GeorgiaDon

Semi-serious question: do law students have to take acting classes? I ask because I often see lawyers on the news describing their client as one step away from being sainted, when the the client has a rap sheet a mile long and is obviously a thug. Also, I imagine that a big part of being a successful trial lawyer is being able to project absolute certainty that your client is innocent, even if the client murdered someone in front of 15 witnesses and 5 security cameras. So, are successful trial lawyers just naturally such good actors that they can keep a straight face while speaking absolute bullshit, do they train for that, or are they just so immoral that it doesn't matter to them whether or not their client actually committed the crime? Whatever the answer, it would seem that practicing law would be great training for a political career. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

I am pretty disgusted with all politicians these days. Not just from one side, but all sides. They are nothing more than self serving crooks. The only people I am more disgusted with than the politicians is the media, oh and the lawyers too. But since politicians are more often than not, lawyers, it's all the same thing. Who's more to blame? Politicians who tell people only what polling tells them the people want to hear, or people who would never in a million years would elect a politician who always told the straight-up truth, however unpalatable? Maybe both? Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Almost all measurements in science involve proxies. I have never seen (and will never see) a DNA molecule with my eyes alone, yet I can sequence whole genomes using technologies that measure light released as nucleotides are incorporated into the cDNA strand. I cannot see the position of atoms in a protein crystal, yet I can deduce the location of those atoms because of the way they diffract X-ray beams. Actually I can't see the X-rays either, I have to use another proxy (previously X-ray film, nowadays X-ray sensitive CCDs). The planets Uranus and Neptune were discovered using a proxy, the effect of their gravitation on the motion of Jupiter and Saturn. Their location in space could be calculated with great accuracy based on the perturbation of Jupiter and Saturn's orbits, so Herschel knew exactly where to point his telescope. Foraminiferans are great proxies for sea surface temperature in two ways. First, they are coiled, and the direction of coiling is sensitive to temperature, so in a large enough sample the relative proportions of left- and right-coiling individuals accurately reflects relative temperature. Secondly, the incorporation of oxygen isotopes into the shell is temperature dependent. It's pretty fucking disingenuous of you to suggest that using "proxy data" is tantamount to "We'll manufacture some". Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

How about if you employed him, knew he was a CM, and still continued to use him in a job that provided locker room access to thousands of unsuspecting kids? How about if you did that because you knew that reporting him would endanger your businesses revenue? Such people are not "as guilty" as the CM himself, but if they knowingly enabled him they are still dirty dirty dirty. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Pretty sure it's entirely satire. On the sidebar there's a link to another story: Texas Board of Education Revises Textbooks: Slaves were ‘Unpaid Interns’. It's all a bit too 'over the top' to be real. Although I'm sure some of our more 'regressive' (or at least anti-progressive) friends here in SC might have been inclined to go along with the story. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

The quote is from an article in Forbes magazine. The article makes the argument that the problems with the ACA web site stems from a decision to have the site factor in the federal subsidies before showing people the cost of the various health care plans, in order to minimize the "sticker shock" of seeing the unsubsidized cost. In order to calculate the amount of subsidy a subscriber would receive, the site needs to obtain and verify information including income and age. This is why people have to create an account first, before they can even browse the choices. The verification process involves cross-checking the data against various databases, including (apparently) credit reporting agencies. This process is very computationally demanding, which is what slows everything down and has caused the system to crash. The more efficient system would have been to allow people to browse first, then register and do the subsidy calculations for only one choice at a time instead of all the possible choices, but that (so the argument goes) would have meant disclosing the unsubsidized cost up front, and the fear was that people would not proceed beyond that point due to "sticker shock". At any rate, I still don't see how checking your information against Experian allows them to take that data and sell it to third parties. If they did do that, I would fault Experian not healthcare.gov. Similarly if I apply for a mortgage I expect the bank to check my credit rating, and if the credit agency sells my information I wouldn't hold the bank liable for that. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

