Trains are an economic disaster in the US, and it is not for any sort of engineering reason (you can look at pretty much any other industrialized modern country in the world and see that trains actually work out pretty damn well).

They were given the money to go there because no one would go there with out any sort of subsidies. In addition to that, since the lines are still allowed to be solely owned by the private companies in those areas then no one else still feels like its a market they can compete in with out those subsidies either because they'd have to make their own investments and ultimately be making a medium-term loss in a developed market. If anything the government should be investing more in bringing in competitors.

The ultimate goal of a business is to make money and they stand to not make money in a lot of areas, that is where government can help out people that might not get these services otherwise, by making undesirable markets desirable. Ultimately for society and the economy these investments by the government do pay off because you open new markets to internet trade, you can revitalize businesses and attract new businesses, etc. This is a very simple concept that most libertarian/conservative fools can not even begin to grasp, that infrastructure costs money, usually doesn't turn a profit, but is the backbone of economy. They have a mentality that contradicts thousands of years of history in regards to infrastructure. It is like they just see roads and rail networks and assume they have always been there and thats how it will always be and do not even for a second consider the forces that created them. A strong partnership between business and government with an eye towards what is best for their customers and their citizens is the best system. Look at Japan for an example.

Yea, cause I mean those sole provider markets are totally willing to leave the internet behind right? Total free markets do not work, they become predatory and violent (literally).

If you want a country where you can do anything you want if you have the money try Somalia or Afghanistan, I prefer to live in a society where the weak are given the same standards as the powerful.

Its better people equate them as the same to lessen their chances of ever holding any significant office. Now hush up!

They would just be recommitting their dedication to stupidity. I'd take Romney over Paul any day and I am about as far left as you can get (with out swinging back around again to libertarianism...).

He gives such a hoot that he wants to repeal the civil rights act!

Not really, what he did at the FBI's goading has no excuse, the original question is would he have actually done anything or amounted to doing anything had the FBI just kept an eye on him instead of trying to make a point in Portland. Beyond that, did the FBI have to push him that far to get a conviction?

While there was some impetus on the suspect for his actions, the fact that Portland was targeted and this threat wasn't nipped in the bud earlier was obviously political in nature. Why let it go as far as they did? They easily had enough material for a conviction on numerous charges that would have put him away for a long time before they actually went all the way with the "attack". Why actually let the suspect go all the way down to the ceremony, place the "bomb" and let him try to detonate it? The moment he was even in possession of the "explosives" he would have been guilty of a number of major felonies. The fact that they let it play out in a public place was clearly theater meant to induce some sort of reaction in the Portland leadership.

Was when the FBI encouraged a young immigrant boy in Portland, OR to try and carry out an attack on a Christmas Tree lighting ceremony. The boy by all accounts had no prior involvement in anything radical beyond browsing the internet, and seemed more angry at his parents than the US or any 'infidels', was approached by undercover FBI agents and brought into this plan as the trigger man.

While that is interesting in itself, the really telling part comes from the fact that the City of Portland refused to cooperate with the FBI after 9/11, refusing to allow agents unfettered library access and other information into the citizens of Portland. Not only this, and while it may be conjecture, Portland has never seemed to be on the top of anyones attack list as far as foreign terrorists go... Needless to say Portland quickly subscribed to the FBI's intelligence program after the attempted attack and decreed that it would fully cooperate in the future with any investigations.

Would you like to buy my rock? It keeps away communist tigers.

The lasers are pulsed anyways to prevent jamming or interference with other systems in the field. The round and designator accept a 3/4 digit laser "code" that tells them to modulate in a certain pattern.

The only really big thing in this story is the miniaturization of the technology we have had laser guided bombs and even laser guided cannon artillery for almost 40 years now.

You realize that would make them a better target right? Laser guidance works on detecting the reflected energy of the laser off the target, the more reflective the surface the better.

Yes, because the problem with libertarianism is that while something not as drastic might happen, there would be no one monitoring that from happening.

Because thats EXACTLY what the world should be like!

And you think the Right is any better? They want to throw out EVERYTHING and let the corporations walk around with total impunity. Private police, private firefighters, private military, everything. That is their ideal, including Ron Paul who is the most insane of them all, his policies equate to a conservative version of total anarchy!