to be sarcastic. Forgive me for that.

At any rate, one of the two segments is Russian; the other US and shared with Europe, Japan, and Canada. So it is basically as much a Russian asset as US. It is in the Russian interest to see to it that the thing doesn't come to grief prematurely. As a human of Earth, I'm not against being thankful and grateful to Russia for coming through in a pinch, and rescuing everyone's ass, but basically they are serving their own interest as much as ours.

They aren't "improving skills". They are assisting the subject mechanically so he doesn't NEED as much skill.

I've got to hand it to you, an absolutely fascinating argument.

You are the one who sounds like an intolerant axe grinder and name caller. Cold fjord furnished substance with references. You didn't.

An interesting way to look at it. I think you will find that it takes big government to control those assets.

You don't know me. Don't be a fucking half-wit moron or a liar. I didn't blame socialism for anything. I specifically avoided singling it out. So take your disgusting bile and go jump in a lake.

There is an itsy bitsy problem with making that claim; namely, the Constitution is the foundation of the law of the land, and it cannot be altered or overridden short of a well defined process of amendment. So the TPP can say what it fucking wants, but the Constitution trumps it. Yes, I am fully aware that the clowns in the Supreme Court have abandoned the Constitution, but they have no enforcement arm. When they go rogue, unless the Executive Branch goes rogue with them, they can blow in the wind. Now, the Supremes are insulated from accountability, but the executive is not. The White House is due for a change in 18 months. If there are enough patriots among the people, there will be a correction. If not, well, the people do not deserve to have their Republic continue.

Paragraph two of the United States Constitution states, in part, that: "We hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal, that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; among them life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness..."

Maybe you're having an off day, so I'll be gentle. That quote is not from the Constitution. It's from the Declaration of Independence. There's a bit of difference. The Constitution is the foundation of the law of the land. The Declaration of Independence is nothing more than a statement ("declaration"). It has no force of law.

As such, the Constitution is a lot more specific. For example, the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." It doesn't go into a lot of carrying on about where those rights come from. It just guarantees them.

You can't stop people from communicating with each other sub rosa. You can make it awful tough for them if they use a cipher (SSL). A cipher is pretty obvious, and you can use force to compel them to give up the key if they don't destroy it first. And you can immediately see if the key works. So they don't use a cipher. They use a code. "The oranges are falling from the tree in Grant Park". That could mean "attack against Fort Sumter the third week of August". Or it could mean "The pigs discovered cell number 377". Or it could equally well mean "I left three joints of marijuana for you at the agreed place". Want to know what it means? The target can tell you it's not written down anywhere, and he's not telling you. Hell, street slang is a code that is not written down.

Or they can just go into the woods and whisper to each other. They can send runners. Carrier pigeons.

I'll try to make it easy for you. Socialism demands big government, and big government always progresses naturally to bigger and finally to biggest. Simple as that.

No, obviously socialism is not the ONLY source of (or route to) big brotherism. But it is one important source/route. The question is, no matter what ism you choose, can you keep it focused, controlled, and harnessed. For example, the US Constitution was a strong attempt at doing so, but nine criminal, off the rails and off the wall swelled heads in black robes are effortlessly and without the slightest counteraction defeating it.

In the end, whether you have a formal Constitution (US) or not (Britain), if the general population is not sufficiently committed to keep the government under control, it will always evolve into a tyranny.

Finally comes the time nothing short of a revolution will fix it, and you have to hope enough patriots are left to step up.

Who in hell cares, if they are taking them off my hands at no cost to me?

that Bing maps is a failure, how will Microsoft compete against Google in the search business without maps? Will they integrate Google Maps results to Bing?

Another question which is at least as glaring: what would be the reason to keep running Bing at all WITH NO MORE ADVERTISING REVENUE?

Then explain why there's a court involved, and why the government will enforce collection of the civil suit damages?

Because the alternative would be some kind of wild west scenario where the party who can summon the most naked force to his cause wins. That might be the wet dream of anarchists, but most civilized societies have a consensus that this is a better way.