kimmy

There's been some chatter in the status updates about this, so why not have a thread to talk about it. Budget bill rewrites access to information laws to protect the RCMP from potential criminal charges. The government explains that the change is to close a loop-hole that would allow people to request gun registry information that is supposed to be destroyed: The budget bill includes a lot of other non-budget issues: I have always hated omnibus bills. I hated them when they were Chretien's favorite thing, and I hate them now. I suppose supporters would say they provide efficiency, a way for parliament to get a lot of business done in a hurry. That might be true, but they do so by limiting debate on topics that should be debated on their own, or to hide potentially controversial laws in a hay stack of other laws. And there is also an element of political gamesmanship. If you stash up a potentially controversial law in with laws that you expect to be popular, you're daring your opponents to give you election campaign material. "They voted against the Lollipops for Sick Orphans program. What a bunch of heartless jerks." Leaving their opponents to try to explain that they voted against the lollipops for sick orphans program because it was in an omnibus bill that also included the flatscreens for felons program. And if you have a minority government situation, attaching non-budgetary laws to a budget bill omnibus provides a way to turn every vote into a confidence vote. "We really oppose the Flatscreens for Felons program... but to we oppose it enough to force a national election over it?" -k

Swartz was never convicted. All charges were dropped after his suicide. -k

No convictions, but lots of fines and settlements. -k

I believe the Residential Schools have been termed an atrocity. It's pretty inane to suggest that the United States is in any way unique among nations in having blood on its hands. -k

Apparently they are still considering charges against individuals. They absolutely should. Anybody whose name they have, they should pursue them with the same vigor they had when they went after Aaron Swartz. Swartz was the kid whose crime was downloading research papers from the JSTOR archive-- publicly funded research that was eventually released into the public domain for free anyway. Even after JSTOR asked the Massachusetts prosecuters not to pursue Swartz any further, the prosecutors brought about 10 years worth of charges against Swartz, with the promise that they go easy if he plead guilty. When he didn't plead guilty, they went back to the books and found an extra 20 years worth of jail time to add to the charges. "Feel like pleading guilty yet?" They eventually found over 50 years worth of charges to bring against Swartz, prior to his suicide. Personally I thought that was a ludicrous abuse of prosecutorial power, but apparently it's legal for them to do that. So, why not go after these bankers with the same wrath? They clearly wanted to make an example of Swartz, but clearly these bankers need to be made an example of as well. They should take every name they have, hit the books and find every possible charge they can bring against these guys, and tell them: "you're going to prison for centuries. And we're going to use civil forfeiture laws to make sure that your spouse and your children live in poverty. And the only thing that will persuade us to go easy on you is if you give us names of other people we can go after." And if they provide valuable information, that's awesome. If not, then put them away for centuries and use civil forfeiture laws to take everything they own. Make an example of them. Make the next guy think twice. The other thing I have been thinking is, why not really make an example of one of these banks? For example, one of the terms of this settlement is that the banks got waivers allowing them to continue to do things like operate mutual funds in spite of the criminal convictions. Next time, pick one bank out of the group, and give it a "time out". One offender gets to sit on the sidelines for a while and watch its competitors scoop up its business. Kind of like an NHL referee picking one guy out of a scrum to sit in the box. Not that different. The mass "robosigning" of mortgage applications they fully knew should never have been approved, the use of these worthless mortgages as filler hidden in Mortgage-Backed Securities, strong-arming ratings agencies like S&P into giving these BS MBSs A+ ratings, the cooperation of agencies like S&P in the scam... there were a hell of a lot of people that should have been prosecuted. I gather they've finally gotten around to laying charges against Angelo "Fund 'em" Mozilo, all these years later. -k

As I said, Muslims seem big on this notion of gender segregation, yet I have never heard of Muslims disrupting a flight by refusing to sit next to women. I think that when Muslims get on a plane in North America, they're just happy if they made it through security without a body cavity search. Whereas these Haredi seem to have an enormous sense of entitlement. As for Calgary swimming pools... maybe the lifeguards there should be equipped with tazers too. -k

I don't even care. They needn't worry though, religious fundamentalists are right between lepers and dead-people at the bottom of the list of people I'll have impure contact with. I believe Muslims have equally strict thoughts about contact with women who aren't related to them, yet I haven't heard of Muslims freaking out on planes over this issue the way these Haredi have been. I suspect the difference is that Muslims know that if they start acting up on planes, they're going to get tazered. -k

