Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

attn fusta!

Comments Filter:
  • They both want any power to be theirs, and both resist giving an inch.
    • Not sure how that jibes with the Right tending to be for giving power back to the states. When not every state is red.

      • The states have proven to be too corrupt to handle the power.They are just "mini-feds", feudal entities. Giving power to the states will only result in endless confrontation. It is the irresistible force that keeps the peace, as weak as it is.

        And of course you see everything backwards. Only the "left" wants to dissolve the authoritarianism of the fed and the states, right down to your local sheriff shaking down regular people. Only the "left" believes in true liberty for all. All authoritarianism is a right

        • If you want to make an argument against concentrated power you have to address the inevitable corruption.

          The big question is, how do you "address" something, in a way that respects freedom. As just one example, current and proposed campaign finance laws restrict how much money I can give, ostensibly to fight "corruption". I'm not in favor of these erosions of our freedom, so I can't be in favor of such laws. But that is just one example, of the general principle of where do you place the balance between "you shall be controlled so that your freedom is maximized" and "you're on your own so you may not get to

          • You can give/offer all the money you want. I don't care about that. Citizens United is not an issue to me. Campaign finance laws are bullshit and a violation of free speech rights. The problem is the people who take it and provide the favoritism. The snake didn't commit the sin. Eve did.

An Ada exception is when a routine gets in trouble and says 'Beam me up, Scotty'.

Working...