In reality; anarchist was the name given to communists in the 19th century. The difficult to tell difference is because they were both espousing the same thing; Carl Marx's utopia. The early communists, and indeed Marx wrote that when the proletariat took over there would be no more need for government because government was the Oligarchy and Bourgeoisie keeping the Proletariat down.
It also goes even further back than Marx. The French Revolution espoused a communist ideology as well, although the term hadn't been invented yet, same ideals.

It wasn't about finding who or an investigation. it was about stifling speech they don't like.

The Red Scare goes back to much earlier than the Cold war(1919-1920), but yes you're right about the good old days, they were never really that good, but this is getting to the point were the US is becoming a parody of the old Soviet Union. Didn't a former White House Chef just die in an accident?

When did the United States become the society we were told the USSR was during the cold war?

What part of "run the equipment on biodiesel" did you not understand?

The part were they get less biodiesel from the crop than they use to get the crop, also the part were poor people starve because food production is changed to energy production.

The ONLY barriers are social and political--even now the economics are so compelling that every call for projects solicits more than regulators and utilities want to accept.

I don't think you understand economics. If it were so compelling there would be no need for regulators to get involved, unless its their subsidies that are required. The utilities would be doing this themselves because it would turn a profit. If it requires the regulators actions to make the economics compelling then the barriers aren't social and political but economic.

I've bought and sold at Gun shows. The ATF usually sets up a booth there and police are present providing security at the doors. FFL's have to log in and out every firearm received and sold/transferred with a to and from. If the to isn't an FFL they have to have a matching 4473 form, and the ATF audits them. People have and do go to jail for innocent paperwork errors. If there is anything intentional suspected then their business gets shut down until the investigation is over. Personal buys and sells are not wink/wink because there is likely as not undercover agents there as well. The 60 minutes documentary had the journalists actually committing several felonies and were(cough*David Gregory*cough) not prosecuted because of who they are.


The real reason for the whole gun show loophole propaganda is to get people who don't know about the laws and realities to push to make it illegal for private individuals to buy, sell, gift, and inherit guns to each other without going through a federal licensee/dealer. This raises the prices of guns by at least $100 per sale, and creates a de-facto gun registry so that later they can tell you like Dianne Feinstein wanted to "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here."

To be fair; the inference(an let me be clear, it is an inference) is from the quote in the article:

Modified soybean oil is also an option. Monsanto Co. is testing an oil called Vistive Gold made from soybeans that have been genetically modified to make it heart-healthier and good for frying without the need to hydrogenate it, said Sarah Vacek, soybean quality traits manager at Monsanto. Restaurants will be Vistive Gold’s main target.

If the measurement threshold is large enough than it can be like those fat free butter sprays that are made from oil and water. When you can say trans fat free as long as it has less than a gram of it why bother changing it when they're mostly milligram doses anyway? Oh and from the fine article it appears the real reason is that Monsanto genetically engineered Soybeans to naturally produce trans fats. So they can use them but not have to claim them.

That is a lie. The ONLY change a gun show allows is a Federal Firearms Licensee to transfer a firearm at the gun show instead of at the business location. Every law is still in force and enforced even at gunshows.

I think you may be referring to a fraudulent loan; taking the loan out with no intention of ever paying it back. The reality is that with student loans going into the low hundreds of thousands no one will get enough credit card limit to pay them down. If the amount is low enough to put on a credit card, its likely low enough to pay down quickly.

burying a serious and good idea here now; there is something deeply troubling about students having huge loan debt that cannot be discharged from going to a university that has hundreds of millions to billions of dollars in endowment and with a university president pulling down multi-million dollar a year sallary and a mansion to live in rent free. I suggest we tax university endowments of over $200million to pay off student loans.

Okay I did;
"A fraudulent conveyance, or fraudulent transfer, is an attempt to avoid debt by transferring money to another person or company."
However he's not transferring his assets nor his debt to someone else. He still has the debt, its just to a different creditor. Or is it a fraudulent transfer to take a personal loan to pay off a secured loan? If so then the law is an ass.

Where's the room for graft in that? No room for graft and it will never happen.
You talk as if the whole college student loan thing were about educating people. Its actually about getting money to politically connected and "right thinking" individuals. Why else are there more administrators than faculty at universities now?

He's taking the Jon Corzine way out. You can't discharge student loans with bankruptcy and they can and will garnish your wages. Credit cards don't have either of these remedies.

Its a better plan than defaulting on the student loans which will balloon their amounts as default fees are added.

I will say two things:
1. I do not think "Reckless Borrowing" means what he thinks it means.
2. Banks and businesses have no qualms about shafting their creditors, why should ordinary people? (ex. see MF Global, etc.)