Not when those who follow the SJW path, to blame and shame without evidence, sometimes vehemently. I don't disagree with their ideals, necessarily, just their methods. It isn't war. It is society adjusting to the errors of their ways, more slowly than some wish, but that is their problem, not ours. To use warrior tactics is what makes them SJW's, they want to make their problem, ours, whether we deserve it or not. And as the speed at which society adjusts isn't our problem as we don't control society. They want to change minds faster than minds want to be changed. Some are going to take longer than others, so foisting some sentiments on the rest of us is...well abusive might be a bit strong, but not much.
I used to tell my manager trainees (there were many, and many very successful) that I wanted them to do something, anything, even if it is wrong (we could correct that later), but these days when politicians feel the need to do something, anything, even if it is wrong I have a different perspective. Correcting laws (even unconstitutional ones) is a lot more difficult than repairing the mistakes of a young manager trainee.
Like the SJW's use of blame and shame without evidence, the label may be inappropriately applied, as they apply their blame and shame without evidence, in some instances. In others it is perfectly justified. When someone says 'your racist' and you reply 'I'm not' and that is used as proof that you are because you didn't say 'I'm anti-racism', that is not a reasonable position, and therefore warrior tactics. It isn't the goal that is improper, it is the method.
Cards should be called by the suit they represent, not by some other name because it may have a different meaning in another context. The word 'master' has become anathema to some, especially in colleges where the title 'house master' was used as a title for the one in charge of a dorm. But because 'master' also had connotations of the owner of slaves it is now considered racist, to those who like to blame and shame without evidence. The certified Master Chef's of the world would like to disagree, along with many others.
But, then, what should we call them?
Posturizing, the way SJW's try to get attention and attempt to shame everybody else to their way of thinking. Unfortunately, this has become the new norm for politicians who may or may not be SJW's. Even more unfortunately some succumb to the tactic.
Just what does the USPS think should be classified about it's operations? Where or how they go about testing mail for bombs or ricin or other pathogens maybe (but is that really secret?), but could that take 1200 pages?
Unless they give a result you don't like, such as having 'your' words moderated. (I don't mean you AC, I mean those that that want only their words displayed, anywhere they wan't, whenever they want, even if those words are misinformation or outright lies).
It is good that Senators Cox and Wyden have made their comment public, but I doubt it will do any good as the FCC is likely to lose it, along with many others that speak against the petition. Then, when Senators Cox and Wyden claim they made it publicly, and dispersed the content of their comment publicly, the FCC will just maintain that it was 'never submitted' as we can't find it, so it doesn't count.
Not that that will get them anywhere because when they get sued for trying to regulate the Internet in ways § 230 does not enable the court will just get Senators Cox and Wyden to speak as witnesses, either as called by the proponents of the suit or as amici curiae.
"President Donald Trump’s campaign and the Republican Party are devoting millions of dollars to wage a state-by-state legal battle against mail-in voting during the coronavirus pandemic, not only suing state officials but also intervening in cases where they aren’t a party to limit how Americans can vote from home."
Doesn't matter. Cops got immunity and in front of a Grand Jury. Why would a DA present testimony to a Grand Jury that needed for the testifiers to have immunity for lying? I did not mention the Brady aspect.
I am wondering, after hearing that the cops were being given immunity for lying in the case they were hearing, how they justified actually rendering a true bill indicting the suspects? If there was enough 'other' evidence, then why did the prosecutor feel the need for the cops to testify at all?
There seems to be a lot about this case that stinks, especially about the prosecutors behavior. Then there's the cops.
What are the chances that Barr is actually trying to protect the protesters? By removing them from local jurisdiction and charging them with something so hard to prove, isn't he just setting them free? Of course there is the intermediary incarceration and the expense of a defense, but the likelihood of a long term sentence is low.
Nah. Barr isn't smart enough to think that through. Instead he is looking for yet another method for control, or at least the threat of more control through fear.
Five Eyes. You forgot Five Eyes, the international buddy system for intelligence agencies. They don't need private contractors, they just get one of their partners to do it, and come away with clean hands. The question will remain, however, that when this becomes clear to the courts if the same issue of circumventing rules surrounding 4th Amendment activities won't come up again. As they should.
'Broken Windows policing'. Is that where the police break the windows and then arrest you for having broken windows?
They are not doing 'broken windows policing' as that would mean that they were actually going after petty crime in order to discourage less petty crime. They are just harassing people, some of whom have criminal histories, but no current criminal activity (that we know of). I am unaware of having long grass being a crime anywhere, though it does violate the covenants of some HOA's, that is not criminal, it is contractual, and not the business of the police.
I am dying to hear the justification between long grass and criminal activity. What's that you say? There isn't any? So, in the end, the supposition is that The Pasco County Sheriff's Department thinks that if they can get everyone to move out of Pasco County then they will have a lower crime rate with the added bonus of less to do.
Has anyone mentioned to them that if there are no residents in Pasco County there will be no tax base to fund the sheriff's department?