Functional democracy? If by that you mean a Theocracy run by a bunch of power mad mullahs, then yes. I wonder if they've sent back Hebollah's thugs they imported the last time a few years back their people were stupid enough to believe they had functional democracy.

That would be true if the third was not MS. MS always defined itself by how it could screw competition, not compete fairly with them. Skunks don't change their scent.

Yeah, that's it, NSA wanted Cisco to do something so stupid it would take the Chinese 2 minutes to figure out how holey their boxes are.

And in 2012, Scalia argued the opposite with regard to subsidies and Roberts used part of that argument against Scalia in the current case:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Yep, the internal inconsistencies in at least Scalia are appalling.

The government got into the act when they defined laws that treat married people differently. I don't recall those laws being in the constitution but there they are. As long as there are civil constructs like that defined by Congress, then the government is into the act with both feet.

For thousands of years and across cultures the sun has been going around the earth. That fact that a minority culture in the world has chosen to call a cat a dog doesn't make it a dog.

I don't think it is the previous colonial powers if by that you mean Turkey. I think it is more the little jerks calling themselves mullahs and imams that are fearful that the West will finally triumph over Islam via the intertubes which brings in all sorts of radical ideas they cannot stomach.

The interpipes reduce friction. It used to be the mullahs and imams could hide behind Islam and control their societies. Now they can no longer do that and they have unleashed the worst of their kind in Daesh. Daesh has been able to combine Islamic hate for everything not Islamic and Sunni with tribal insecurities of losing the tribes' control of their people.

The muscle behind Daesh is the old Saddam Hussein hacks, at least the Daesh fighters who have run away report this. They run the security apparatus behind Daesh. One doesn't just join Daesh, you have to be vetted by these clowns first.

I don't think Daesh's run is going to be that long. They have the ancient idea that if they scare enough people, they'll be able to impose their will. But with the internet, it is too easy for those who have lost a brother, father, etc. to Daesh to communicate and plot revenge. The same tribal sensitivities they think they are taking advantage of will come back to stab them in the back when they least expect it. If it is one thing the fellows in the mid-east know how to do, it is to carry a grudge for a long, long time.

The Republicans will put it back on the table because they believe their echo-chamber IS the American people. It will take a rout to disabuse them of that notion, and still the Conservative wing will claim they haven't had a fair hearing due to the liberal news media, illegal aliens, etc., any excuse will do so they don't have to rethink their views.

"Jiggery-pokery" is is the term Scalia learned from Harry Potter. It is the first new thing he's learned in 20 years, give the guy a break.

That's easy to fix, put the magic chemicals on three popsicle sticks. Test the obvious three orifices. If negative, you are good to go. If not, you can still be friends.

Not only that, Scalia argued the opposite in the previous case on the ACA. In 2012, Scalia argued the opposite with regard to subsidies and Roberts used part of that argument against Scalia in the current case:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

The shitstorm is awaiting them in the next election cycle. It will be much more difficult for them to campaign on easing out of the ACA. Their campaign contributors will have kittens...the Kochs' will personally visit abortion clinics to have the kittens removed before they are born, claiming a new sacrament for the religion of Conservatism. The Democrats will beat them mercilessly over those 6 million or so people getting healthcare through the exchanges. Republicans are not getting out of this easily.

And why should they want out? Their sainted private healthcare is still intact, the insurance companies are doing well. The basic problem is that Conservative Republicans think you should work your way into health care and the Liberal Democrats think of it as a basic right. But then the Conservative Republicans think if you are poor, it is your own damn fault, and Liberal Democrats believe if you are poor, the rich made you that way. In my opinion, most Americans are somewhere in the middle, bu they have no strong beliefs to help settle the political issue that results, hence we get the current deadlock in Congress.

The act uses the term "the state", not "a state". The opinion of authors was that if they had a chance to rewrite it, they'd make it clear "the state" referred to the federal government. Scalia himself has reasoned cases on Congressional acts that said the entire act must be looked at to get the meaning of the terms. He cannot very well turn around now and claim the narrow interpretation he wants simply because he doesn't like the act.

Marissa to become another VP in Uncle Larry's Stable of Executives from Other Companies?

Yep, and in Maryland, O'Malley was famed mostly for talking out of his ass and raising taxes...and this after he finished screwing up Baltimore as mayor.