1 - 10 Next
Okay, I need to ask a dumb question here. Why does Congress need to do ANYTHING about the "border crisis"? Don't we already have several hundred laws on the books that tell us, in some detail and with agonizing precision, exactly who must do what in this particular situation? What (or who) is stopping up the works, and what's it going to take to break loose this particular plug in the pipe?
Learn theory and use of VPN's (Virtual Private Network), use them religiously, and use Opera for most of your browsing.
Aren't they doing something like that already in China at the behest of the Chinese government? That's probably why they think it's ok to do it here.
The greatest threat of the autonomous vehicle is that it is determinedly anti-liberty. When I'm behind the wheel of my car, I go where I want to. In an autonomous vehicle, I go only where it will let me. Even then, if mis-identified by the system or a human supervisor as some sort of threat, the vehicle would easily be re-tasked to deliver me to a (to me) completely unknown destination, a situation that may remain unknown to me until the final seconds before the vehicle stops, shuts down and keeps all doors and windows shut and locked to avoid having me escape. Imagine the smug joy of a policeman who doesn't even have to go and arrest me, but merely enter a code into the transportation computer and then wait for me to be delivered to his jail. Arrest warrant? Oops! We forgot about that. Best talk to the judge in the morning. Kids in the car with you? That's ok, we have a DCS office here in the building. I'm sure your kids will enjoy talking to our agents there. The possibilities for abuse are almost too numerous to note, and almost impossible to defend against. How long until anything other than instant, abject obedience to any cops least whim winds up with your car carrying you to the worst part of town, dumping it's remaining fuel on the road under it and popping all the locks to leave to completely vulnerable to the local gangs...all without any "evidence" being left in the computer to show what happened.
Obama's new rule on CO2 is "bold"? I'd describe it as deluded and insane. How badly do we have to be harmed before this guy and his friends are removed to places where they can't hurt the country any more?
Come, come Mr. Mitchell. You're neither blind nor simple. If the proper answer is smaller, less powerful government, then every current member of government will be dead set in the other direction. Government itself will be determined to go the other way in the name of sheer bureaucratic survival, which must grow or perish. The prescription will and must always be, more government.
In response to:

Random Thoughts

Schism Wrote: May 27, 2014 4:49 AM
We are entering fully into "The Crazy Years" of Heinlein's timeline. Fascinating place, but not necessarily survivable for any individual.
Oh, the vote is in on that one. They are equally important, and equally attainable. You just have to remember that those who are providing our safety would NEVER threaten our freedom. This is America! (Pay no attention to that man getting beaten up behind the curtain. Nothing to see there. Move along!)
Penetrating thought. Except for the large numbers of "us" who vote for the other guy...and lose. We have NOT given our consent, and the constant drumbeat of "facts don't matter, history doesn't matter, we gotta DO SOMETHING" is driving us crazy.
In response to:

Chipotle: Don't bring guns in our stores

Schism Wrote: May 20, 2014 1:30 AM
Yes, they can. The 2nd Amendment is a limitation on government, not on private parties in their own establishments. If Starbucks wants to tell me, "no you can't bring your gun in our shop", fine, I can just deal with the shop down the street. If Government says, "no, you can't carry your gun anywhere in our territory", where can I go? That's the difference.
1 - 10 Next