Holy cow! One of the most sensible and rational articles I have ever read! It is HILARIOUS how the "strict constitutional constructionists" rail against a "living Constitution" but in the same breath approve of Presidential power to wage a war himself without a Congressional declaration of war. They say "this is a new type of war with no battlefield". Well, then amend the Constitution or stick to the definition of war and required Congressional Declaration that the FRAMERS adopted in the 1780s!

We need to find out what frequencies and wavelengths these operate on, and then post blueprints and specifications on the internet of how to build a high enough power jammer. Then sit back and watch millions of local police thugs dollars crash and burn. Heck, the Al-Quieda retards hacked US military drones, so the average American can probably do it too. This is serious. If enough people can hack and take over these drones, the practice will stop. The police should be terrified of *US*, not the other way around.

Interesting. What about all that "individual liberty" and "rugged individualism" that Conservatives love so much? Don't people have the right to actually exercise that "individual liberty" and NOT get married, pursue a career ect? There are just no laws that can force people to live the life you want them to. That is the beauty of America! We are all free to live as we choose! What if 40% of the US just decided to not get married or have children? The birthrate plummets, and the population shifts dramatically older. What then? Can the government FORCE people to get married and have kids?

By your logic then, Divorce should be FAR more regulated than it is. As it stands, 100% of divorces are granted to the filing spouses even if the OTHER spouse wants to save the marriage. A spouse can merely DELAY the inevitable, but in the end, cannot PREVENT the divorce being granted. There is no mechanism for any spouse to prevent a divorce against their will. Heck, in PA there is a 2 year waiting period, but that can be overcome by moving to Nevada, residing 6 weeks, and in another 2 weeks, the divorce can be over. How "public" is that?

It's the fact that some moms *HAVE* to work, because when it comes down to it, the cost of living has shifted to a TWO INCOME model. That doesn't mean some moms don't stay at home, but the Market has been shifted to the two-income model because many moms *CHOOSE* to work! In the end, couples with a stay at home mom must live in a Market and financially compete with other couples who both work. The general trend of two workers in a couple has therefore raised the cost of living for the entire Market. The simple solution is a "flex tax" model that is statistically weighted FAIRLY, but politicians and economists apparently hate advanced math and statistics, so forget that...

See, its all about the FREE MARKET and competition. If a couple both want to work and earn more, thereby raising the standard and COST of living, then one income households either need to compete accordingly or suffer the financial consequences. It's that simple. If one of you chooses to stay home, fine. The government should stay out of it almost COMPLETELY, and simply offer fair tax deductions and rates for EVERYONE. But, two-income households are raising the cost of living, so be aware of that. No more BS about "how hard it is" to live on one income with a family: COMPETE just like everyone else.

Maybe we should switch to a new type of weapon. We should use dart guns with ground up bits of Irukandji jellyfish, a potent and sometimes deadly toxin that can cause horrific and agonizing side effects. With this new ammunition, hardly anyone will die, but they will be left in ICUs for months sometimes. Some people have pain the rest of their life!!! Then after a while, we make commercials with people shot by these darts, telling their story of how they turned to a life of crime, got shot with a dart, and now can't hold down a job or even sleep because of the side effects. At the end of the commercial, text appears stating the individual will most likely commit suicide because there is no known long-term treatment.

Listen man, Your sister's case was adjudicated according to WELL-DEFINED statutes in florida law when there is no written living will, duly passed by the LEGISLATURE. The real issue was because she did not have a WRITTEN living will. Had she WRITTEN down what she wanted and had it notarized, there wouldn't have been a SINGLE issue with this. You do realize that people in a persistent vegetative state who have WRITTEN living wills are routinely removed from life-sustaining treatment, just as your sister was? I'm sorry, but if a person specifies IN WRITING what their wishes are, then we are bound by Law to do just that.

OK, so childhood obesity should be left to the parents. But along the same lines, I should not have to pay for the medical care of children or teenagers with Diabetes Type II or cardiovascular problems - because hey, it's the PARENTS responsibility. Therefore, we need to kill Medicaid reimbursement for childhood obesity-related problems. I don't care if a 13 year old is in renal failure - either the parent pays 100% for dialysis or the kid becomes a Darwin Award. That simple....

This is sad. Destabilizing the Taliban was a worthwhile operation. However, nationbuilding appears not to have been. And this begs the question about Iran too. Just what is the US going to do if there are military strikes? Iran is not Iraq or Afghanistan. They have about 100,000 highly trained Revolutionary Guards that can run an insurgency. Remember what Al-queda and the Mehedi Army did to US forces, and now imagine the equivalent of Army Special Forces running a similar style insurgency. The US is definitely getting what it deserves for trying to do what other empires have failed to do for 2000 years...