Politifact is "reasonably comprehensive" and "unbiased"???? Damn! What are you smoking, we'd all like to know cuz that shit must be good!

Up to 2011, they found Republicans to be lying 119 times to 13 for Democrats. Usually Politifact engages in strawman attacks where they dismiss the actual language the speaker used and instead substitute their own language (which would in-fact be false), then label the speaker's claim as false. Try looking at http://www.politifactbias.com/

Well, actually there is a mechanism. It's called the vote. However, you have a lot of low information voters out there and a media that's as loyal as Pravda to the Democrats. The people voted to stop Obamacare by voting in people to oppose it.

Democrats bitch and whine that a "democratically passed law" is being opposed. The media parrots the Dems and tells people what to think - "The evil Republicans are opposing a democratically passed law." But they don't tell the sheeple that the Democrats in the House were voted out over Obamacare and that it is the #1 job of the people who were to voted in to oppose it and shut it down because that is why they were voted in!

The 4th estate is an utter failure. They do not operate to keep those in power honest - they serve the interests of Democrats for the purpose of aggregating power.

And Democrats do anything differently when Republicans occupy the White House? Oh yes, Democrats are pure and white as the driven snow while Rethuglicans are the spawn of Satan and servants of their corporate evil overlords.

Of course, Obamacare was not written by legislators (entirely Democrat in its support) but by insurance industry reps who stood to profit greatly on the back of the middle class and through forcing every every man, woman and child to purchase their product. The AARP supported Obamacare, against the wishes of their members, because the AARP would benefit from Obamacare to the tune of $2.8 billion.

As Pelosi said "We won't know what's in it until we pass it." Now we do, to our great sorrow: millions of jobs cut to part-time, full-time jobs that will never be created, billions in additional debt, the IRS having its nose in our medical histories, the middle class bearing massive insurance hikes in order to create new entitlements to pay for Democrat votes, the demolition of privacy in our medical care and stripping away choice from millions in their healthcare decisions.

For fuck's sake, the Democrats couldn't give a rat's ass about their constituents - they care only about power and serving the corporate interests that have supported them. Seriously -- you didn't clue into Obama's nature when he was asking people to report on their neighbors if they spoke out against Obamacare?

OK, can we just cut to the chase and blame God - if he/she/it hadn't done such a poor job on raising Adam and Eve, this shit would have never happened!

If you want to freeze your ass off, go right ahead and buy real estate in the Antarctic. Antarctic ice levels are at their highest recorded levels. That's something that's usually left out of the AGW debate. See: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2012/09/19/antarctic-sea-ice-sets-another-record/

This was modded informative? You guys do realize that his reference to platypuses being "secret agents" is to the children's cartoon "Phineas and Ferb" where the main characters have a pet platypus who lives an alternate life as a secret agent fighting the schemes of a mad scientist to rule the "tri-state area." I can possibly see it being modded "funny" or possibly even "interesting," but informative???

The legal authority provided for this unconstitutional intrusion is 287 (a) (3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 66 Stat. 233, 8 U.S.C. 1357(a)(3), which simply provides for warrantless searches of automobiles and other conveyances "within a reasonable distance from any external boundary of the United States," as authorized by regulations to be promulgated by the Attorney General. The Attorney General's regulation, 8 CFR 287.1, defines "reasonable distance" as "within 100 air miles from any external boundary of the United States."

However, the SCOTUS has not yet chimed in on the subject but its precedence suggests that the breadth of the searches and the distance involved may be unconstitutionally overbroad. Specifically, the border search exception applies only at international borders and their functional equivalent (such as international airports) (See Almeida-Sanchez v. United States, 413 US 266, 273 (1973) ).

More recently courts have opined that the "extended border search" exception should apply only to those situations where the following facts are present: (1) "reasonable certainty" that the international boundary has been crossed by the suspect vehicle and (2) reasonable suspicion that the subject of the search was involved in criminal activity. (See US v. Guzman-Padilla, 573 F. 3d 865, 868 (2009) , See also US v. Nelson, Dist. Court, D. Arizona (2012)).

You're comparing apples to oranges. Finland is a largely homogeneous society (as are most countries that outperform the US in education - Japan, South Korea, etc). As of 2010, just 4.6 percent of Finnish residents had been born in another country. America is a nation of immigrants and is racially heterogeneous, this in turn has a significant impact on our "averages" in standardized tests. For example, during the kerfuffle over the teachers unions in Wisconsin, they liked to point out that Wisconsin's unionized education resulted in better performing students than Texas, which was non-unionized. However, when the numbers were broken down by race, Texas students beat Wisconsin students in every single grade and category. However, Wisconsin simply had fewer minorities - it's a very white State.

