Mars needs women!

You apparently don't know what it is, then. You can't even identify what "enemy" is being comforted. Perhaps the enemy is the American people. There is no war declared that permits the legal definition of an enemy, and not much evidence that the spying has any actual effectiveness at combating terrorism. It is massive surveillance of all forms of electronic communication. Professional terrorists are unlikely to use communication that will be intercepted in this way. The information will almost certainly eventually be used for criminal prosecutions, probably including everything from drug to copyright violations.

Am I the only one who is unwilling to take at face value a news story from "Courthouse News Service" which reports a lawsuit against the IRS that accuses them of seizing millions of private medical records, but does not identify the plaintiff? The story was repeated by the moonie times, and they couldn't use their vast resources to dig up an easily obtainable public record. Without details, it's just a rumor.

If you believe in free will, you have to admit the possibility that the Universe isn't deterministic. It might not be possible to prove that any posited set of laws is ultimate, so that question might remain unsettled for a long time.

Local coverage was abdicated as a business decision of station owners, most of whom are corporations that own multiple stations in different markets. They are not interested in local communities. The economy has dried up revenue for advertising as well, and local news coverage is labor intensive. Policy decisions by the FCC, removing rules such as limitations of station ownership and requirements for news programming content, have gone away along with the Fairness Doctrine, because of ideologies leading to deregulation and the belief that corporations should be free to do whatever the hell they want.

This is not something that ought to be eligible for patent coverage. Aren't there some ambulances that need chasing?

For every need, from education to medical care to communication, there is a natural God-given right for private entities to collect rents to provide for it. This supersedes a presumed right of people to collectively and voluntarily provide it to themselves.

It is obvious to the subject which are the control questions and which are the relevant questions. I have wondered how one can distinguish between responses that represent deception, and responses that represent apprehension that the machine will falsely indicate deception. Some people react more hotly to stress than others, and are prone to produce false positives. Also, people can be trained reduce the likelihood of actual deception being detected.

It is unusual for it to be documented so quickly with respect to an issue that has the level of interest and emotional involvement as does health care reform. Instances of the financial benefactors of Congresscritters getting their sentiments reflected more or less verbatim in the Congressional Record are not novel.

This is your second notice that the warranty on your annoying telephone scam is about to expire.

IANAL, but it seems to me that the standard of proof for criminal penalties is reasonable doubt, for civil penalties it is preponderance of evidence. That is the distinction that appears to be made.