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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Supreme Court did *not* say corps are people .. (Score 3, Informative) 1330

Hobby Lobby's owners find it religiously objectionable to provide health care to its female employees that includes birth control.

Completely untrue. Hobby Lobby provides 16 different types of contraception to its employees.

Here's their statement:
"The Green family has no moral objection to the use of 16 of 20 preventive contraceptives required in the mandate, and Hobby Lobby will continue its longstanding practice of covering these preventive contraceptives for its employees. However, the Green family cannot provide or pay for four potentially life-threatening drugs and devices. These drugs include Plan B and Ella, the so-called morning-after pill and the week-after pill. Covering these drugs and devices would violate their deeply held religious belief that life begins at the moment of conception, when an egg is fertilized.

How outrageous!

Comment Some questions (Score 5, Insightful) 465

Sorry to repeat myself, but this was a late post to the first incarnation of this story.

Sharyl Attkisson (investigative reporter formerly with CBS) has posted some questions that should be asked:

  • Please provide a timeline of the crash and documentation covering when it was first discovered and by whom; when, how and by whom it was learned that materials were lost; the official documentation reporting the crash and federal data loss; documentation reflecting all attempts to recover the materials; and the remediation records documenting the fix. This material should include the names of all officials and technicians involved, as well as all internal communications about the matter.
  • Please provide all documents and emails that refer to the crash from the time that it happened through the IRS’ disclosure to Congress Friday that it had occurred.
  • Please provide the documents that show the computer crash and lost data were appropriately reported to the required entities including any contractor servicing the IRS. If the incident was not reported, please explain why.
  • Please provide a list summarizing what other data was irretrievably lost in the computer crash. If the loss involved any personal data, was the loss disclosed to those impacted? If not, why?
  • Please provide documentation reflecting any security analyses done to assess the impact of the crash and lost materials. If such analyses were not performed, why not?
  • Please provide documentation showing the steps taken to recover the material, and the names of all technicians who attempted the recovery.
  • Please explain why redundancies required for federal systems were either not used or were not effective in restoring the lost materials, and provide documentation showing how this shortfall has been remediated.
  • Please provide any documents reflecting an investigation into how the crash resulted in the irretrievable loss of federal data and what factors were found to be responsible for the existence of this situation.
  • I would also ask for those who discovered and reported the crash to testify under oath, as well as any officials who reported the materials as having been irretrievably lost.

Comment Questions to ask (Score 3, Insightful) 372

Sharyl Attkisson (investigative reporter formerly with CBS) has posted some questions that should be asked:
  • Please provide a timeline of the crash and documentation covering when it was first discovered and by whom; when, how and by whom it was learned that materials were lost; the official documentation reporting the crash and federal data loss; documentation reflecting all attempts to recover the materials; and the remediation records documenting the fix. This material should include the names of all officials and technicians involved, as well as all internal communications about the matter.
  • Please provide all documents and emails that refer to the crash from the time that it happened through the IRS’ disclosure to Congress Friday that it had occurred.
  • Please provide the documents that show the computer crash and lost data were appropriately reported to the required entities including any contractor servicing the IRS. If the incident was not reported, please explain why.
  • Please provide a list summarizing what other data was irretrievably lost in the computer crash. If the loss involved any personal data, was the loss disclosed to those impacted? If not, why?
  • Please provide documentation reflecting any security analyses done to assess the impact of the crash and lost materials. If such analyses were not performed, why not?
  • Please provide documentation showing the steps taken to recover the material, and the names of all technicians who attempted the recovery.
  • Please explain why redundancies required for federal systems were either not used or were not effective in restoring the lost materials, and provide documentation showing how this shortfall has been remediated.
  • Please provide any documents reflecting an investigation into how the crash resulted in the irretrievable loss of federal data and what factors were found to be responsible for the existence of this situation.
  • I would also ask for those who discovered and reported the crash to testify under oath, as well as any officials who reported the materials as having been irretrievably lost.

Comment Re:Only emails outside of IRS lost ... (Score 2) 372

From the article: "Camp's office said the missing emails are mainly ones to and from people outside the IRS, "such as the White House, Treasury, Department of Justice, FEC, or Democrat offices.""

