EvilMonkey

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 16, 2010 -> 04:43 PM) Keep ignoring all the Americans who headed off to Somalia to join AQ. WHo come back with Muslim names, long beards and other things that could also be profiled.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 16, 2010 -> 04:44 PM) Evidence of TSA groping three year olds? Evidence of profiling actually being effective? I didn't say 'would'. Rean next time before climbing on your horse. And if you haven't seenthe video of the screaming kid being searched by the tsa yet, not my fault.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 16, 2010 -> 04:38 PM) No, it doesn't. Keep telling yourself that every time they grope a 3 year old.

Profiling would work better than these patdowns and scanners.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 16, 2010 -> 02:19 PM) The systems weren't supposed to save images. Are they actually doing so? Anyway, it's not like that would stop a person who wanted to save them. Just sit in the room and pull out your cell phone camera. This was using the older, unclear version, but the fact is they weren't supposed to save ANY. Yet it happened. Kust imagin if it were the more enhanced versions that could be photoshopped. http://gizmodo.com/5690749/

http://gizmodo.com/5688087/the-tsas-sense-...akes-me-nervous

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Nov 12, 2010 -> 09:36 PM) Glenn Beck accuses holocaust survivor George Soros of being a Nazi collaborator, as a 13 year old Jewish boy. http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20101...ocaust-comments Beck said on the radio Wednesday that Soros—as a 13-year-old Jewish boy, living apart from his parents in order to avoid apprehension by the Nazis—"used to go around with this anti-Semite and deliver papers to the Jews and confiscate their property and then ship them off. … It was frightening. Here's a Jewish boy helping send the Jews to the death camps." Abraham H. Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League and a Holocaust survivor, called Beck's comments "completely inappropriate, offensive and over the top." [see update] Here is the rest of that quote that seems to be missing.....

She is an effective political force on the local and state level, but nationally she is polarizing. You either love her or hate her, there is very little in between. I like what she did this year infusing her zeal into a lot of state races with moderate success. I believe that can even translate into the smaller political game such as mayors and county government if she wanted to, and had the right backing. I am not enthused by any of the 'presumptive' 2012 Rep. nominees. Sorry Tex, Perry isn't one of the 'chosen' ones.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Nov 13, 2010 -> 06:39 PM) Yea, government employees get government rates most of the time, and most people get pre negotiated rates. The problem is, sometimes said rates aren't available or the pricing isn't available. Hotels aren't stupid, they know the per diems and don't want to lose the business, but sometimes they jack up the rates anyway for capacity/conventions or whatever. So, back to my original post that started this branch of conversation, anyone wanna defend what that school superintendent was doing?

QUOTE (lostfan @ Nov 13, 2010 -> 11:50 AM) Let's reverse the liberal/conservative ratio in here and then bring up one of Obama's books and see how unpredictable that is? The one ghost written by a terrorist?

QUOTE (Tex @ Nov 11, 2010 -> 06:39 PM) First off I fainted when I saw Alpha being so critical of a Republican. Who would have expected Alpha to accuse so strongly a Republican for trying to work the system to her advantage to win. Interpreting the law is why we have so many courts and so many lawyers. Which I appreciate. We'll need less as our rights get eroded. If the ballots are denied, expect a suit from voters in Alaska whose right to vote was denied because of this law. I'm hoping she has enough uncontested ballots to win, and the last report I heard, seems to indicate she will. I also heard that the Miller folks contested one ballot because the letter L in her name was in cursive and the rest was printed. I'd be embarrassed. Tex, they contest votes like that to make sure there are enough contested ones that they have to be looked at and decided on. 'Working the system' would be playing within the rules as allowed. trying to have the rules changes midstream is just wrong. They already had one rule changed that allowed the polling places to hand out a list of all who signed up to be a write in candidate. previously the rules said no. But a judge appointed by daddy fixed that one fast.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Nov 11, 2010 -> 04:42 PM) From the description I read it doesn't sound like the author is showing people how to do anything illegal but it's still really creepy to read. I am not clicking the link, but from that description, it sounds to me like he is trying to 'offer' a set of 'rules' for pedophiles to voluntariloy follow to make the situation 'safer' and sentences if caught possibly lighter. I don't get it.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 11, 2010 -> 12:37 PM) Chris Christie gets called out by the U.S. DOJ's Inspector General's office as an example of someone gaming the system for his own benefit. The officials declined to be identified because they were not authorized to discuss the findings on the record. And this "When you break the rules and make taxpayers cover your $450 suites at the Four Seasons, you lose your right to claim the mantle of fiscal responsibility," doesn't fit with this "While the total cost of what was charged over the federal government’s allowed maximum appears to equate only a couple thousand dollars,". That's not very many stays. And I have to say to this: so what? Why do you seem to think that if someone on the right advocates cuting costs, that they could have never overspent in their lifetime? If he was cutting these costs WHILE racking up overages, then you have something. otherwise, what you posted is total crap and irrelevent. What are your thoughts and comments on the video link I posted? Do you approve of what he was describing?

