Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:What's the deal with the rush of TSA stories re (Score 1) 1135

Again, I'm not defending the TSA or the way we do airport security, but saying that he 4th amendment protects you from airport security is just stupid. The government cannot force you to submit to a search of your person without a warrant, it can and will force you to submit to a search of your person before allowing you into certain areas of its sphere of control. As long as the only penalty is not allowing you into that area, there's no legal issue.

So if people start setting off car bombs you would be ok with government mandated searches of your car every time you bring it onto a government constructed highway? After all, you can walk right?

Comment Re:The technical issues (Score 1) 309

The technical issues: Hurricanes, typhoons, rogue waves, tropical storms

Hurricanes, typhoons, and tropical storms are all the same thing. And they don't form below 10 degrees latitude because the Coriolis force isn't strong enough there. I guess you missed this part of the article:

The islands would be located at the equator as it isn't prone to typhoons and the climate is stable. However, in the event of large waves, strong elastic membranes would be attached to the lagoons around the outer circumference of the cells, with the shallows above the membranes standing 10m (32.8 ft) above sea level. The water pressure difference between the lagoons and the ocean would limit the movement of the membranes and buffer the force of the open sea waves. Additionally, 20-30m (66-98 ft) high seawalls would be constructed to handle a worst-case scenario.

Comment Re:Should be good for the economy (Score 1) 1530

No. It's not a meaningless phrase. You can't grow government without more and more government interference in the lives of individuals, and the corresponding loss of the individual's freedoms. I value freedom over the supposed security that a larger government offers every time.

Every time... so you are an anarchist then? If you have already made up your mind that there is no legitimate function of government, then I cannot have a rational discussion with you. By that kind of logic you wouldn't want the fire department to kick down your door and come rescue you from your burning house because that would imply a violation of your privacy and property rights. Now of course this is hyperbolic nonsense but it serves to illustrate that the line is much grayer than most libertarians make it out to be. At the end of the day the government isn't the only bully out there waiting to take your lunch money.

LOL. You're kidding me, right? The US was the most prosperous nation that has ever existed on the face of the earth until you progressives came into power.

I don't think providing a date range here should be all that difficult. If you can't tell me when it started maybe at least you can tell me when it ended. I really want to know what you are talking about here because for the life of me I can't figure out what it is. If you can't provide dates then at least give examples of the progressive abominations you are railing against.

How do you think we've done all that consuming that you hate without being very prosperous?

Please don't make assumptions about me and I will attempt to return the favor. And the answer is that a bubble economy is not a prosperous economy. But I still have no idea what time period you are talking about to reply coherently.

Why do the progressives want to redistribute our wealth to the world? Because we have so little of it?

When did I say that? The rest of your post is also irrelevant to this discussion so I won't address it.

Comment Re:Should be good for the economy (Score 1) 1530

American people aren't going to put up with the dishonesty and politicians working against them anymore.

I sincerely hope you are right, but I fear the system is too broken to self-correct at this point.

Take campaign finance for instance. Will we see meaningful reform under the Republicans? I seriously doubt it. At least the Democrats tried, which is more credit I can give the Republicans.

Comment Re:Should be good for the economy (Score 1) 1530

...and vice versa. Of course the advantage to a balancing of power, which is what happened, is that one party can't ramrod whatever it wants down our collective throats like they have for the past 2 years.

You haven't been paying attention the past two years then. Or for the past 10 for that matter.

This is a good thing, especially for people like me that believe both parties are cancer. The less damage either one can do the better. If this means neither party can pass ridiculous legislation full of pork and start more wars, AWESOME!

There are way too many problems in this country for gridlock; we absolutely must have competent leaders and government if we are ever to get out of this mess.

Put the koolaid down and sober up so you can see them both for what they are.

My criticism of the Republicans in no way reflects on my opinion of the Democrats.

Comment Re:Should be good for the economy (Score 0) 1530

No President has ever decided they should be able to hold a US citizen without due process other than Abraham Lincoln and his situation was far, far different than Obama's.

Jose Padilla and Yaser Esam Hamdi would disagree with you. And to be fair, Lincoln suspended habeas corpus just as the constitution allows him to "...when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it."

They've grown government way too much.

A meaningless phrase if I've ever heard one. They've grown government in ways you don't like is what you really mean.

We are at a point in our history where we must make a 180 degree turn and go back to what worked, or we will end up bankrupt and all our freedoms will be gone. We can't afford to keep on creating debt for our grandchildren and their children. Debt is slavery, and that's exactly what we've been doing to ourselves and our posterity. We're enslaving ourselves in the vain hope of getting something for nothing. It's unsustainable.

And you are a fool if you think the Republicans will be any different this time around.

Our founding fathers did things right. Under their system we became a country in which even our poorest citizens were better off than a very large percentage of the world, and our country was fiscally sound.

When was this golden age of American prosperity exactly?

Comment Re:Should be good for the economy (Score 1) 1530

So, when the main liberal community has this attitude why should we expect their leaders to have a different attitude? I haven't seen one. I see Obama calling those who disagree with his legislation enemies. I see Pelosi saying bills must be passed so they can be read. I see Obama giving himself the ability to deny US citizens due process. I see Obama giving himself the ability to assassinate US citizens with absolutely no due process. Yeah, real compromise and reaching out. A real effort on his part to preserve and protect the constitution, which is part and parcel of the presidency. He swore a public oath in which he promised to do so, and has violated it again and again.

Everything you just wrote can be said of the Republicans. I don't like the democrats in congress either, but don't act like the "other side" is the only one in the wrong here.

Slashdot Top Deals

Kleeneness is next to Godelness.

Working...