Court authorized wiretaps in the U.S. surged last year

Yes, I'll agree with that. However, getting elected is rarely the end in itself. It's simply the means to fulfilling one's real agenda. In the case of this infestation of neocons we have in the US, their foreign policy agenda really is agressive globalization. They believe it'll change the world for the better. I have no crystal ball, so I can't comment on what will happen. However, I can note that violent dictators throughout history have had the same agenda, which is to make everybody like them, to export their culture, and thus their influence. The problem isn't so much with the end; we in the west all agree that in the end, more trade, better communication, and a level playing field for business is a good thing. It's with the fact that they believe they don't have to answer for the means with which they persue that end. It's this idealism that leads to piles of burnt bodies, and less communication, and more anger, and more hate. Economies are far more efficient when everybody likes everybody else. Hate is a tax on the efficient use of resources. This is the part they always seem to miss.

Well, 9/11 wasn't a non-event. Also, the US's *response* to terrorism isn't a non-event.

I agree with that. People hear about a kid getting kidnapped in Colorado, and immediately, you see no kids on the street for a week.

I don't really think it's that simple. The politicians aren't picking the issues; they are doing polling, focus groups, and phone interviews to determine what folks care about. Thus, the issues they come up with directly reflect the issues that coalitions of people care about. They need to find issues they can make people believe they can affect.

Whether they can affect these issues is really unimportant, at least until the next election cycle. In fact, there is evidence that the more effective a president is at 'fixing' his issues, the less likely he is to get reelected; he has 'done his job', and thus the base that got him elected moves on to other issues. Dick Morris, the guy who got Clinton elected for his second term (and is now a conservative comentator for the FOX network,) pointed out that this is why Bush would win reelection; he was incompetent. He had messed up the response to 9/11 so badly that he still had a job to do.

I think Karl Rove, the political genius behind the bushies, knows this. Thus, the bushies focus on losing issues that people are pissed off about; gay marrage; prayer in school; abortion rights. Then, when they lose, they can blame it on those 'liberal elite', and get elected to fight on. They start indeterminate wars that will keep people thinking about foreign policy through the next election cycle. They bankrupt the government with tax cuts, and then try to 'fix it' with changes to social security which will never fly.

I can't really think of a single thing this administration has succeeded at, except cutting taxes, destroying all environmental controls on business, and starting protracted wars in the mideast. By looking at what an administration succeeds at, you can determine their real agenda. Karl doesn't care about the Christians and their 'lets live on mainstreet USA' fantasy agenda. He cares about his buddies in the texas oil business. Look at the profits of energy companies in the US, particularly the texas energy producers.

--
Regards,
  Bob Monsen

Not me! How about you?

Draw a graph. X-axis is how much money we spend supressing illegal drugs. Y-axis is how much harm is done to the users of those drugs. Are you arguing that the curve is flat, or even slopes upward?

I suspect that if certain drugs were freely and cheaply available, great social harm and lots of personal misery would result. As currently result from cigarettes, alcohol, gambling, television, hydrogenated shortenings, and possibly pornography.

John

Fine, so long as the state does not facilitate the harm, and does not pay any resulting medical expenses.

John

Now that you mention it, theatres do result in a lot of personal misery. Opera, especially.

John

So, are you opposed to mandatory seatbelt and motorcycle helmet use laws?

John

Cannabis is fairly low on the harm scale; minor lung damage, learning problems, car crashes. Here in San Francisco, Mexican heroin is cheap, and the hospital emergency rooms are impacted by a stream of people who have shot up their veins so much they've had to move on to inter-muscular injection, which causes nasty, hard-to treat necrosies. One hospital visit can cost a hundred thousand dollars or more to treat, and these people don't have insurance. Two emergency rooms here have closed because of this. Escasy has done neurological damage to lots of kids. Steroids are bad news. Speed does kill.

I have a friend who treats men for sexual disfunction, and he tells us wild, sick, gruesomely funny stories about how p*rn wrecks some peoples' lives. I just fired a guy who was so addicted to p*rn that he didn't work, but mostly used up our DSL bandwidth and consumed our supplies downloading p*rn and burning CDs.

In a society where work and duty have been increasingly replaced by amusement-seeking (a natural consequence of productivity increases, courtesy engineers) some portion of the population will be bored enough, and have means enough, to be very self-destructive, and often destructive to others, too. Is that a proper concern of government?

John

who thought you'd killfiled me.

I read in sci.electronics.design that John Larkin wrote (in ) about 'Court authorized wiretaps in the U.S. surged last year', on Mon, 2 May 2005:

.... which is precisely why it is futile, indeed wholly counter-productive, to make some drugs 'illegal'. There will always be another one along in a minute. (Of course, the drug itself isn't illegal; it's possession of it which is illegal. Some people would like to make even mentioning the names of drugs illegal.)

--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
There are two sides to every question, except
\'What is a Moebius strip?\'
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

I read in sci.electronics.design that Jim Thompson wrote (in ) about 'Court authorized wiretaps in the U.S. surged last year', on Mon, 2 May 2005:

I don't think that's necessarily a joke. Consider what removing the illegality would do to organized crime, and what the funds released from drug law enforcement could do for world-wide health.