Unlike the Jaime/Cersei thing, I think that Sansa's ordeal was organic to the story. How else could wedding night with Ramsay have gone? Short of Theon snapping or Brienne bursting through a window to save her, there was no getting around it. Sansa knew that she was going to have to consummate the marriage. She knew it when Littlefinger pitched the plan to her, and she went ahead with it. She accepted it as part of the price she was going to pay to avenge her family. I question the use of the word rape in this instance, because while it was obviously awful and painful, I believe that she willingly endured it. Sansa, like many other royal offspring in the story, understands that her reproductive organs aren't for love, they're for strategy. If Robb Stark had figured that out, he'd still have his head. It was painful for her and she hated every second of it, but it was part of her plan. It was upsetting to watch, and perhaps they could have made it less upsetting for the viewer, but that has never been their style. From Oberyn getting his brain exploded to Robb Stark's wife being stabbed in the belly, they have never pulled punches to spare the viewer's feelings. On the issue of Theon being forced to watch... if I recall, there's actually a Westeros precedent for "bedding parties". Robb Stark and his wife discussed it at the Red Wedding when Edmure and his bride were carried off. Without witnesses, there's no proof that the marriage was really consumated, apparently. -k

I would agree to move to another seat, firstly out of consideration for the other passengers on the plane, and secondly because I would have no wish to travel next to some bigot who finds my presence repulsive. However, in the general case I think that these guys should be treated like any other passengers who disrupt the flight and refuse to comply with the flight crew: removed from the plane and perhaps charged according to applicable laws. -k

China has a burgeoning dairy industry, and they need to feed cows. Alfalfa prices are going up, so people grow it and sell it on the global market. Fair enough. But water is a cost of doing business, and if you're doing water-intensive agriculture in the desert you've taken on a big risk. -k

I've read that California's almond and pistachio farms need ludicrous amounts of water. As well, alfalfa uses a vast amount of water in California agriculture. Who eats alfalfa? Cows do. You'd think it would be California's beef and dairy ranchers that are the end user, but a lot of it is being exported to China. -k

welp... that just happened. We knew it was coming, but it was still tough to watch. I wonder if Theon has a breaking point? I wonder if Sansa's return has reminded him that he used to be human. I wonder if the Maesters know any good abortifacients. So... Loras and Maergery are in jail, Lord Tyrell is in Braavos in the care of Cersei's goon Trant, And Lady Tyrell is stuck in King's Landing. Are there any Tyrells left at Highgarden? Lady Tyrell is in a really vulnerable situation at the moment... she could end up in irons for jaywalking if Cersei feels like it. On the other hand, the Lannisters are broke and have no allies left if a fight breaks out. She called Littlefinger to town to ask if she can depend on troops from the Vale if war breaks out, then promptly agrees to let him take those troops to Winterfell. Cersei could wind up in huge trouble. I don't think she has any idea how dangerous the Queen of Thorns actually is. Why is Cersei even doing this? She got what she wanted. Her little darling is firmly installed on the throne. She should be Freedom 55ing instead of picking a fight with the Tyrells. I notice that just like in season one she thinks she has obtained ultimate leverage by putting her rivals in the hands of deranged zealots, but just like season one I don't think she has any more control over the Sparrows than she had over Joffrey. If the Sparrows decide that Loras and Maergery are to be executed, things will go sideways for her just as when Joffrey had Ned executed. And I can't imagine how Tommen will react if Maergery is executed, but I doubt he'll forgive Cersei for her role in this. Sooo what's Littlefinger up to this time? Why does he want to take troops from the Vale to Winterfell? It seemed as if he had worked out a way to win without putting any cards on the table and without spending a dime. What's his motivation for getting personally involved? It's not really his style. I am guessing his angle is that if Stannis is winning then he assists Stannis to establish himself as an ally, offers to wed Sansa and be the new Warden of the North and support Stan's march south. On the other hand if the Boltons defeat Stannis then Littlefinger can swoop in to finish the job. It looks like Jaime and Bronn have some esplainin to do. On the bright side, at least they foiled the abduction attempt, so they've got that going for them. And Arya finally got to find out what's behind door #2! That was visually pretty stunning and kind of gave me chills. -k

It's The Music of Erich Zann. -k

The circumstances made trial in a civilian court the only acceptable choice. Those circumstances aren't applicable in every trial of a terrorist. -k

