http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/07/29/does-legalization-cell-phone-unlocking-really-benefit-consumers/?intcmp=obnetwork

Take THAT!!! :D

Michale

We were talking about Arnold Schrazzenagger movies the other day..

Finally watched SABOTAGE...

It wasn't bad. A step up from mindless entertainment.. Had a few of my favorite Actors..

Sawyer from LOST.. Mac from THE UNIT..

It was fairly decent. It probably helped I went in not expecting a whole helluva lot...

AS really needs to give up the COMMANDO rolls... He should age gracefully..

Like Sean Connery...

Michale

Which is funny because I love apocalyptic end of the world movies..

"You should be happy with that. And you would be if you didn't harbor this morbid desire to face the end of the world.."
-Morgan Freeman, OUTBREAK

I even liked THE POSTMAN.... A LOT... :D

But movies that have a ton of violence JUST to have a ton of violence don't interest me much..

Although, it does have Charlize Theron in it.. The hottest African American on ANY planet!!! :D

Didn't see the original Sin City, so I doubt the sequel will hold anything for me..

I gotta go with GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY.. Anything that has a talking raccoon that blows shit up??

I am there!!! :D

Michale

-David

New Mad Max trailer ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iO0jUAzOsV8

Boehner rules out impeachment: ‘Scam started by Democrats’
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/29/boehner-rules-out-impeachment/

Fear-mongerings Democrats get their wee-wees whacked!!! :D

As I have said time and again, talk of impeachment prior to Republicans owning the Senate is ridiculous...

AFTER the GOP takes the Senate, the GOP can hold impeachment over Obama like the Sword Of Damocles...

Michale

Amen to THAT!!! :D

Michale

Yep. Same for Republicans.

The problem is that the way that our system is structured, with so much reliance on special interest groups to fund campaigns, that many candidates, once in office, simply aren't nor do they have incentive to.

They tend to find it easier to take the money, say they're going to serve the public interest, and then once elected pay back the corporate interest groups.

It's why my biggest issue is money in politics. Until we find a way to either take the money out of the equation or introduce a more direct democracy, we're likely going to see the same old, same old.

If you ask Americans about issues, we tend to agree. The polarization comes from special interest groups and how they've figured out how to win elections.

So, in other words, give Americans more freedom over their own lives and insure the government has LESS control over their own lives.

I'm all for freedom. As Hillel (one of the founders of Judeo-Christian religions) said: "If I am not for myself, then who will be for me?"

I also believe, however, that we have a responsibility to our community and our country. Or, to also quote Hillel: "If I am only for myself, then what am I?"

This is why I believe in community and government. They serve a need that markets simply don't. (Of course this doesn't make me any less angry at corruption.)

It's a balance though between individuality and responsibility. At least that's my belief.

It's a wonder we disagree on ANYTHING!

There is more truth to this than I think even we know.

-David

Agreed...

So, if "the public" puts Democrats in charge, then one can construe that "the public" thinks that Democrats will serve the public good...

Logical??

I still believe people tend to know what's best for their families and children.

Again, agreed...

So, in other words, give Americans more freedom over their own lives and insure the government has LESS control over their own lives...

It's a wonder we disagree on ANYTHING!!??? :D

Michale

Good question. In a democracy, I believe we, the public, define the public good.

I still believe people tend to know what's best for their families and children.

-David

Like Illegal Immigrants??? :D

Other than that, excellent lesson, David! :D

But I do have a serious question (no, really, I do!! :D) about this:

If we chartered corporations for the public good and they are causing more damage than harm (either because they've become a monopoly or for other reasons), maybe we should start asking ourselves if we shouldn't break them up?

Who defines "the public good"???

THAT is the question...

Michale

Great ... so everyone should be allowed to avoid their responsibility to the country. At this point, we're pretty much not a country anymore.

Where I've had more success is in talking about the history of incorporation in America (and elsewhere) and some of the reasons why we originally allowed corporate charters.

In many ways the Revolutionary War was as much a revolt against the British East India Company as it was against Britain. At the time, it was more of a monopoly than Walmart is today.

People forget that the Tea Act of 1773 was corporate corruption at the highest level. It was the British government putting in place a law to aid a monopoly in unloading surplus tea. The unfortunate consumers in this instance were the American colonists.

One of the goals of this act was to drive competitors out of business.

In many ways, our Revolution was just as much about getting out from under the yolk of a monopoly as it was from separation from England.

For 100 years or so after the Revolution, we had a healthy suspicion of corporate charters and kept very tight restrictions on who could incorporate.