Oh, so that shouldn't be a problem, then. Just request the emails from the White House, etc. I'm sure they won't have any problems digging up their copies. They couldn't also have lost those particular emails, now, could they?

Comment Re:Wow (Score 1) 224

Interesting to see if that is backed up by actual statistics. I doubt that it is. Pew Research just recently released poll results that argue that Liberals (voters) are less interested in fair compromise. Given their unwavering media support, I'd guess that the sentiment would be shared by their legislators.

When they look at a political system in which little seems to get done, most Americans in the center of the electorate think that Obama and Republican leaders should simply meet each other halfway in addressing the issues facing the nation. Compromise in the Eye of the Beholder More on Political Compromise and Divisive Policy Debates

Consistent liberals and conservatives define ideal political compromise as one in which their side gets more of what it wants

Yet an equitable deal is in the eye of the beholder, as both liberals and conservatives define the optimal political outcome as one in which their side gets more of what it wants. A majority of consistent conservatives (57%) say the ideal agreement between President Obama and congressional Republicans is one in which GOP leaders hold out for more of their goals. Consistent liberals take the opposite view: Their preferred terms (favored by 62%) end up closer to Obama’s position than the GOP’s.

Comment Re:Wow (Score 1) 224

Do not forget that ObamaCare was rammed through without a single Republican vote in the House or Senate.

It's the unfortunate case that Republicans don't generally support Democratic bills.

I'm sure that you meant to say that "It's the unfortunate case that Republicans don't generally support Democratic bills and vice versa." But, either way, that doesn't change any of our preceding arguments, so I'll leave it here.

Witness the recent student loan bill....

This could be the subject of another debate, but not interested, at the moment.

Comment Re:Wow (Score 1) 224

Actually, we would have had a much less expensive plan, but we couldn't get it by the conservatives. It's called single-payer....

You couldn't get it by the conservatives? Which conservatives voted for the current crapfest? Do not forget that ObamaCare was rammed through without a single Republican vote in the House or Senate. Think about that. A complete transformation and takeover of the U.S. Healthcare system and the Democrats rammed it through without a shred of bipartisan support.

I'm sorry that you didn't understand my presentation. Or that you understood it and can't accept it. I've thought about it for a very long time and I'm pretty sure of it.

How about that I understand it, but don't believe it (and the facts and logic back me up).

Comment Re:I'm embarrassed for you (Score 1) 224

That's because you want that to be true. You probably don't even notice instances where people bring up the same point when idiots say that democrats are so superior.

You could very well be right. However, ever since I first noticed this behavior, I have actively looked for counter-examples. But, as you say, I could be blind to that.

Comment Re:I'm embarrassed for you (Score 1) 224

Both parties are just puppets. The puppeteers may be different different for each one, but that doesn't change what The One Party really is.

After reading Slashdot for many years, I've noticed that whenever the Democrat/Republican argument is cast in favor of the Republicans in a post with unassailable logic, the invariable response is "well, both parties are the same."

Comment Re:Wow (Score 1) 224

So? You don't think that the Republican Party leaders wouldn't want more self-employed voters? Even ignoring the tendency of the self-employed to vote Republican, your whole line of reasoning is just ... odd. "Oh, no!" say the Republican Party Corporate Masters, "Where will we get our laborers from if [a small fraction of] our employees leave to work for themselves? There are so few people without jobs -- whatever will we do?"

Listen, I'm glad that you've been able to find insurance coverage, but that same result (for you and the others that ObamaCare was supposed to help) could have been achieved with much less legislation and far less government intervention and far more success. But, I'm sure that you know that. You just wanted to take a cheap shot at the Republican Party; but you just didn't really think it through.

Comment Re:He picked the wrong moment to support amnesty (Score 1) 932

I believe the general feeling is that amnesty will encourage another large surge in illegal immigration. When it looks like it is going to be passed, there will be a surge trying to get into the country to benefit from the amnesty. If it gets passed, then there will a surge of new illegals to fill the demand for undocumented (and thus below minimum wage) workers.

The Tea Partiers have been saying that this is obvious and that any plans for amnesty shouldn't proceed until it is obvious that the border is secure.

So, the two issues are closely linked.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Inquiry is fatal to certainty." -- Will Durant

Working...