So when you say the local media aren't talking about it, you mean that there are no articles about it written by Real Texans in Bastrop County media websites Right Now. Way to move those goalposts! There has been lots of coverage of this conspiracy theory in many Texas media outlets, including the ones you cited, during the past 3 weeks, which is when the Governor and Senator Cruz and Rep Gohmert all sounded off on the topic. The news coverage on this in mainstream Texas media has pertained to the hilarious town hall meeting as well as the major politicians who have weighed in on the issue. And the editorial coverage in mainstream Texas media has been uniformly "please stop embarrassing our state". (Of the non-mainstream media serving Bastrop County, one should point out that Austin-based idiot Alex Jones is one of the biggest proponents of this lunacy.) I never claimed this idiocy was limited to Texas, and I never intended to "indict" Texans. While you've been hoping to convince people that this is just a handful of kooks, and some Bastrop residents worried about forest fires, I think the national poll indicates that it's more than just a few kooks. And BTW, I completely get that it's grating to see an entire state characterized on the basis of something like this. I've written more than a few times about how Albertans are mischaracterized as a monolithic group of rednecks. When my family packed up and moved to Ottawa in the 1990s I experienced this first-hand, discovering that my classmates had some really weird ideas about life in Alberta. I've lived in enough different places to know that none of these regional stereotypes hold much water. -k

Is it Polynewbie? Perhaps Gov. Abbott could send the Texas State Guard to monitor the situation. -k

When I read the title, I was wondering "why on earth would anybody rent a hot water heater?" but now that I've read the explanation, this sounds like the scammiest scam that ever scammed a scam. -k

Only insane people believe that Obama is going to attack Texas, Topaz. -k

So on the one hand you're angry that people are stereotyping Texans, and on the other hand you're disregarding this guy's column because he doesn't look enough like a stereotypical Texan to you? To be clear that was by no means an exhaustive list of articles I found. That was pretty much the first handful of articles I got by googling for "dallas morning news jade helm", "houston chronicle jade helm" and "austin chronicle jade helm". Try it yourself-- its easy to do, and will provide tons of examples to dispute your claim that Texans aren't talking about this. Actually, what it said is that they "harbor reservations that the government will use the training operation to impose greater control over the states." I noticed you cropped that little portion out of your response, probably because it didn't fit your narrative that this is about forest fires and Obamacare. -k

Texas media? Houston Chronicle Austin Chronicle Dallas Morning News (I assume Rasmussen isn't a Democrat think tank?) -k

Obamacare isn't working in a state where the state government has refused to actually implement it? What a shock! If it's really about forest fires, then why aren't Cruz and Gohmert and Abbott talking about forest fires? If it's just a handful of wackos, then why are Cruz and Gohmert saying otherwise? -k

"My office has reached out to the Pentagon to inquire about this exercise. We are assured it is a military training exercise. I have no reason to doubt those assurances, but I understand the reason for concern and uncertainty, because when the federal government has not demonstrated itself to be trustworthy in this administration, the natural consequence is that many citizens don't trust what it is saying." "I have a great deal of faith and confidence in Governor Abbott. He is a long-time friend and mentor of mine. You know, I understand a lot of the concerns raised by a lot of citizens about Jade Helm. It's a question I'm getting a lot. And I think part of the reason is we have seen, for six years, a federal government disrespecting the liberty of the citizens. That produces fear, when you see a government that is attacking our free speech rights, or Second Amendment rights, or religious liberty rights. That produces distrust." http://eaglerising.com/18237/ted-cruz-and-rand-paul-demand-answers-on-jade-helm-15/ It's a documented fact that Gov. Abbott has asked his State Guard to "monitor" the US military. You'd have to ask him and his commander for details about what that actually means. -k

You are confusing "debt" and "deficit". Deficit is our income minus our expenditures (ie, the government spending more than its revenue in a year.) Surplus is the opposite (ie, the government's revenue for the year exceeds expenditures.) Debt is the sum of our deficits over time. ie, if you run a $10 billion dollar deficit for 10 years in a row, you have a $100 billion dollar debt. If you then run $10 billion surpluses for two years and use the surplus to reduce the debt, then you still have an $80 billion debt. We ran surpluses for a few years under Paul Martin, but it wasn't nearly enough to erase decades of deficit spending and debt accumulated going back to Trudeau and Mulroney. Martin's few years of surpluses was a drop in the bucket compared to the accumulated debt. There may have been a budget surplus when Harper took over, but there was also a $500 billion dollar debt. -k

You'd have to ask Gov. Abbott or the commander of the Texas State Guard. -k

The ones who seem to be trying to take advantage of this are people like Gov. Abbott, Sen. Cruz, and Rep. Gohmert, who have been trying to walk a fine line between "just asking questions" and pandering to crazy. -k