Charters were granted for very specific purposes only (usually for the public good) and could be revoked easily if companies exceeded their authority, broke laws, or acted against the public good.

Charters also typically expired after a number of years.

This idea at the heart was that citizens granted charters only for the public good. And we kept a close eye on these corporations because we knew that without oversight we could have another EIC, another company exploiting our country while returning little to the citizens.

Me personally, I think it may be getting time for a return to this view of corporations.

Revoke a few charters and our current companies might become better citizens.

If we chartered corporations for the public good and they are causing more damage than harm (either because they've become a monopoly or for other reasons), maybe we should start asking ourselves if we shouldn't break them up?

-David

Yea?? And when she decides not to seek the nomination, guess who'll have the last laugh?? :D

Michale

So, we're agreed.. There is boo koo buyer's remorse over Obama..

That's all I am saying...

Michale

same poll

Clinton 55%
Romney 42%

Buyer's remorse indeed, but no pent up demand for a used Romney either. He is your father's Cadillac; cushy ride, poor handling.

also in the same poll, another reason for Hillary to smile just very slightly:

Christie 13%
Paul 12%
Huckabee 12%
Perry 11%
Ryan 11%

Mostly because she knows it's Silly Season, these hypotheticals mean next to nothing, and that many Perry votes are probably not for the Governor wearing Henry Kissinger's old glasses, but rather for the pop singer, and her splashy "Dark Horse Tour."

July 18-20 2014
Obama 44%
Romney 53%
Neither (vol.) 3%

Talk about buyer's remorse!!

That's just GOTTA hurt!!! :D

Michale

This one's for you...

http://sjfm.us/temp/4cw.jpeg

:D

Michale

In a twist of irony, it's actually DEMOCRATS who are floating 90% of the impeachment talk.. :D

Dems are so petrified of the upcoming shellacking, they are throwing everything they can against the wall, hoping for something to stick..

Michale

Put another way...

Shuttle Diplomacy is great...

But, as with Clinton, Kerry is missing the point

The "DIPLOMACY" part is MUCH more important than the "SHUTTLE" part..

Michale

Oh I do... I apologize for not making that clear..

ANYONE who tries to equate "terrorism" with political disagreements is a complete and utter MORON...

"Present company excepted, of course.."
-General Chang, STAR TREK VII, The Voyage Home

:D

I think you would agree with me on that.. :D

But the ding on the cannibis guy is well-deserved..

For those who can really "see", there is a big fat line between passionate activism and hysterical fanaticism...

Unfortunately, we see far too much of the latter and far too little of the former...

But, good call on the guy.. That's why I like it here.. By and large, yer not afraid to call a spade a spade... I wish more Weigantians could step back and do the same..

Now, pardon me.. I have to go wipe this brown stuff off my nose.. :D

Michale

Hey, I thought you'd have liked that ding on the weed guy...?

-CW

Touché!

Although I do tend to slip out of the editorial "we" here in the comments...

:-)

-CW

Oh, the irony.... :D

Liz,

Kerry is probably more deserving of this award than most of the recipients this year when you compare the blood, sweat and tears that go into their respective work.

While Kerry deserves an E for effort, he really hasn't accomplished much...

The thing is, if Kerry REALLY wants to save lives in the Middle East, he should just butt out and let Israel finish the job...

Imposing another cease fire will just repeat the cycle of death and destruction over and over..

Let Israel finish off Hamas once and for all. Then no one need die in Gaza....

Michale

I really should have ...

Don't you mean, 'we' ... you shouldn't shoulder ALL of the blame for these things ... after all, it's a group effort, right?

:-)

Fair point. I really should have given a MIDOTW to Kerry last week, but overlooked his diplomacy for some reason (too focused on domestic stuff).

But you're right, I should keep foreign policy in mind when considering awards. Like I said, fair point.

-CW

Yes, well, this column is not exactly passionate about geopolitics or US foreign policy, but y'all might have at least considered what Secretary of State John Kerry has been doing this week and what he has managed to accomplish, so far.

Kerry is probably more deserving of this award than most of the recipients this year when you compare the blood, sweat and tears that go into their respective work.

John Kerry demonstrates everyday what it means to be an effective Secretary of State for two reasons above all else - he is passionate about his role and he's not afraid to fail. Which, in the end, counts for much more than what a MIDOTW award could impart. Though, it would have been a very nice touch and, certainly, well-deserved.

"Facts are stupid things." - Ronald Reagan