Fuck you pal, we currently give you $680 billion a year, which is approximately 30% of the federal budget. It is the largest defense budget in the entire world.

For comparison, we only spend 0.5% of the federal budget on foreign aid.

We give you plenty of money to do whatever the fuck you want, and that is the problem. The money is wasted on stupid wars, tons of oil and ammunition, and a standing army of over 2 million soldiers.

If we saved some of that money that you love to waste, we could do a lot of good stuff with it. I'm not in favor of videotaping everything the military does for security reasons, but fuck you for saying you don't get enough money. You get more money than any other organization in the entire fucking world.

Lower and middle-class people can typically get grants to go to school by filing a FAFSA, or scholarships based on either their low income or their high merit.

I've just finished college, and I had grants and scholarships, so if I was a little more frugal I could have made it through without my very modest student loan debt.

The ability to apply for a wider range of jobs was well worth the investment, and my family was certainly middle-class.

I don't think you need to use a "wooden spoon" to raise children.

My Dad had a fairly novel solution to the "temper tantrum in the store" problem. He simply ignored my tantrum and walked away. Once I realized that I was by myself I got scared and ran to the next aisle to find him. Of course, I immediately started my tantrum again, but he just walked away again. Once I learned that throwing the tantrum wouldn't get me what I wanted, I stopped throwing them -- no "wooden spoon" required.

The research shows that corporal punishment is not a good way to raise children. It causes them to become impulsive and violent, and in the end, they won't internalize the values that you wish to teach them, and then they'll run wild as soon as you're not around.

Just out of curiosity, have you ever been groped by the TSA?

Because my girlfriend got groped and it really wasn't as big of a deal as everyone is making it out to be. People are just overreacting and letting their imaginations run wild.

Yeah, what do you do? Carry bricks around? Wash dishes? Clean shit-stained toilets in the men's restroom?

Please, enlighten us.

Anonymous was never really about spreading a message anyway. It's just for amusement. The chief past-time of the group is pulling elaborate pranks and sharing jokes and stories.

I found it particularly annoying when people started referring to Anonymous as a group that was formed to combat Scientology. Making fun of Scientologists is amusing, but pretending that Anonymous has some sort of credo or mission or organization of any kind whatsoever is just annoying and wrong.

I don't think it trivializes human rights at all.

Say for instance you have a third world country led by a petty dictator who declares it illegal to discuss politics with foreigners (e.g. Libya). If such a government set up a state television network and a state internet to spread lies and propaganda, while banning it's citizens from accessing the world wide web and talking to foreigners, then yes, I would say that a human right had been violated

Basically, if you aren't economically able to provide access to the internet for your citizens, you aren't committing a great injustice or war crime or whatever. But if you could provide it, and you choose to ban it instead, then that would sound like something wrong to me.

Bullshit. The Libyans can't throw out Qaddafi and his supporters without help. They have air and land superiority ... fighter jets, tanks, and a well-organized and disciplined infantry. I have also heard reports that Qaddafi's forces have attacked the rebels with chemical gas, although this may not be true.

The rebels are mostly civilians and their best weapons are RPGs. Their leader is an IT worker with no military experience. They were losing ground, too, with the Libyan military approaching the rebellion's stronghold. If captured, they would likely be slaughtered.

As someone who opposed both the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, I think these cruise missiles were well-spent.

What in the world made you think that gtall disagrees with assisting the rebels? Nothing in his post indicated that.

If anything I think he was trying to suggest that the U.S. decision to intervene wasn't motivated by a desire for oil.