Drugs (alcohol, tobacco and coffee) that are not illegal aren't half as fascinating as the illegal ones. Prohibition showed the futility of legal sanctions against drug use.

Does the state have any right to prevent people damaging themselves with drugs by putting them in prison so that other people can damage them (and where they can often still get the drugs), while the distributors of the drugs amass large fortunes? Does it make ANY SORT of sense? What would an intelligent alien or computer make of it? We may find out in about 20 years!

--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
There are two sides to every question, except
'What is a Moebius strip?'
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

Is that so?

..... new Communications Privacy Directive ..... that would allow countries to order ISPs to monitor and retain information on all users for an extended period of time....

To 'allow' countries is something different than to force them. But, it is still bad, very bad.

All this crap is the result of the 'negotions' between US/EU. And the EU dances. Dances on command, like puppets on strings.

[snip]

--
Thanks, Frank.
(remove \'q\' and \'invalid\' when replying by email)

Well, our current president likes to make everybody believe that he doesn't listen to focus groups. He brags about doing the hard thing. It's crap. It's all a football game for both republicans and democrats. The fact that elections are so close is good evidence of what I'm arguing. It's a testament to the skill of the advertising guys who actually run the campaigns. If candidates were actually saying what they wanted to do, the other guy would clobber them with their own words. They eek out constituencies one at a time with careful, controlled speeches, ads, email blitzes, etc. The focus poll on EVERY issue. Even the words they use are tested again and again on focus groups. Every position is calculated to garner an advantage.

--
Regards,
  Bob Monsen

A friend of mine spent time as cook on a freighter. He is a bit of an arrogant MIT jerk, so the crew hated him and harassed him. To get back at them, he started putting old cigarette butts into their coffee. According to him, they liked the coffee better...

Ah, cologne is far more offensive to me than cigarette smoke. It's probably more dangerous as well, due to my asthmatic reaction to those floral scents.

--
Bob Monsen

Dance... They love it. We had such stuff decades before, on paper though. There are always those wou love to collect data on whatever. As long as there are others who pay for this data... A goverment contract is something great, isn't it. Just send some bills to their hands.

Rene

I read in sci.electronics.design that John Larkin wrote (in ) about 'Court authorized wiretaps in the U.S. surged last year', on Mon, 2 May 2005:

Those drugs are NOT 'illegal'; they are prevented from being prescribed, either wholly or for some people. You cannot be jailed for possessing thalidomide. Nor can you for potassium cyanide and a host of other stuff which is far more dangerous than any recreational drug.

Of course not. First, only the very stupid ones would do that. Secondly, the very stupid ones already do, because no ban on drugs is effective. The way to discourage people from drugs is by education. I know that's a BAD word these days, but it's the only solution.

I believe that the Parkinson's cases were caused by impure Es. But again, Es are everywhere in the young adult community. Only by EDUCATING them about the dangers can we expect to persuade them not to indulge.

There wouldn't be any need for crack if cocaine were legalised, as it was in England till about 1910. It was made illegal, too, on highly spurious grounds.

Pardon? What do you mean?

Because putting out fires is EFFECTIVE.

Why, indeed, as the medics are now finding out to OUR cost, with MRSA, drug-resistant malaria and TB, etc.. And they don't 'emerge', they are the results of:

- using antibiotics too freely, especially as 'placebos-on-demand' for patients with virus infections;

- not EDUCATING people that they MUST complete a course of antibiotics in order not to create resistant strains.

--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
There are two sides to every question, except
'What is a Moebius strip?'
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

Yep, that's why you kill them before they can kill you, for certainly they

*will* kill you if you do nothing.

--
  Keith

Yes. I find the argument of, well marijuana is harmful, so it should be illegal, completely bogus. Its got f'all do do with state what someone chooses to do with their own bodies.

Kevin Aylward snipped-for-privacy@anasoft.co.uk

SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture, Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

That's exactly my view;-)

Kevin Aylward snipped-for-privacy@anasoft.co.uk

SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture, Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

I read in sci.electronics.design that John Larkin wrote (in ) about 'Court authorized wiretaps in the U.S. surged last year', on Mon, 2 May 2005:

[snip]

Sure; would you have it otherwise?

No, it's realism. in practice, we can't stop them, even by throwing gigabucks at drug control.

[snip]

No, AIDS is transmitted by sharing body fluid (not only sexual fluid) with an infected person. Drugs are somewhat contributive, in promoting carelessness, but that very much includes alcohol.

[snip]

Of course. I'm glad that you realise that. (;-)

--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
There are two sides to every question, except
\'What is a Moebius strip?\'
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

I read in sci.electronics.design that John Larkin wrote (in ) about 'Court authorized wiretaps in the U.S. surged last year', on Mon, 2 May 2005:

Sacrifice it to Ceres, of course. What do you do?

--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
There are two sides to every question, except
\'What is a Moebius strip?\'
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

A while back, someone suggested 'the Internet'. Maybe.

--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
There are two sides to every question, except
\'What is a Moebius strip?\'
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk