Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Designer Babies? (Score 1) 37

Maybe they just let the real definitions do the work..

Designer: a person who plans the form, look, or workings of something before its being made or built, typically by drawing it in detail.

Baby: a very young child, especially one newly or recently born.

Yeah, I know, the designer handbags and shoes use another definition : made by or having the expensive sophistication of a famous and prestigious fashion designer.

One seems a more proper use of the term but not the most popular in connection to this way it is being used.

Comment Re:What happens next... (Score 1) 302

Well, yes he can do recess appointments to the Supreme Court.

The president can make recess appointments to " all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session." They vacancies specifically mentioned by the constitution in the preceding paragraph of the same section includes the supreme court.

Comment Re:Good Riddance! (Score 1) 302

Every corporation has a fiduciary duty. Any expenditures must meet that fiduciary duty in some way else is it no different than giving money to your brother because he is your brother. So if there isn't a compelling interest in the corporation to expend the political speech (nothing would benefit the company from the desired outcome), the corporation would be in breach of it's fiduciary obligations and could face criminal charges as well as stock holder lawsuits. When people assemble, they often form corporations in which they isolate their liability for the actions of others assembled with them to what is invested in the association of people. In other words, you should not be held financially liable for something I do just because we both share a view and were at the same event that I did something completely wrong at or because I violated the law in some ways.

Anyways, that is neither here not there. There is nothing in law or the constitution that limits corporations to anything other than an assembly or association of people. Anything else you can imagine is little more than what you think you see wrong with this concept. Whether it is or not wrong is not a constitutional question at this point. It has been settled all the way back to the 1800s. If you think it is wrong, then changing the constitution is the proper path not ignoring it or the court decisions that have been made long ago before you and your opinions on the matter were even alive.

What you seem to be saying is that in your view, an individual can have political speech but groups of people cannot peacefully assemble and pool their speech to become more effective. I do not think that is in line with the US constitution.

Comment Re:What happens next... (Score 1) 302

Why would it deadlock the Supreme Court?

It has functioned with 8 members before and even with less (as few as 5 members that I know of). It originally had only 6 members and it was raised to 7, then to 9 and then to 10 and then back to 9. They will just go on about their business and any case that one vote would have changed, they will hold off until someone else is appointed provided that congress does not permanently remove a seat.

Comment Re:Good Riddance! (Score 1) 302

The court ruled that corporations are associations of people. Nothing you mentioned discounts that. The segregation you mention is only insofar as the people in the association does not act in their own. So if you have a corporation and work for the corporation and something happened, you are not separated from liability outside the corporation if you participated in the action. If you did not participate in the action, then you liability ends with the corporation which the segregation is apt.

You make a decent argument but you failed to address the constitutional or legal aspects of my request. It would appear that for reasons outside of constitutional or legalities, you think the ruling was wrong. However, the ruling is limited by the constitutional limits on congress and government and therefore cannot ignore the constitution because you think it is a good idea and can make a convincing argument. I suggest you amend the constitution to allow associations of people to be limited in their speech.

Comment Re:What happens next... (Score 1) 302

For what purpose? The president cannot force congress to act in certain ways, just to return to work.

But as I said, if congress does_not_ recess, there isn't an opportunity to call them back for a separate session. Harry Reid already created a working plan to avoid ever going to recess. The republicans have been following along too.

Comment Re:What should happen but won't (Score 3, Informative) 302

but the GOP leadership will likely want to avoid having their candidates commit on 'what they want in a Justice' on the campaign trail.

Nah.. All the candidates need to say is they want someone who would follow the US Constitution and not make stuff up as they go. If questions about specific people are requested, they just say- "I have people in mind but have not spoken with them on the subject so you will just have to wait until I become president."

It is really that simple of an answer. It is bad form to talk about how a judicial appointment will rule on any given topic which is why they always answer "stare decisis" or they "cannot comment" when asked about controversial topics - even by the same senators who would confirm them.

Comment Re:Good Riddance! (Score 4, Insightful) 302

How do you know he didn't care about climate change?

Doing something that is illegal or unconstitutional does in no way all the sudden become good or correct just because you like the desired outcome. What he did was proper regardless of his views on climate change, Obama, or some treaty that isn't a treaty because the senate has to confirm all treaties for it to become a treaty.

As for Citizens United, I do not see any flaws in the ruling. Can you point them out? And no, businesses or corporations having political speech or money equals speech is not a flaw in the ruling. What constitutional basics is incorrect or flawed in it?

Comment Re:What happens next... (Score 2) 302

If congress doesn't recess, Obama cannot appoint any interim justices. This was already hashed out by the supreme court and I seriously doubt they would all the sudden ignore their own ruling and allow an intersession appointment if congress doesn't actually recess.

The supreme court has functioned with only 8 members before without problems. It can in the future too. In fact, congress may decide that it only needs 8 members and reduce the size or attempt to before the administration is out.

Comment Re: Nice (Score 2, Interesting) 302

Not only that, so freakin what if he did. The black community is largely populated in dense urban environments ripe with gangs and notoriously bad schools (One teacher told me it was almost like holding school in a war zone at times and since he was a combat vet from Vietnam, I'll take his word for it).

Anyways, the situation is that many minorities do seem to come from tough environments and a slower pace could actually bring the talent out or nurture that talent that would let them shine above everyone else. I can see it as a net positive in some situations and probably a net negative in others. But admission due to your race and not qualifications or abilities will never foster this or weed out the differences.

Comment Re:Too late and too stupid. (Score 1) 62

The phone companies bills the pri for activity and a number reservation. It only makes financial sense to use real lines if there are few lines otherwise digital is the way to go. I have a customer who has six hard lines and the phone system is self contained within the phones. I have another who has 6 lines but uses a pri because of the ease in VoIP and trunking which includes routing calls to remote locations and cellular connections (more than 6 lines company wide but 6 at this location )

Each channel is not assigned a number on a pri. Each channel can carry any line assigned to the pri as needed. This allows lines to be in use and still ring instead of giving a busy signal. I cannot speak to BT's specific setup but these are standards of the technology and i somehow do not see England being in the dark ages on this.

Slashdot Top Deals

CChheecckk yyoouurr dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh..

Working...