Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Refugees (Score 1) 155

Japan has been xenophobic from the start, they are much farther along in demographic decline, they are doing fine.

Only if by "doing fine" we ignore Japan's massive debts. They have a higher public debt per GDP than anyone else, including such outstanding examples as Zimbabwe or Greece.

Comment Re:Totally Revolutionize is a remarkable overstate (Score 1) 437

More like instead of a powerful government, a powerful ruling class which they fantasize will be them. Unluckily history has shown that there is always a power hungry asshole ready to step into any power vacuum.

Government is not the only source of power. If the public steps up, then there isn't such a vacuum for someone to occupy.

Comment Re:Totally Revolutionize is a remarkable overstate (Score 1) 437

Some Libertarians seem to just want to replace government tyranny with corporate tyranny or at least tyranny of the rich (them). The famous quote is something like "wanting just enough government to protect them from their slaves"

Yes, I too am deeply concerned about these imaginary libertarians and their imaginary corporate tyranny agenda. My view on this is first, show that it's a problem worth of that level of concern, then we have something to talk about. Currently, I see it as an overblown problem like drugs or terrorism meant more to scare the public into approving certain shifty activities. There's something of an issue there, but it's not serious enough to justify the hype.

Comment Re:Authoritarians will always rule. (Score 1) 437

This of course allows for Authoritarians to gain and keep power simply by promising to enforce a Conservative Libertarian agenda on Social Libertarians or a Social Libertarian agenda on Conservative Libertarians.

And that gives them the power to do what again? No matter how much you play on divisions like that, you can't implement blatantly authoritarian schemes. Politics isn't rock climbing here where barely perceptible flaws in the surface allow you to climb arbitrary distances.

Comment Re:Can a Hillary supporter step up and explain? (Score 1) 634

It's innocent until proven guilty in this country, not "innocent until public opinion thinks otherwise".

Absolutely not. The whole point of elections is precisely so that the public can do that very sort of thing and judge politicians any way they choose. And it's worth noting here that no indictment of Clinton will move forward unless the US President chooses to allow it to move forward.

Finally, I think Clinton has once again been proven guilty. There is yet again a remarkable disinterest in her so far successful attempts to evade the laws concerning classified information and FOIA requests.

Comment Re:Can a Hillary supporter step up and explain? (Score 1) 634

Sorry to burst your bubble, but if society and the Government (see DOJ, and Congress) doesn't choose to pursue the necessary action required to bring Clinton to the guilty verdict that is purportedly true, expect to be disappointed that the standards of reality that you wish existed, don't.

Here's the problem, buttercup. If Clinton can break these important rules with impunity, then what else will she or her allies break?

If you feel anything more than a slight annoyance by this fact, you just might be the one who has a problem.

Being jaded is not a virtue.

Comment Re:Can a Hillary supporter step up and explain? (Score 4, Informative) 634

Your "They aren't principled. At least not in a moral sense." is an example of what is wrong with politics today, and you should be ashamed of posting it.

Ok, let's look at your argument.

On the classification side of things, there is not a lot of solid information about whether something bad was actually done or not. Yes there are seven email threads (twenty-some emails in all) that contain information that is now considered classified. So far no-one with any knowledge of those emails directly has commented on whether that information was classified when those emails were sent. We have heard that those emails did not have classified markers on them, but that again does not mean that the information was not classified at that time.

In other words, she committed a felony right there by creating and maintaining the server right here since classified information was sent repeatedly and corrective action not taken.

It's also worth noting here that there's a lot more than a handful of "email threads". We have spy satellite data stripped of its classified information - that's a felony for whoever did that. We have people, particularly, Sidney Blumenthal without a clearance given access to this information. That is a felony right there. And then we have Clinton instructing an aide to strip classified markings from an email. That is a felony right there.

And it's worth noting that this particular email setup has already allowed Clinton to evade FOIA requests. I believe that is a felony as well.

So, saying people who support Hillery Clinton are not morally principled is an example of unprincipled partisanship. Please wait for facts before accusing anyone, let alone making accusations about their supporters. There is plenty to legitimately disagree about in the actual issues in the campaign, without resorting to unsubstantiated mud-slinging.

Fuck you. This sort of weaseling is exactly why I agree that Clinton supporters are remarkably unprincipled. Notice that you aren't arguing that Clinton didn't commit these crimes, but rather that we can't prove it.

Slashdot Top Deals

"355/113 -- Not the famous irrational number PI, but an incredible simulation!"

Working...