it is sooooo easy to bend that data when your job depends on funding for it.

I'm not aware of any American sanctions or military moves

The NYTimes article I cited talks about the sanctions. The military moves you mentioned yourself — the move of the navy into Black Sea — the invasion stopped short of taking Tbilisi. Or, maybe, it was diplomacy — the Russians stopped, when Condoleeza Rice arrived to Tbilisi. It was not enough to make Russians return the land they captured, but it was enough to make them stop short of taking the capital.

The "not enough" part was bad. But the "awful" was avoided...

It makes me think you're a partisan shill instead of a thinking human.

I am a thinking human, and therefor I "shill" for Republicans. They are bad, but they aren't (quite as) awful.

The Western concept of freedom probably started with the Greeks. Of course, they weren't perfect, they owned slaves (as did the young American Republic) but Western civilization has never been and never will be perfect. The Romans added a great deal to the mix, as did the British, and the United States is really just built on all that came before it.

Incidentally, I've never been to Sweden, but I've spent some time in Finland. I'm actually headed back there for a month this summer and have a trip to Stockholm on the agenda. If you've got any suggestions for things to do.... :)

Our country can't even move forward with the military tribunals of unlawful combatant foreign nationals captured aboard, even though such tribunals are explicitly allowed under both domestic and international law. You think we'd be able to do it against an American citizen, for crimes allegedly committed on American soil? Give me a break. This is the type of conspiracy theory nonsense that makes internet discussions a complete waste of time. Study how the real world works, it's a lot more boring and bureaucratic than you think.

You'll forgive me if I decline to discuss my views of the relevant NSA programs, since /. isn't exactly welcoming to opinions more nuanced than "Snowden Good. NSA Bad."

All I'll say on the subject is that there are mechanisms in place for people who feel their Government is doing wrong. He could have gone to the relevant Congressional committees or the Inspector General at NSA. He could have used the whistleblower act. He ignored all of those options and leaped straight to leaking, then further threw the baby out with the bathwater by leaking details of programs that had no bearing whatsoever on domestic civil liberties, like NSA's activities against China. In effect, he substituted his judgment for the judgment of our elected representatives, an act of extraordinary hubris in the words of Robert Gates.

In spite of everything I may have retained some understanding of his choices had he opted to selectively leak the details of NSA's domestic activities. He didn't do that though, he took as much as he possibly could and leaked it all, with no consideration for the damage it would do to American interests and national security. That may not mean anything to you but such actions have far reaching ramifications and I don't recall seeing Mr. Snowden's name on the ballot when I was selecting the people who would wield that power on my behalf.

You might have a different perspective if you're homosexual. Or Muslim. Or generally anything but Slavic Orthodox.

Here's an interesting statistic that speaks volumes about corruption in Russia: The annual global wealth study published by the financial services group Credit Suisse says a mere 110 Russian citizens now control 35 percent of the total household wealth across the vast country.

I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law. - MLK Jr, emphasis mine

I can't arose much sympathy for someone who professes to love his country but seeks refuge from a regime that stands opposed to virtually everything his country stands for. There are people who are willing to die for this country, without fame or recognition, but Mr. Snowden both outs himself and refuses to face a jury of his fellow citizens?

It's not Finnish. ;)

X might be old but its not particularly arcane and neither is OpenGL.

Its just an eye candy window manager core for X Windows and is totally unnecessary and wastes cycles.

This will not dissuade Ms. Clinton's adorers, who'll dismiss it all as yet another manifestation of the infamous vast right-wing conspiracy. They love her for being a Collectivist (as in "It takes a village"), a Democrat, and the first female President.

Nor will it affect her opponents ("haters") much, because to them this only confirms, what they knew or suspected for years.

Nothing new here, move along...

Ya, because fear of a neocon president sure scared him away from invading Georgia.

Once again, this is a case of "bad vs. awful". Our reaction (both military moves and economic sanctions) to Georgia back then was not enough to push Russians out completely, but it kept Russia from entering Tbilisi and vanquishing the little country for good — as they were poised to do.

But when, instead of ratcheting the sanctions up, the current nincompoop sent the ignominious "Reset" button to Moscow and dropped — only two years later — what few sanctions there were in the hope, Russia will help pressure Iran, Putin was encouraged... For Russia can certainly weather two years of sanctions — a small price to pay for the jewel of Crimea.

If Google weren't afraid of "monopoly" accusations — and the resulting regulatory scrutiny — and started treating Yahoo! as a real competitor, Ms. Mayer's company would've gone the way of Radio Shack and Woolworth years ago.

I suppose, it is good for the rest of us while it lasts, but the moment Yahoo! actually does start performing (if that ever happens), Google may decide to take the gloves of...

Oct 1929 through 1940, when the war effort began really rolling. So FDR had nothing to do with it.

But was the high level of stratification due to "trickle down" at all? Or, maybe, the policy does not really have anything to do with the wealth-consolidation you decry?

What makes you think, the wealth-concentration you dislike so much in the second half of 20th century was due to "trickle down economics"?

It actually didn't really start until the 80s, and if you'll recall, that era was prefaced by several recessions and double digit inflation in the 70s, a similar stoppage of wealth growth as in the 30s.

So, things were bad before the "trickle down" started? Is that what you are saying?

Just perhaps that was the stated economic policy of the Reps as they rolled back taxes on the wealthy?

If it really was "the stated policy", where is your link to the statement?

the top 1% is gathering it back quickly, impoverishing everyone else.

Higher taxes on the rich mean their wealth growth rate is slowed, as the flow in is slowed.

Not necessarily — it depends on how those "higher taxes" are spent. If, for example, they are given back to them (think Solyndra or Tesla motors), it may be the exact opposite.

In 2009 the top 50% of income-tax payers paid 97.75% of the total tax. Do you suppose, the bottom 50% could pay much less than 2.25% — and would it help them, even if it could be arranged?

So, as suspected, you don't have any substantiation to your claim, that the "top 1%" impoverishes everybody else. Class warfare much?

Red-herring - the last several presidents can be shown to be both

It is not "red herring" because that's what this sub-thread is all about — when JDAustin pointed out, Obama failed to reign-in overly invasive police, an "insightful" AC countered with "trickle down economics" (which was a false "red herring" of its own, of course).

Because otherwise we'd have that paragon of politics Palin instead of Biden to make fun of?

Sarah Palin made no obvious mistakes — in fact, she anticipated Putin invasion into Crimea. Joe Biden, on the other hand, was beyond mockery from day one -1: when he claimed, that "we, along with France kicked Hezbolla out of Lebanon". Show me anything comparably stupid from Sarah Palin, I dare you...

Or perhaps that ever American loving Romney, as long as you're not 1 in 2 Americans?

I don't care, whether President loves me — I'd find it outright creepy if he did. I want him to effectively execute policy I find agreeable. Obama's only saving graces come from his failing to execute some of his disastrous plans.

Reps killed their own chances in 2008.

Whatever killed their chances (somehow vastly more people knew, what Palin spent on wardrobe than that Biden was once caught plagiarizing), it was to the detriment to the country.