This is how AOL will make their comeback and the swamp boys will make it happen. We will get our memberberries going and we won't mind that the internet is just even more of a shitty pay for pay cluster fuck than it is today. I wonder how the FTC will handle spectrum auctions and amateur radio license issuance and complaints. But these things really don't matter to the swap boys. The spectrum is already promised to our friends at ATT and Verizon. T-Mobile if they put it in the right hole. They could care less about us radio nerd, four hundred pound computer hacking consumers.
What is sad is that you would have to be blind or very ignorant to the current and sad state of broadband in this country to believe that this will do good and not just roll to serve the corporate interests of the most powerful telecom companies on the planet. But then again if you "only check email and it's good enough for me" then you probably have no idea of what a good connection works like or what you are missing because you don't use the network as a business tool or for gaming.
Just remember that they will kill everyone on your buddy list if you violate their TOS.
If the DOJ actually wanted them to do something about the problem it wouldn't be a request, but a demand, and one backed by a stiff penalty for non-compliance. Imagine that same boneheaded logic applied elsewhere and it's easy to see how weak it was.
"My client is pleading 'Not guilty' Your Honor on account of the law merely asking people not to drive while intoxicated, it does not actually say that doing so is illegal or even bad."
By merely suggesting that the PD put in place a group that might hold the officers accountable, or even present the facade of such, they basically gave the PD all the room it needed to decide that nah, they'd rather not.
He will eventually get the money back, because if they dont release the bond after some amount of time he has grounds to sue the local city. Given he has legal judgement that his case was settled and no pending appeals the city has no grounds to keep the money other then "we dont wanna".
In addition there are legal methods (like the one he took) to force the court to say pay him back, the court can stall for a while but at some point this stalling tactic fails (normally after a reasonable time he can sue or otherwise ask a higher court to look at this case as the current court is failing to take action resulting in harm)
We should do the same thing for medicines, too. Just quit taking them! All of them! It might take a while, but it will work. After a while the drug companies will be so eager to get rid of their drugs that they will pay *you* to take them! Just like Mexico is going to pay for that wall.
A is a 'good citizen' and keeps his/her head down, doesn't make waves, doesn't question those in charge, and as such isn't given much attention by the higher ups.
B is not a 'good citizen'. They speak their mind, question statements made by their betters, and have the audacity so suggest that the government might not in fact have their best interests in mind. As a result should B make too much of a hassle the can look forward to 'investigations', a 'few questions', maybe some 'administrative issues' should they try to fly anywhere or apply for a job that requires a background/security check.
If everyone is guilty of something(and with the insane and near countless laws we have that's pretty much a given) then that gives those with the ability to hand out punishments enormous power, both direct and indirect at their discretion and/or whim.
Re: Re: 'Corruption, noun: What happens in other countries'
Quite right, even if the impossible happened and a politician that was less than absolutely perfect managed to slip through and remain undetected, the flawless legal system would without fail prevent them from causing any damaage, which just makes it even more clear that so much as mentioning the possibility is completely and utterly Un-American and an indication of a seriously warped, perhaps even communist mindset.
'I have members of family that served, but I do not respect someone 'just because' they served.'
Respect is a scale, not a yes or no thing. I can respect someone a little or a lot. Serving in the military earns you some respect. Acting like a fuckwad loses you some respect. Bad actions can absolutely cancel out any respect that might be deserved for serving, e.g. McCain.