I've seen comments like this a couple of times now and I have an easy way to demonstrate that bullying was (and is) illegal. I believe Aus and US law are not too far apart on this - either the bully hits the bullied, or does not. If he does, he can be found guilty of battery. If not, he can be found guilty of assault, (if the bullied person feels his safety is at risk that's technically enough).
But that's a bit circular because it depends on your (perfectly reasonable) definition of "bullying" as involving a threat to safety. There are many forms of childhood cruelty which do not involve any threat of violence, yet are still referred to by many as bullying.
It's not completely clear from that article whether physical contact is instead of, or in addition to, a threat of violence. But either way a great deal of bullying would easily qualify.
That was my thought, but lacking real details of the recorded encounter, I didn't quite go there. FYI, physical contact is separate from the threat of violence. In general physical contact elevates it to battery, thus the cliched "assault and battery" that's on every perp's rap sheet in every crime drama
Yes, the kid got charged because he violated Pennsylvania's wiretapping and recording laws.
As far as I know, all two-party states have an exemption for recording illegal activity. Now, technically, you could argue over whether the bullying reached the level of illegal activity. But that's a question for lawyers and judges, and that stupid fucking prick of a cop should have preserved the evidence, not forced its destruction.
Like he really has any control over what they do anymore...
If you have ever met the local SAR types I am willing to bet that they were instrumental in shutting him down. The last thing in the world they would want is their "Seniority" to be challenged by some upstart with easy to use technology. If you want to see the living defintion of a blowhard then go meet your local SAR.
Interesting. That's not at all the case where I live, so my perspective is completely opposite yours. Probably good for both of us to be reminded that the attitude of local SAR is going to be extremely variable across regions...
No, actually the Iraq war was very economical in monetary terms. The entire cost of the war FOR ALL THE YEARS is less than the "stimulus" that Democrats stole under Obama in the 1st year of Obama administration.
Bullshit. The actual invasion and ousting of Saddam were economical. The ongoing >10-year slog to clean up after the botched initial occupation has been enormously expensive. And remember, "the stimulus in the 1st year of the Obama administration" was actually the stimulus that Bush got Congress to pass. Fucktard.
No, it hasn't. Even the smallest of Obama's deficits is larger than the largest Bush deficit.
That statement is partisan bullshit, pure and simple. The 2009 budget was Bush's budget, passed by Congress before Obama was elected. Obama assumed office in early 2009 and began work on implementing his policies, so the 2010 budget was the first one over which he had any control at all. (This is the way it works for all incoming presidents--they don't get to influence the budget before they are elected. Duh.)
I blame shifted nothing...
Sure you did. You blatantly blamed Obama for the part of the debt increase which was directly caused by Bush's last budget.
I'm pretty certain that Rumsfeld had nothing to do with Saddam's loyalists deciding to continue to fight on in a guerilla war, or for the internecine warfare to occur based on long simmering grievances, or for al Qaida to wage a campaign of terrorism to try to establish control.
Rumsfeld overruled Powell (and the rest of the chiefs of staff) regarding the plan for the post-invasion occupation. He allowed for far few troops to control the country and far less effort toward rebuilding than they wanted. He made the decision to not only oust Saddam, but oust all Baathists from government, leaving almost no one in office. He made the decision to dismantle the police force without a clear plan to replace it. He is the goddamn arrogant fool who thought that he could just sweep aside the entire governing infrastructure in Iraq, sit back, and wait for a democratic republic to magically spring forth from the ashes.
And you will assign zero blame to Saddam.
WTF? Are you fucking blind? Read what I said more carefully this time: "...the amount wasted on the war due to incompetence in carrying out the occupation...".
I wasn't even arguing against having gone to war with Iraq. Just pointing out the fact that Rumsfeld's incompetence caused the cost of the whole Iraq mess to be at least twice what it should have been. (Not to mention US casualties probably being 10x what they should have been.)
At the same time, you should understand that you can't "inherit" a deficit.
1) Every president does so his first year. In OP's claim that the debt doubled during Obama's first 6 years, he was implicitly including Bush's last budget. (Submitted to Congress by Bush 5 months before Obama was elected, 7 months before Obama took office.)
2) It's not possible, barring massive social and economic disruption, to strip the better part of $1 trillion from the deficit in a single year. Massive deficit reduction such as what Obama has accomplished takes time. (BTW, I agree that more needs to be done, and that too much of the reduction comes from the wobbly recovery with too little from spending cuts.)
sorry you are correct, I did mean debt, which again someone said was unamerican in the past. But yeah, im a fucktard because i mistyped something. You could have ended it after your second sentence and gotten the same point across without sounding like a smug asshole
I wasn't just the typo. It was the blame-shifting onto Obama of Bush's fiscal disaster. So I stick by my second sentence, because it applies to your post as a whole.
...but when I see the deficit has damn near doubled in 6 years...
The deficit has been reduced by more than half in 6 years. The national debt has increased greatly, because of the huge deficit which Obama inherited from Bush. But seriously, why I am wasting my breath on a fucktard who doesn't know the difference.
The bills from the Obama administration will dwarf the minor fraction of debt that was from the Iraq war.
The amount wasted on the war due to incompetence in carrying out the occupation would easily pay for the health care for all uninsured citizens for almost a decade.