Chris Christie calls oout the head of Parisippany NJ district by name as an example of someone gaming the system for their own benefit. I like it.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 11, 2010 -> 11:54 AM) These things going on are not exceptions against the rule. They are dealing in situations that the code does not explicitly address. Let's put aside this silly idea that no interperetation of the law can be done, because that's impossible. And let's also put aside the equally silly idea that a vote for Lisa M, when there are two Lisa M's, should be guessed at - that vote should not count. So, you are left with the cases in between, which follow that law but still need to be looked at. NSS, the code does specificly address the write it situation. it says exactly how the name must be written, and then says no exceptions. Right or wrong,. how can anyone say that it isn't clear?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 11, 2010 -> 11:28 AM) You're going with a non sequitur again. Interpreting a misspelling of a name is not the same as changing the voting process and electoral system. It's using judgement so as not to disenfranchise voters. Where's the respect for how our legal system functions? For past case law and precedents? This isn't changing rules "mid-game" but using reasonable judgement to interpret laws. Law rarely, if ever, have a single, objective interpretation, not the least because they're written and passed by many individuals. That is why we have judges and the court system--to determine the meaning of the laws based on past applications and current judgement. The rules set out in this section are mandatory and there are no exceptions to them. A ballot may not be counted unless marked in compliance with these rules. How many different ways can you interpret NO EXCEPTIONS!! It doesn't say, "unless you are an idiot who can't spell and doens't care to take enough time to figure out HOW to spell the name of the person you thnk you want to vote for"

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 11, 2010 -> 11:02 AM) Idiots have every right to representation and to consenting to governance as anyone else. You honestly think it's good for democracy if someone who spelled her name "Murkowsky" has their vote thrown out? That isn't a disgrace to the idea of voting for representation? Where is the respect for law? Amywhere? Anyone? maybe we should just get rid of that whole electoral college thing and go by popular vote, since that is the voters intent, eh? Laws be damned. Fixc the law, then worry about it. You can't change rules mid-game.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Nov 11, 2010 -> 11:08 AM) By law, i think Miller is in the right here. Even if you factor this in, i think Murkowski still takes it. I would probably agree with you.

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Nov 11, 2010 -> 09:41 AM) My grandmother was being charged $9k/month at a Sunrise private nursing home facility. That was for everyting. Drugs, Room, Meals, etc. The caregivers, were only earning $16/hr. ONLY? Is that not a living wage? Out of the $9k comes saleries, meds, insurance (a HUGE bill for them), the cost of the buildings and upkeep, food, etc. I know it isn't cheap. FYI, I used to have several Sunrise locations as customers, and was privy to some of the information on their balance sheets as we copied and distributed those for them. I DO recall that the insurance portions of their expenses seemed impossibly huge to me. But I agree with the general premise of your post, I'm just sayin.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Nov 11, 2010 -> 10:54 AM) Whenever you want a B) to show up instead of the smiley you have to uncheck the "Enable emoticons?" option when creating your post. **exits stage left** I figured it was somethign along those lines. B)

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 11, 2010 -> 10:52 AM) That can amount to a literacy test. I can't believe you think it's a good policy to disenfranchise voters over misspellings. I am not one for stopping people from voting, but I am not for helping idiots to vote. If you have to go to their door to get them to register, show up at their house and drive them to get them to go to vote, and hand them a piece of paper telling them who to vote for, I want those people to stay home. They dishonor the right to vote. Same for people to fooking stupid to fill in an oval, check a box or spell a name correctly. Voting is not rocket science. And fyi, they disenfranchised themselves by not spelling the name correctly. I am for following the law as it is written, not as some want it to be interpreted.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 11, 2010 -> 10:15 AM) Non sequitur. What does voter registration have to do with this? Throwing out the vote of someone who wrote "Murkowsky" is pretty clearly disenfranchisement over a spelling mistake. Do you think that's a good policy to have? Except where you have cases of people who wrote her name wrong, on purpose. Read blogs and news stories up there. There are people who wrote it wrong thinking, incorrectly as it seems, that they could be playing with Lisa on that issue. Would suck to lose with a few hundred writeins with your name spelled wrong. So yes, I think it is a good policy to have. Spell it right, or too bad. Knowing how to spell ONE name correctly isn't too hard of a burden and doesn't imposes economic hardship on anyone.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 11, 2010 -> 10:11 AM) don't courts have a history of ruling in favor of "voter intent" understanding of the law, so that people aren't unnecessarily disenfranchised over technicalities? Is voter registration a technicality? Why have rules at all?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 11, 2010 -> 10:04 AM) Why do you want to disenfranchise voters who have clear intent? Change the rules if you don't like it. Before the fact, not after. Lisa's camp knew this rule going in, that is why they stated a huge spelling bee type campaign, purchased and handed out wristbands with her name on it, made temporary tattoos, etc. They knew the rule. Now they want to have it both ways.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 11, 2010 -> 09:55 AM) I agree its clear - its clear that they have to take what the voter says, but that in cases where what they say doesn't exactly match any candidate, they have to determine voter intent. Which seems like the logical way to do it. I fail to see the problem here, except again, with the whole Lisa M thing (and in that case, I think the vote should go to no one). http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/akstatutes/15/15.15./15.15.360. edit: That smily face was a 'B with a ) when I pasted it. Hmmm. Seriously, how much more clear does that need to be? They do NOT have to match oter intent. They have a clear rule to follow.