You aren't considered enrolled until you pay, and you have until Dec 15 to pay for coverage beginning in January. How many people do you think are going to pay in full 2 months before the bill is due? Moreover the stats are skewed by the number of people who had to log on several times due to the clunky start up. Also, who is really surprised that people will visit to get information so they can comparison shop before they buy, especially when the deadline is months away? If your intent was to suggest that 99.6% of visitors looked at all the plans on offer and rejected all of them, that's a pretty dumb suggestion. As I'm sure you know full well. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

You would know.Well considering that I'm a medical entomologist, I do know, though probably not in the sense that you meant. I've been amused by your choice of avatar for years. I suppose I should thank you for all the chuckles. It certainly helps put your posts in the appropriate context. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

I find it amusing that someone with your choice of avatar would use "maggot infested" as an insult. However, considering the preferred diet of the blowfly, your choice of political leaning makes a lot of sense. Garbage in, garbage out. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

If so, it's only because the right can't follow anything more involved than a bumper sticker. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

I also wonder about the constitutionality of the tactic of refusing to fund the government instead of the proper method of proposing and passing legislation to repeal a law (which the Republicans tried and failed at over 40 times). I wonder what the Supreme Court would say, if it comes to that. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

I guess Speaker's Corner will just die out if that happens. Isn't that a little extreme? Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Well considering Jesus turned water into wine (and apparently an excellent vintage), I don't see the problem with that. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Correction noted, thanks. Nevertheless, I would argue that stopping and frisking people at random, or everybody in a particular neighborhood, is hardly "reasonable". Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

??? Are you suggesting real Christians still follow Leviticus and Kings? If you don't believe in stoning people you're just a "Sunday Morning Christian"? Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Did you actually write those words, or just copy and paste them from some anonymous source to provoke a reaction? Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

So you admit to being nothing but a troll. If you consistently copy/post intentionally inflammatory material just to get a response, and even include language to indicate you personally agree with the ideas in the posting, you can't claim to be surprised when the people you are targeting get the idea that those posts do in fact reflect your beliefs. If you troll time and again with similar material, always pretending the ideas are yours or that you agree with them, who is to blame if people get the idea that those really are your beliefs? Here is the problem with your behavior. In the end nobody can be sure of who you are, what you believe, or if anything you have ever posted is true or reflects anything about what you believe. You have always portrayed yourself as an older gentleman with strong born-again Christian beliefs, who found an occupation as a substance abuse councilor after being "saved" from a self destructive life when you found Jesus. Now we don't know. Is that all just a fiction, created to "evaluate the responses"? Do you really live in North Georgia and Florida, and like to ride your motorcycle, or are you just a bored inmate in a federal prison in Utah? We have no way to know. Yet there is no way for anyone other than you to know this. So now we have two choices, neither of them reflecting well on you. Either you do agree with the reprehensible statements in your post, or you included the "I can't argue with any of it" statement to intentionally deceive readers of your post, which makes you a liar. Which one is it? Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

And you didn't read Ron's post properly before calling out Don for his reply, so if I were you I'd call it even and move on hey, just because we wasted a little bandwidth on both accounts.... have a good weekendAnd you as well. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

As a general proposition, it would be easy to eliminate almost all crime, and quickly solve what crime does occur, by micro-chipping everybody at birth and tracking everybody's movements 24/7, collecting a DNA sample from everybody at birth so it could be matched to forensic evidence, have the police listen in on every conversation, phone call, read every email or text message, confiscate all guns, pointy objects, electric drills, spoons, etc and on and on. Of course nobody, of any political stripe, would agree to that, because the cost in freedom would be vastly greater than the benefit to be gained. It's hard to balance personal freedoms with the desire for a peaceful and safe society. Different people will put the balance point at different places, depending on how they feel the loss of freedom vs increase in "safety" will affect them personally. Of course the Constitution puts limits on how far the government can intrude on freedoms, even in the name of security. It doesn't serve any useful purpose to attach labels like "liberal" or "republiscum" or whatever, unless you want to shut down the discussion. Anyway if the author of the article you posted doesn't like the court decisions, they are free to lobby for a constitutional change that allows the police to stop and search people without probable cause, and allows the police to blatantly profile based on race. Good luck with that. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

