Gary Johnson now polling at 6% nationally, and is suing the two parties for debate access.
"If the lawsuit is successful, this year's CPD-sponsored debates will either expand to include the Libertarian candidates as well as the Green Party ticket of Massachusetts physician Jill Stein and Pennsylvania anti-poverty advocate Cheri Honkala, or be canceled."
While I disagree that property (a loaded word) is the root of all evil, I do think it's time the real libertarians separate themselves from the fakes.
Business value via Ayn Rand Objectivism is isolationist in nature and severely underestimates the value of those around you. The right to self-interest must inherently, simultaneously and logically accept the right to self-interest of others. This is a simple but apparently true error in a large part of the co-opted liberty movement. Liberty means freedom not for me, or you, or the individual alone but for everyone at once. Self-interest is not a license to abandon the interests of others. It is in fact a requirement to ensure the possibility of all self-interest at once. You cannot have a market by yourself. And the wealth of the market stems from the success of everyone around you, not from you alone.
Here's the problem as I see it: there is a false dichotomy being played out. Elizabeth Warren is neither wrong or right. Government can be great and it can also suck. Privatization can be great and it can also suck. There is a spectrum of good and bad and mediocre examples of all of these. There are simply many different ways for a society to succeed.
My objection is when members of a society have no choice about which solution they would like to participate in. I don't like the false dichotomy because it perpetuates the notion that there must only be one social contract for everybody.
One of the problems in politics today (maybe all time?) is that people immediately knee-jerk one direction or another. But the concepts that Elizabeth Warren promotes are much more rooted in philosophy than typical political jargon. She's making a structured case for her political position.
This is a good thing: instead of talking about symptoms she's bringing the conversation over to the root systems. We're all better off talking about root causes and rooted decision making.
The problem with figurehead leaders like Romney, Obama, Bush and Pelosi is that they don't have any underlying principle that they are attempting to accomplish, it's just vague party talking points. There is no foundation. With principled leaders you not only know what you are getting but why you are getting it. And on this foundation we can truly evaluate what works and stop what doesn't work instead of arguing endlessly through spin and biased media jargon.
I don't agree at all with Warren's ideas, but in a democratic situation (which we are all stuck in currently) I'd much rather engage with someone who has thought through their position than a puppet.
As always, I'm interested in the dynamics of social thought. If all you want to do is call Warren a bitch I'm not interested.
I don't think Ron Paul necessarily "wins" this argument. The post 9/11 world is a place where there are a lot of people who are OK with the Patriot Act and proactive security measures. It just comes down to whether you think they will work or not, because they certainly erode our individual liberty. Are you OK with that tradeoff?
For me, if someone is crazy and wants to hijack a plane, there's actually nothing you can do about it. You can carry sharp sticks onto planes that function as knives. And you can get complex bomb devices and other fear capturing devices onto planes relatively easy.
But the flip side is having someone listen to your phone calls and pepper spray you when you protest. One person has the right to use force over or spy on another without due process. Who is the actual terrorist here? And why should anyone trust a bureaucrat to keep them safe?
Absolute nightmarish scenario watching him proudly discard due process while the crowd nervously twists up and down, unsure what exactly is going on. The confusion is palpable, especially when he violates the right-left rhetoric only long enough to agree with Obama when it comes to shredding the constitution.
"The federal standards will pre-empt state rules in at least one respect: the national health plans will automatically be eligible to compete against other private insurers in the new exchanges, regardless of whether they have been certified as meeting the standards of those exchanges."
Why is this the first I am hearing of this? Did legislators just sneak the Public Option through the back door somehow?
"When a user sends a picture or document, it will be encrypted, digitally “shredded” into thousands of pieces, and temporarily stored in a “Secure Cloud Broker” until it is transmitted to the recipient. Silent Circle, which charges $20 a month for its service, has no way of accessing the encrypted files because the “key” to open them is held on the users’ devices and then deleted after it has been used to open the files. Janke has also committed to making the source code of the new technology available publicly “as fast as we can,” which means its security can be independently audited by researchers."
If Google+ were as important to modern life as gmail, then I could see the point. But if these guys don't post on FB or anywhere else the point made here is completely invalid. G+ isn't something that everyone needs or even wants to use.
These two sides will argue this classic discussion until they are blue in the face and neither will get what they want because there is only one state. That means that at any given time, only a single implementation will be forced upon everyone. And that single implementation is neither capitalist or socialist, it's some kind of disgusting authoritarian corporate state that nobody wants.
Ralph Nader: “Libertarians like Ron Paul are on our side on civil liberties. They’re on our side against the military-industrial complex. They’re on our side against Wall Street. They’re on our side for investor rights. That’s a foundational convergence,” he exhorts. “It’s not just itty-bitty stuff.”
Reshared text: Its to dark for pictures but the east and west side of the block is covered with cops caring zip handcuffs and portable fencing. They are about to flank the protesters and start arresting!
At what point does free speech become provocation - like the shouting "fire" in the theater example. Free speech is important, but it's not like it's a simple guideline. Youtube has to weigh many options, and they are a private enterprise. As far as I can tell they have acted independently so far.
Interesting reddit thread on how a deaf person thinks.
"I'm deaf.....So, to answer your question, I think in ASL (American Sign Language). I guess deaf people's thinking process is little different from hearing people. When I think, it's like I'm seeing myself signing from either my point of view or third person view and when I'm imagine a hearing person speaking, I imagine him/her actually signing instead of speaking because I can understand him/her that way."
In a letter announcing its sponsorship withdrawal, Philips wrote that it was concerned the commission's work "may appear to support bi-partisan" instead of "non-partisan" politics. YWCA similarly wrote that it was dropping out because it is a "non-partisan" women's organization.
