Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:One has to wonder (Score 5, Insightful) 253

I'm sorry that you can't be bothered to actually read the sources that you link to. Well, actually the source you link to, as one is just a blog post. The WashPo article actually discredits your conspiracy conjecture, but since you couldn't be bothered to read it you don't know that.

Anyone with the slightest shred of common sense realizes that the IRS was doing their job. In case you have forgotten, the role of the IRS is to collect taxes. If they get an application for tax exempt status from a group that is vehemently opposed to taxation and known for making statement encouraging people to cheat on their taxes, they should put extra scrutiny on that application.

This is no different from the DEA aiming to work harder investigating NORML and other such pro-drug organizations.

In other words, find a different conspiracy for your anger. This one isn't worth shit.

Comment Re:These are senior retired officers (Score 1) 9

Presumably, they're getting some double-hush-hush info from People Who Know. I guess.

So again, it comes down to what you want to believe, having absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with anything that you have facts to support the belief in.

Not that I actually care, mind you:

As cousin Balky says, don't be ridiculous. We all know this is your top conspiracy conjecture. You didn't post it just to get eyeballs and comments over here, you posted it because you believe it will help your quest to bring about a premature end of the current POTUS.

Comment What is their actual gripe? (Score 1) 9

How is this different from any other conservative group that is disappointed to see that all the independent investigations have failed to impeach President Lawnchair? Complaining that an investigation didn't live up to your dreams is not the same as having an actual problem with it that is based on facts instead of feelings.

Comment Re:The reason we didn't get single pay (Score 1) 238

is the insurance industry spent half a billion dollars in 1 year on anti-single payer campaigns.

And that was just on money that went straight from the industry to politicians, in the form of campaign contributions or outright bribes. Imagine how much they would have spent if they didn't already own congress and had to play fair...

They were fighting for their lives, and they won.

And the rest of America lost.

Comment It's a trap! (Score 4, Insightful) 238

Seriously Google, don't mess with the insurance industry. Don't mess with any part of it. They will make you pay. Look at what happened in 2010; we thought we were going to finally get a single-payer option for Americans and instead the federal government handed out the largest corporate handout in the history of government to the health insurance industry.

If Google tries to disrupt the insurance industry we soon will have no Google.

Submission + - Fox News Apologizes for False Claims of Muslim-Only Areas in England and France (nytimes.com) 1

operator_error writes: Fox News issued an unusual on-air apology on Saturday night for having allowed its anchors and guests to repeat the false claim for a week, that there are Muslim-only “no-go zones” in European countries like England and France that are not under the control of the state and are ruled according to Shariah law.

Fox Report host Julie Banderas, said that “over the course of this last week, we have made some regrettable errors on air regarding the Muslim population in Europe, particularly with regard to England and France.”

“Now this applies especially to discussions of so-called no-go zones, areas where non-Muslims allegedly are not allowed in and police supposedly won’t go,” Ms. Banderas continued. “To be clear, there is no formal designation of these zones in either country and no credible information to support the assertion that there are specific areas in these countries that exclude individuals based solely on their religion.”

The claim that such areas existed attracted widespread attention, and a wave of online derision."

Comment Re:That really wasn't much of an olive branch (Score 1) 42

I'm not telling you. The fact that your memory is vastly dwarfed by your ego (both of which are dwarfed by your stupidity) is not my problem. Thanks for admitting that you're a fraud and not the red4man that we used to have, though. Not that anyone doubted that, but now you're on record admitting to it.

You really should take up a new hobby. You might do better playing "dodge moving traffic on foot" on the interstate. Or, at least, you'll fail at it fewer times. It is clear though that you suck tremendously at this hobby you have tried to take up here on slashdot.

Comment Re:Probably too many complaints (Score 0) 11

That, and if I discover they remove/edit comments, is when Slashdot will lose its real value.

I agree that the discussions are (usually) the more valuable part of slashdot. However, since there is no functional way (using slashdot, google, or any other mechanism that I know of) to search comments by text, the archived comments aren't that enormously valuable unless you have some way of keeping track of them yourself. Once a comment is more than ~2 weeks old or so finding it again is a huge PITA. They should be retained, but they should also be searchable.

Slashdot Top Deals

To do nothing is to be nothing.

Working...