jason-old
Jason
jason-old

@aarste: 1/3 of the Senate and 100% of the House of Representatives are elected every 2 years. The President every 4 years. So in any given even-numbered year you'll have 435 House seats, 33 or more Senate seats and possibly the White House. In addition, at the State level, many governors are up for re-election and

@Improbable: Depends . . . did you look at the actual paper? (bad) or had you scanned it to a jpg, encrypted it with TrueCrypt, saved it to your Dopbox account and acessed it with your Android phone (good). :-)

@ho0lee0h: You can re-register for the next election, but at least in my state you wouldn't be able to vote somewhere else on election day, mainly because they would then need to confirm that you hadn't done the same thing in a dozen other districts that day.

@nolabar10der: I agree with you on the desirability of having some (at least minimal) policy preference to guide one's vote, but it's also worth noting that to some of us liberty is not a cheap buzzword. Discount it from the mouths of people that clearly don't take it seriously, but also recognize when someone

@casjuan: In addition to fraud, there's the concern about coercion. If I'm alone in a voting booth, there's no way a parent / boss / etc can force me to vote a certain way. If I'm voting online from home, work, etc, there's no way of ensuring that someone's not being coerced. Granted, the same can happen with

My threshhold for saying, "This was pointless" is really really high. This met the threshhold.

My threshhold for saying, "This was pointless" is really really high. This met the threshhold.

@bakana: In many cases of fraud the waiter/waitress carries a small deviec called a skimmer. Looks like a pager, but it has a little slot that reads all the data from a credit card for later cloning.

I can't believe nobody's mentioned TrueCrypt yet! (kidding, kidding).

@Demonicume: Like when you unsubscribe from a newsletter and it prompts you for feedback, that would be awesome! For example:

@Talthybius: So you mean I'm not responding to your claim that "CUvFEC does not limit that spending to corporations who are headquartered in and pay taxes in the United Status." when I write this: "Smith pointed out that the decision did not overturn the ban on political donations by foreign corporations and the

@Talthybius: Again with the ad hominem attacks. Because I have a different opinion, I'm a troll. Because I have ready answers to your insults, it's boilerplate. Liberalism used to mean open-mindedness. It makes me sad to see what passes for liberalism in our country today.

@Talthybius: The left doesn't have one station . . . they have the rest of them. Or are you one of these delightful souls who thinks MSNBC is straight news? Chris Matthews talking about a "tingle up his leg" during the inauguration of POTUS? Find me any Fox NEWS personality who talks that way? I understand many

@roninpenguin: I'd like to highlight how much more interesting discussing this with you is from discussing this with Talthybius. Thank you. That whole, "reasonable people may differ" thing is utterly lost on so many people today. I don't think liberals are mean-spirited, evil or dumb. I think they have a different

@roninpenguin: I'd like to highlight how much more interesting discussing this with you is from discussing this with Talthybius. Thank you. That whole, "reasonable people may differ" thing is utterly lost on so many people today. I don't think liberals are mean-spirited, evil or dumb. I think they have a different

@Talthybius: I wonder sometimes whether liberals are born with the sense of smugness or whether they have to acquire it over time the way other people acquire skills or experience. I've quoted facts about these cases every step of the way. You instead insult my intelligence, question my reasoning skills and

@Talthybius: Sadly, you're as ignorant of the facts of the Citizens United case as is our dear leader POTUS when he classlessly scolded SCOTUS during the SOTU. Fortunately, your ignorance is less harmful to the country than his. Read up:

@Talthybius: You appear reluctant (perhaps unable?) to argue facts so you instead follow the path of most people losing an argument and resort to ad hominem attacks. Is there a particular fact that you care to refute here? For the record, I find Gelnn Beck's television program well-researched, entertaining and

@roninpenguin: This line made my day: 'I hate hearing stuff like "Paid for by the Committee of People Who Love Puppies" when the truth is that it was really paid for by some special interest group that may or may not actually like puppies.' LOL!!

@roninpenguin: Thanks for the clarification. In that case, in spite of all POTUS' demonization, there's nothing for you to object to in Citizens United (the SCOTUS case that Talthybius lambaseted to start this whole thread). The case [en.wikipedia.org] did not cover donations to political candidates or campaigns.