Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Don't they have to fly that thing around? (Score 1) 327

by Quila (#46483611) Attached to: What If the Next Presidential Limo Was a Tesla?

So he rode bikes, while Obama goes golfing constantly. The rest of the time he was working. A president can't ever really go on vacation, but Bush had the facilities to do his job there.

Need a break, they can always hang in the facilities in DC for weekends/short breaks.

That's what Camp David is for, and why it's generally not counted as vacation time. The president can work in a more relaxed atmosphere away from the DC crazy, maybe take a quiet stroll, go horse riding, whatever. Bush just preferred home. Obama actually goes on real vacations, not having a vacation home (he likes to stay at the homes of rich Democrat donors).


by Quila (#46482127) Attached to: What If the Next Presidential Limo Was a Tesla?

Bush had a mini White House set up at the ranch in Texas. Aside from brush clearing photo ops, he was basically at work, just away from the DC crazy. He even hosted foreign dignitaries there. A lot of infrastructure was put in place at the ranch and could stay there until Bush left office.

What OP is talking about is the jet-setting of Obama and his wife around the world, filling many international flights of AF1 and attending cargo planes, extravagant hotels at an obscene cost. While a president can never truly be on vacation, these are more like real vacations than Bush usually took.

Comment: Re:Outed? (Score 1) 191

The same way it would work currently (from what I understand - Im not American) with the exemption to the cooling off period if your life is in danger and you need to buy a gun

Then you have someone running around without training, kind of ruins the point.

And the cooling off period isn't for any concern for crime, their effectiveness being inconclusive at best. The waiting period is designed to dissuade people from purchasing handguns overall, which is the goal of the organization that had them instituted.

Comment: Re:Right to Privacy? (Score 1) 191

Don't those left-wing nutjobs believe in their own judicial activisim

The types we are dealing with do not take positions based on overarching principle. Instead they take individual positions they were convinced to by their peers or superiors regardless of context. Thus, you will see conflicting positions that amount to obvious hypocrisy.

Two recent examples:

A Republican speaking of "Freedom of religion" while supporting a law allowing vouchers to be used for religious schools, then backpedaling quickly when she realizes that Muslims schools will get money too. She's not for the principle of freedom of religion, she just wants to promote her own religion.

A liberal satying that the Founders were talking about muskets in the 2nd Amendment, and couldn't have envisioned modern firearms, therefore the 2nd Amendment doesn't cover modern firearms. They of course have no problem exercising their 1st Amendment right to say this over the Internet, television and radio. This person doesn't really believe that rights should be restricted to the technology of the time, he just wants to ban guns.

Comment: Re:Outed? (Score 1) 191

Even for what you want to mandate, there are concerns.

like gun safety classes for anyone purchasing a firearm for the first time

How do you propose to prevent this from becoming a poll tax? They must be free. How are you going to make sure localities don't schedule classes erratically in order to prevent people from taking them? What do you do for the woman who just got a restraining order against a violent man threatening to kill her? Sorry lady, class is in three weeks, good luck. Education is important, but in order for this to work without violating rights or killing people, it must not prevent lawful, timely ownership.

electronic fingerprint safeties on all new firearms

The first person who can't defend himself because of that 3%+ fingerprint false rejection rate, and gets killed, who gets to be blamed? If you are not willing to have a non-matched person grab the loaded smart gun, point it at your head, and pull the trigger, then you should not be willing to risk the lives of others on the bet that the system will read their prints perfectly in time of need.

I wouldn't even think about these until all police and military have been armed with such weapons for years and they've proven themselves in the real world. To make only the people do it is a good sign of an authoritarian state.

Anyone who believes otherwise is a progressive authoritarian, not a progressive liberal.

Both of your proposals are fairly authoritarian.

Comment: Re:TL;DR (Score 1) 242

by Quila (#46464777) Attached to: Senator Accuses CIA of Snooping On Intelligence Committee Computers

indeed, as obvious from their contents, they're crucial

It was CIA work product, their conclusions, not actual information on the program itself.

They most certainly shouldn't be able to raid other committee's computers to destroy the copies

They didn't, they accessed CIA computers in the CIA SCIF. Once they realized thei unintentional access to these documents would not last, committee members then took the documents out of the SCIF, without redaction by the CIA, contrary to the agreement with the CIA.

It's just so fun to see Feinstein's own people playing the Snowden part.

Comment: Re:TL;DR (Score 1) 242

by Quila (#46462995) Attached to: Senator Accuses CIA of Snooping On Intelligence Committee Computers

This is an oversight committee that is specifically created to study this topic; there's no "spillage" here

Using CIA computers, the committee found classified documents they were not supposed to get, and the CIA looked at those CIA computers to determine how the committee found them, and where on a non-CIA-accessible part of the network they were copied to. So, now you have classified documents in a place where the classifiying authority did not authorize them go to.

Basically, the committee pulled a Snowden on the CIA, getting documents they shouldn't have had and copying them.

Comment: Re:TL;DR (Score 1) 242

by Quila (#46456829) Attached to: Senator Accuses CIA of Snooping On Intelligence Committee Computers

It seems like the "search tool" provided to the senate staff picked up more than the CIA thought it would

This would be considered spillage if classified information was sent where it wasn't supposed to go.

got themselves in deeper with the potentially highly illegal search.

What is illegal about the government searching a government computer to find and remove said spillage?

Comment: Re:Given the Obama Admin a pass on everything else (Score 1) 242

by Quila (#46456779) Attached to: Senator Accuses CIA of Snooping On Intelligence Committee Computers

I was surprised that CBS was leading the charge on Fast & Furious. Liberals eating their own? Nope, turns out that reporter had been a thorn in management's side a long time for not sticking to party line reporting, and she is finally being drummed out of the network. I guess your info digging pissing off the White House enough to have them yell at you is a bad move for a journalist in a liberal network.
