81–90 of 202 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "how can you tell the difference between anything and anything?" You can't until the overlord(s) you've delegated all your thinking to tells you what you saw.
Which is amusing, because it’s you lot here literally doing the groupthink. I guess my comment may have been received better if I framed it in the devils advocate / steel manning context.
Flying a drone within 1/2 mile of ICE vehicles, which may be unmarked, is illegal? You can be flying a drone and if an unmarked ICE vehicle drives close enough, without warning, you have now broken serious FAA laws? This isn’t the kind of restriction that gets passed when the people making the rules care about being fair or consistent. It’s a power grab.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A marginally less-extreme option would be to start subdividing larger states. The Constitution does not permit amendments to change the "equal" representation of states in the Senate, but we can even the playing field by making it easy for large states to subdivide for the benefit of the people.
Awesome idea: Texas can become four states, Northern California can become a state, Northwest Dakota, Northeast Dakota, and Upper New York can all become states too with equal Senate representation. Or did you perhaps have some gerrymandering-esque idea to limit these 'benefits' to liberal metropolitan areas?
Flying a drone within 1/2 mile of ICE vehicles, which may be unmarked, is illegal? You can be flying a drone and if an unmarked ICE vehicle drives close enough, without warning, you have now broken serious FAA laws? This isn’t the kind of restriction that gets passed when the people making the rules care about being fair or consistent. It’s a power grab.
How exactly is anyone supposed to comply with this, given that neither the FAA nor ICE are telling anyone where ICE vehicles and operations are. (The answer is obvious - it's impossible to comply with it.)
Make no mistake, getting targeted by this will be severely punishing, even if the courts ultimately throw it out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Awesome idea: Texas can become four states, Northern California can become a state, Northwest Dakota, Northeast Dakota, and Upper New York can all become states too with equal Senate representation. Or did you perhaps have some gerrymandering-esque idea to limit these 'benefits' to liberal metropolitan areas?
> Awesome idea [...] Or did you perhaps have some gerrymandering-esque idea to limit these 'benefits' to liberal metropolitan areas? What? It sounds like you're crowing over some kind of "gotcha", but what is it? If we both agree on the same principle, what's the problem? Namely, that citizens being disproportionately (un)represented in their "democratic" government is typically bad , and especially when it's just fr…
Flying a drone within 1/2 mile of ICE vehicles, which may be unmarked, is illegal? You can be flying a drone and if an unmarked ICE vehicle drives close enough, without warning, you have now broken serious FAA laws? This isn’t the kind of restriction that gets passed when the people making the rules care about being fair or consistent. It’s a power grab.
"ALL UNMANNED ACFT ARE PROHIBITED FROM FLYING WITHIN A STAND-OFF DISTANCE OF 3000FT LATERALLY AND 1000FT ABOVE."
That is somewhat narrowly defined. I'm sure you can still effectively film them from 1100ft.
further:
"FACILITIES AND MOBILE ASSETS, INCLUDING VESSELS AND GROUND VEHICLE CONVOYS AND THEIR ASSOCIATED ESCORTS"
I think you'd easily beat this language in court. "Please show us where 'mobile asset' is legally and narrowly defined."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fascism always needs an enemy/excuse/scapegoat, and if it can’t find one it makes one out of thin air. It can’t actually solve societal problems, that requires progressives.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Are you talking about the razor wire that the supreme court allowed the administration to remove from the Texas border? If so, a little disingenuous to say fences and barriors when talking about razor wire. If not, please cite your sources so we can all be informed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Awesome idea [...] Or did you perhaps have some gerrymandering-esque idea to limit these 'benefits' to liberal metropolitan areas? What? It sounds like you're crowing over some kind of "gotcha", but what is it? If we both agree on the same principle, what's the problem? Namely, that citizens being disproportionately (un)represented in their "democratic" government is typically bad , and especially when it's just fr…
But they weren't just "ancient" quirks. They were commitments made to your fellow Americans in smaller states. Commitments that were required to allow the formation of the country at all; and as such should be shown a little more respect than being referred to as ancient quirks. That's not to say that they should be forever set in stone, but we should at least proceed with an honest portrayal of why we're in this sit…
How else would you describe the way populations grew more places labeled X and not places labeled Y over the course of 250 years?
> They were commitments made to your fellow Americans in smaller states. Commitments that were required to allow the formation of the country at all;
Is this just a complaint about phrasing, or are you claiming some commitment would be broken?
My proposal has no effect on any commitments made to states, neither in letter nor in spirit. It doesn't change the rules for Senate nor House representation, and it doesn't infringe on the sovereignty of any state. If anything is restores state-sovereignty in one narrow scenario, a scenario no signatory ever believed was an intended feature.
Namely, the betrayal which happens when when humans (residing within the borders of a high-population state) are partially disenfranchised, and coalition of low-pop states vows: "Even though it's entirely within your own borders, we will veto any attempts to fix it. No other states except us can be small, we are pulling up the ladder. In order for us to keep an advantage your residents must suffer."