If you want to argue that "the erosion of personal freedoms is a potential problem for all", well I'm in complete agreement with that statement. Let's discuss these freedoms, and whether or not they are being eroded, and if so what to do about it. What "freedoms" are under threat, according to the post Ron copied/pasted? Not one thing is specifically mentioned. All we learn is that the country has gone to hell in a handbasket because of all these groups of people (Blacks, Latinos, Feminists, Gays, Government Workers, Union Members, Environmental Extremists, The Media, Hollywood , uninformed young people, the "forever needy," the chronically unemployed, illegal aliens and other "fellow travelers") now have a say in things, as opposed to the former situation which was dominated by "white Christian males". We don't know if the writer is upset about taxes, gun restrictions, teaching of evolution in the schools, gay marriage, license plates on cars, fluoride in drinking water, or any other issue of the day, because he mentions none of those things. All we get is that he hates it that non-"white Christian males" have a say in anything about this country. It's clear that you object to anyone ever being called out as racist, no matter how blatantly obvious they make their position. I don't understand that, and am curious about your reasons. I'm certain that you do not intend that we should gravely nod our heads and seriously debate the proposition that we would be better off, as a country, if only white male Christians had a say in anything. Should we just look the other way, politely change the topic to boobies or something? In other threads you take a stand against "politically correct" speech. Yet you get so upset when anyone uses the work "racist". I don't get it. Now, I agree that labeling someone "racist" just to dismiss some point they are trying to make isn't helpful. So I read Ron's post again, to see if there was any nugget of anything concrete to discuss that I missed the previous two times I read it. I still got nothing. So I'm not clear what "personal freedom" I am supposedly politicizing and leveraging. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

I guess it all went to hell when they extended the vote to people who didn't fit the "white Christian male" model. I wish I could say I'm surprised that you'd see fit to post such a blatantly racist rant. Perhaps you can also post a link to the part of the Constitution that says that only white Christian males are fit to vote? I'd also add that you'll probably want to limit it further, to white Christian males who came of age in the 1950s or earlier, as there are probable too many younger white Christian males who are complete repulsed by the drivel in your post. Yes I realize you didn't write it, but you posted it with the comment "I can't argue with any of it". Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