Take a second to notice how this works. Try to ignore the points both the Young Turks and Lou Dobbs make and rather focus on the larger, more general effect of what is happening here.
1. It immediately sets up a false dichotomy of liberal vs conservative. Everybody will fall into line either agreeing disagreeing because the opinion is so heavy-handed and absolute. There is no room for a third opinion or nuance when complex concepts are reduced like this. You've just been boxed up into one of two camps whether you wanted to be or not. 2. The vilification placed upon the topic creates an atmosphere of hatred and despair (large, sweeping agendas that out of our control). This is responded to with ridicule and return vilification. The dialogue is never about anything real but rather more focused on loaded meta concepts (liberal Hollywood, agendas and indoctrination, and also massive outrage). 3. The outrage is a poor response, this is exactly the desired effect of this kind of "story". A strongly divided and angry group of people cannot be rational and effective as a collective society. This is a validation of the false dichotomy and perpetuates the myth of a black and white world.
Reshared text: How to update your Facebook status from Google+ without an extension:
1. Access Facebook. 2. Go to http://facebook.com/mobile 3. Copy your email address unique. 4. Go to page Circles + Google 5. Add the e-mail from Facebook in a new circle (Hint, call the circle of “Facebook update”) 6. When you want to publish something on Facebook, simply add the circle.
I agree with +Stefan Molyneux. But the problem for me (and I think some of the OWS protesters) is that while it may originate with the state, I don't think it's just the state any more. We're not talking about Starbucks here, we're talking about Goldman Sachs, Lockheed Martin, Exxon and Wal-Mart. These companies and others like them literally write legislation. The difference is becoming blurred.
Yes, the state enables them to do this, but at some point the balance of power shifts from the kings to the kingmakers. Not sure if we are there yet, but it's worth considering.
Reshared text: Erupting volcanoes photographed from space An image taken by astronauts aboard the International Space Station (ISS) of a large plume of smoke, steam and ash erupting from the Sarychev volcano on the Kuril Islands, Russia. It is thought that the eruption has caused a hole to form in the cloud layer above it.
Here's a cool idea for the plot of a hip, action-thriller movie set in some alternate dystopian universe: a country is spying on itself by secretly harnessing ancient security technology BUT it doesn't want the public to know, so it is using hackers to send DDOS attacks against whistleblowing websites. Everyone says "that sucks" and then goes and watches the Olympics.
Reshared text: Update: photos from the SD card that provide clues are in the album
For Sale: Canon EOS 1000D Description: only used underwater once, in the Pacific Ocean, for approximately one year.
Actual story: found off the end of a wharf in Deep Bay, BC while I was diving on a job for the harbour. I removed the SD card, cleaned it up, stuck it in a card reader and after being underwater in a corroding camera since August 2010 - it works! Approximately 50 pictures on the card from a family vacation. If you know a fire fighter from British Columbia that won the Pacific Regional Firefit competition in 2010, has a lovely wife and (now) 2 year old daughter - let me know. I would love to get them their vacation photos :)
There are other clues on within the pictures - I think I should be able to track them down (not sure he'll want the camera back tho).
"Arguing the case for the Obama administration, Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr. defended the law as a constitutional exercise of congressional power under the charter’s commerce clause to regulate interstate commerce."
I don't know if "it's your fault" is the right way to phrase it, but to me this is the right take on the Google's privacy problem this week.
Google is not a stalker or Peeping Tom. When you "plus one" something you are giving them data about what you like, which they then can use to improve the services they provide you. This isn't about privacy at all. It's about information. If you want ads all over the internet that have nothing to do with you and no integrated services than you can shut off your cookies. Your subsequent internet experience will be terrible.
Chase Bank just set me a snail mail informing me that their records indicate I don't want any offers from them. It also informs me they are "updating [my] preferences" to state that I DO want offers from them, unless I fill out a form saying I don't. #fuckthesebanks
Doesn't sound like the Ron Paul crowd is that into Mittens. He's getting harshed on Twitter. He has almost zero chance of getting elected. Every move he makes is a embarrassing blunder. He's going to get thrashed in the debates.
"Former Saints defensive coordinator Gregg Williams and players maintained a bounty pool of as much as $50,000 over the last three seasons to award New Orleans players for delivering game-ending injuries to the opposition, paying bonuses of $1,000 for so-called “cart-offs” and $1,500 for knockouts. The rewards were doubled or tripled during the playoffs, and quarterbacks Brett Favre and Kurt Warner were among the targets."
Look at how chained down the US market is. This subsidy peels off, but underneath is the fact that many states mandated or created market incentives around ethanol as fuel. So policy built around market manipulations is now terrible policy and fuel prices will go up because of it.
Meanwhile, in an imaginary world where people pay real prices for things the actual value of the commodity would be set and we'd all be dealing with a realistic and sustainable market.
“This is truly an ironic situation. We have been fighting for a free world, and our opponents are mostly huge corporations from the United States of America, a place where freedom and freedom of speech is said to be held high. At the same time, companies from that country is chasing a competitor from other countries, bribing police and lawmakers, threatening political parties and physically hunting people from our crew. And to our help comes a government famous in our part of the world for locking people up for their thoughts and forbidding access to information.”
“These drones would fly off and hover above the city, and create ad hoc connections and networks in a new form of nomadic territorial infrastructure,” Young tells Co.Design, “a flock of interactive autonomous drones that form their own place specific, temporary, local, Wi-Fi community--a pirate Internet.”
Another great piece by Glenn Greenwald today who is becoming somewhat of a journalistic powerhouse in my opinion. I think his work so far with the Guardian (and previously with Salon) is the current standard of excellence. He makes great use of hyperlinking and follows up on criticism with a persistent fervor like nobody else.