While the book "The Bell Curve" is very controversial, the research in this area keeps coming up with the same results - Asians perform better than whites, whites perform better than Hispanics, Hispanics perform better than blacks. I once read some research where they simply broke out the test scores for Caucasians in the USA and compared them against Finland and the USA numbers were in fact better than Finland. There are many other differences between Finland and the USA (childhood healthcare is significant among them) that contribute to the gap, but racial make-up is huge. I lean toward the theory that poverty and the difficulty of learning a language that isn't used at home are the two most important drivers, but there are also cultural differences in black and Hispanic communities that contribute to the wide gulf in educational attainment.

I can see two differences if Romney was the victor. One, the press has been felating Obama since he first ran for office - just ask Hillary on that score. I'm pretty certain that this would have had more traction in our press if Romney was around. Secondly, Romney at least would have had the political luxury of pointing to the prior administration and saying, "I'm not them - I'll correct their errors."

Instead, Obama is in a position where he has to defend what his administration has been doing for over four years. There's a big difference in the inertia. Romney wouldn't have been as politically vested in preserving the status quo and would have been able to spin it into a political plus by saying "my administration changed things."

Better yet, I want them to get a warrant on the basis that there is probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed, which is the standard required by the fourth amendment. Whether a cause is 'just' is in the eye of the beholder and in the Obama administration that largely involves crying "terrorism" or "drugs" and waiving their hands.

Some actually might. For some people cheating is less about the physical exchange than the emotional - they might appreciate it if their men can get their physical needs attended to without the risk of the emotional attachment, baby making or STDs for that matter. If however the man gets his needs attended to by some random hookup, that woman may want to have that emotional connection or create a family bond through an unintended (for him) pregnancy or bring home some microscopic invaders.

Hell, the troops are going to get their jones off one way or another so the options to a government sanctioned brothel would be infidelity or an unsanctioned brothel. That could even be a security concern - unsanctioned brothels could be a nasty attack vector on troops - give the ladies at the local unsanctioned brothels some HIV (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/28/SheMayLookCleanBut.jpg) and let the disease do their work.

From the almighty Wikipedia:

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_escape#Significance_of_solar_winds

I would also think that solar winds would be a steady source of hydrogen atoms as it consists largely of hydrogen ions (also known as protons (H+)). Once in the atmosphere they would capture electrons to become stable hydrogen. This has been detected on the moon for instance (only 10% of the solar wind ions deflect off the moon and 90% become embedded in the lunar surface and become neutral hydrogen atoms by picking up free electrons). Since Venus has very little water (approximately .002% of the atmosphere versus .40% for earth's atmosphere), apparently the stripping the by solar winds is at least as great as the contributed hydrogen.

If we're going to get into the world of fantasy, I would think that setting up a sun-facing device that created a weak magnetic field far enough out in front of Venus that was strong enough to slow the rain of protons but not deflect them, could result in Venus gradually building up a water canopy . . .

There's no evidence that GZ accosted anyone. There is substantial evidence that a TM attacked GZ without provocation (GZ's action of following TM from a distance is not legally cognizable as such) and brutally attacked GZ using the sidewalk as his weapon. TM was not merely "armed only with skittles" as the prosecution argued - the cement instrument is a blunt object and it doesn't matter under the law whether the blunt object is being forcefully applied to a victim's head or their head forcefully applied to the blunt object. TM also pounded GZ's face resulting in a black eye and broken nose. TM threatened to kill GZ and was acting accordingly. GZ had the right to defend his life. Period. Full stop.

Someone better let Joe Biden in on this . . . He's a big believer in firing warning shots:

Read more: http://politicaloutcast.com/2013/05/man-takes-bidens-warning-shot-advice-and-has-his-guns-confiscated/#ixzz2Z2VIJ0A3

One of the things that courts consider when looking at whether communication evidence should be suppressed under the 4th is the measures that the person took to keep the communication private - in short, is there an expectation of privacy? While Duck Duck Go's search engine does not provide perfect opacity, it does provide evidence that you intended to keep your search request private and that you had an expectation of privacy that is worth protection.