I have to disagree with you on this (not surprisingly). I think the point is to make it less likely that a private seller will unknowingly sell to someone who is legally barred from purchasing firearms. I admit that this poses a small inconvenience for those who are not so restricted. I happen to live in a rural area, in the largest county in Georgia, so it would take me 15-20 minutes to drive to the sheriff. Big whoop-de-do. In the Iowa system the permits are good for six months, and for any number of gun purchases, so it's not like I would need to run by the sheriff to get a permit every time I want to go to look at a possible purchase. The real question is, is there anything at all that would pass muster with you as an effort to prevent people who are legally disqualified from owning firearms from getting them via a private sale? Or would you hold that the only thing that should be done is to prosecute such people after the fact? It's a curious thing (to me) that I cannot go into a pharmacy and buy a cold remedy without showing ID, and I am limited to one bottle at a time. I cannot buy alcohol or (should I care to) tobacco without showing ID, despite the fact that I am in my 50s and would never be mistaken for a 20-year-old. I cannot vote without registering (and so having to prove citizenship and residence in the district) in advance, and then proving my identity again at the polling station. All are forms of prior restraint, justified by the perceived need to protect children from the perils of alcohol and tobacco, the need to prevent meth manufacturers from getting raw materials, and by the need to protect the sanctity of the vote. Yet it seems it is perfectly acceptable that wanted criminals, people with restraining orders against them, people who the legal system have deemed to be too out of contact with reality to own firearms, all these people are perfectly free to obtain whatever weapons they desire via private sales. If we ran voting the way we allow private gun sales to run, then anybody would be able to walk into any polling place (and any number of them), promise that they live in the precinct and are eligible to vote, and then vote. No a priori voter registration, no need to show ID, just purely an honor system. If it later turns out that more votes were cast than there are people living in the precinct, it would be up to law enforcement to try to track down whoever voted improperly and prosecute them after the fact. Yet, curiously enough, it seems that many of the people here in Speaker's Corner who most favor voting controls such as government approved IDs are also the same people who oppose background checks to keep criminals from purchasing guns. It's pretty obvious to me that criminals have no problem obtaining weapons. Its also obvious to me that a major part of the reason for that is that the NRA and some fraction of the gun owning population oppose absolutely any measure to impose even the most trivial of barriers to gun purchases. Since we all agree (I presume) that criminals don't obey the law, relying on an honor system where we expect criminals to say "I'd really like to get a gun, but that would be illegal so I guess I can't" is sheer idiocy. If we insist on maintaining a system where a very large fraction of all gun sales (about 40%) are done with no checks whatsoever, we should be honest about it and admit that we have no interest in even trying to reduce violent crime in this country. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Well, I had to go to the voting registration office to get put on the voter roles. But maybe that was just me. Hey wait a minute! Voter registration? I have to get put on a list if I want to vote? You mean the gooberment knows where I live, keeps a record of that, just so I can exercise a Constitutional Right???? I can't just walk into any polling station, demand my right to vote, and leave it up to the gooberment to prove after the fact that I was actually not actually entitled to vote at that polling place? What kind of a country is this, anyway? Not a free one, I guess. Oh, the humanity! Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Here's the Primary Identification section from the Georgia DDS web site: "Primary Identification (You must present 1 of the following unless otherwise noted): US Citizen Valid, Unexpired US Passport - For more information, please go to www.travel.state.gov/passport/ An original or certified copy of a US Birth Certificate/Amended Birth Certificate filed with the State Office of Vital Statistics or equivalent agency in the Applicant's state of birth (including US Territories and the District of Columbia). "Keepsake" birth certificates issued by hospitals are not acceptable. GA Residents, for more information use this link to GA Vital Records gta.georgia.gov/rover Non-GA residents, for more information use this link to view list of other State's Vital Records contacts www.cdc.gov/nchs/w2w.htm Consular Report of Birth Abroad issued by the U.S Department of State, Form FS-240, DS-1350, or FS 545 - For more information, please go to www.travel.state.gov/law/family_issues/birth/birth_593.html Certificate of Naturalization issued by DHS, Form N-550 or N-570 - For more Information, please go to www.dhs.gov/homeland-security-forms Certificate of Citizenship, Form N-560 or N-561, issued by the DHS - For more information, please go to www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis SSA Numident Record – Applicant’s date of birth must be prior to January 1, 1940 Original US Military Discharge Papers – Applicant’s date of birth must be prior to January 1, 1940" So you could use a passport or a Certificate of Citizenship instead of a birth certificate. That's a bit of a dodge, as you would almost certainly need a birth certificate to get a passport, assuming you were born in the US (which I'm pretty sure is the case). I suppose it's just possible the last two forms of ID might apply, not being sarcastic or anything but I recall you've written in the past about your experiences as a young man in the early '60s. Anyway there are other acceptable forms of primary ID but I agree the only one most people would have is either a birth certificate or passport (which requires a birth certificate). It also seems to be true that Georgia does not accept an out-of-state DL as a primary identification. As an aside, this thread does illustrate the problem people can run into when they need to get acceptable forms of ID starting from scratch, for example to vote. You need a birth certificate to get a passport, you need either one for a DL, and of course you need to be able to prove who you are to get a copy of your birth certificate. If you ever lose all your ID (say, in a house fire) it can be a long difficult job to replace it. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Ah, I see. Thanks for that. I don't think my position is exactly the same as the VPC, though the difference might be too nuanced for some. I don't argue that people should be disarmed. I also do not argue in favor of banning specific weapons or ammunition. I do think everyone should go through a background check, even for private sales. I like the system you described for Iowa, where a would-be purchaser gets a permit from the sheriff, who does the background check. I understand the Iowa law was recently revised, so if nothing negative turns up on the background check the sheriff must issue the permit, and that seems fine to me. That way there is no burden on the seller, other than to ask to see the permit. So I'm at a bit of a loss to see how my position is exactly like the VPC. Don _____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)