Some unpopular questions that need to be asked.

[Draco_Argentum]

The side by side speeches in that are brutal.

[JonSetanta]

Wait, brothels are illegal in America? *blinks*

Wow, sucks to be you.

A lot more than that, too, but the degree of "police state" varies between states and even districts.
In my county if you're caught in possession of even something as mild as marijuana, of ANY amount, with intent to distribute (or if the cops say you were dealing, YOU WERE DEALING) you'll get years in jail.
Guilty resort to stabbing, car chases, sprinting through neighborhoods, anything to avoid getting jailtime like that.
It's like something out of Judge Dredd.

Naturally, the rich can buy their way out just as with anything else, but thousands of poor and/or black and/or men are jailed every year on this charge alone.

[Koumei]

Yeah, I know your drug laws are seriously fucked, but I didn't know about the brothels. I can only assume it's handled similarly to the way it's illegal to sell pornography here (except in the ACT, which nobody ever goes to anyway) - that is, they do it any way, and no-one ever cares. Seriously, we have stores advertising that they sell things, and apparently their cash registers print out the name of some place in the ACT, and nobody has ever bothered to complain/order them shut down/arrest them.

Anyway, our drug laws are more sane, but that really isn't saying much. Here in South Australia, marijuana has been decriminalised, but no-one knows the precise number of plants you can grow in your own yard without being charged. I don't smoke, grow or deal it anyway, because stoned people piss me off, but if I wanted to grow a plant and smoke it in my back yard, I could.

Possession (of a small enough amount that it's not intent to sell) is considered a misdemeanour, which has caused something interesting: previously, police would find someone in possession of a joint or two and say "I'm not sending you to jail over that, so I'm not writing it down. Just don't get caught with it again, okay?" Now they can just slap your wrist and give you a fine and go about their business.

Sadly, I'm sure there's a politician somewhere claiming that as proof that legalising/decriminalising drugs only leads to more drug offences. But they're all on coke, anyway.

Sadly, any real pain relief still requires talking to a sympathetic doctor, even though the paracetamol in the painkiller does far worse to you than the narcotic does. The best you can hope for over the counter in a pharmacy (schedule 3) is Panadine Extra (15mg Codeine and 500mg paracetamol), and nothing with Codeine can be bought outside of a pharmacy, even though you can get the liver-killing paracetamol and stomach-rotting aspirin and ibuprofen by the crate in supermarkets without the attendants even knowing to warn you about the harmful effects.

[Neeeek]

Yeah, I know your drug laws are seriously fucked, but I didn't know about the brothels. I can only assume it's handled similarly to the way it's illegal to sell pornography here (except in the ACT, which nobody ever goes to anyway) - that is, they do it any way, and no-one ever cares. Seriously, we have stores advertising that they sell things, and apparently their cash registers print out the name of some place in the ACT, and nobody has ever bothered to complain/order them shut down/arrest them.

Not really. However, since porn is legal, it is actually legal to pay someone to have sex with you, as long as you record it with the intent to sell.

[Crissa]

Reporter Sarah Kugler of the AP[/url]]John McCain and Sarah Palin criticized Democrat Barack Obama over the amount of money he has requested for his home state of Illinois, even though Alaska under Palin's leadership has asked Washington for 10 times more money per citizen for pet projects...
Obama hasn't asked for any earmarks this year. Last year, he asked for $311 million worth, about $25 for every Illinois resident. Alaska asked this year for earmarks totaling $198 million, about $295 for every Alaska citizen...

McCain and Palin were presented as a maverick team in a campaign ad released Monday that played up their reputation for taking on entrenched interests. The ad credits Palin with stopping the bridge without mentioning she once appeared to support it.

[Crissa]

Jo C Goode of the Frontiersman[/url]]While the Alaska State Troopers and most municipal police agencies have covered the cost of exams, which cost between $300 to $1,200 apiece, the Wasilla police department does charge the victims of sexual assault for the tests.

Wasilla Police Chief Charlie Fannon does not agree with the new legislation, saying the law will require the city and communities to come up with more funds to cover the costs of the forensic exams.

Until that 2000 law passed, Wasilla charged the victim, or the victim's insurance, for the exams. This was, of course, four years after Palin was first elected Mayor of Wasilla, and this was the police chief she hired to replace the one she fired for supporting a bill she did not like.

-Crissa

[PhoneLobster]

Porn isn't actually illegal in Australia. The ACT thing, if I recall accurately, is an odd wrinkle in our government mandated ratings and censorship system.

I once read the related act on censorship in broadcasts. It's fairly poorly enforced, generally only being trundled out by dusty frothing conservative custodians to squash small powerless French arthouse flicks about the lives of tragic boring teenagers.

As far as I can determine you could make a very good case that Law and Order SVU should be unrated and banned in Australia (and possibly not even available in a brown paper bag somewhere in Canberra). But it's too mainstream, popular and big money for them to be able to go casually squashing it with censorship just to feel big and pander to the frothing anti sex loons (hi Tzor!).

[Koumei]

the frothing anti sex loons (hi Tzor!).

Oh, so much win in that.

Anyway, to quote Wiki, for all that might be worth:

Technically it is illegal to sell or rent X-rated material in all states of Australia, but it is not illegal to possess X-rated material, and the sale or rental of X-rated material is legal in the Northern Territory and ACT. As the Australian constitution prohibits states from regulating interstate commerce, it is legal to purchase pornography from stores in either territory and bring it interstate. This law means the majority of Australian mail order operations for adult material operate from the ACT.

So, it seems the territories aren't considered states, because it's illegal in all states of Australia. At any rate, I guess it's just "only illegal in theory". So if someone like Carrot Ironfoundersson were to rock up, then there'd be trouble (although first there'd be all those cases in Adelaide of people driving without someone walking ahead holding a flag), but until then, no-one cares.

[Crissa]

NY Times conservative columnist David Brooks[/url]]The Republicans are intellectually unfit to govern right now

The David Brooks that supported the surge, the invasion of Iraq, etc. The David Brooks that supported Dole's 'Contract with America' that David Brooks, yes.

-Crissa

[Crissa]

Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness[/url]][Palin] has already taken on extreme environmentalists whose sentimentality about remote oil fields and even polar bears threatens to interfere with the energy needs of the nation and the economy of Alaska.

Sentimentality about the people who happen to live in those 'remote oil fields' and those people and creatures who are dying due to climate change? Funny how that is supposedly bad. Also remember that those 'remote oil fields' are estimated (at most) to contain an amount of oil equal to 10% of what we import now, and would (at the earliest) take ten years to bring to market.

Elaine Donnelly, in comments about Palin's support for anti-gay agenda. She recently testified before congress about the horrors of homosexuals serving in the military. She has never served in the military herself.

-Crissa

[JonSetanta]

Speaking of military, I head read this afternoon in TIME that McCain cheated on his previous wife with his current one (17 years younger than him) while stationed in Hawaii.
Damn.
Why hasn't anyone cashed in on th- oh that's right.
Stations like Fox News only cover the good parts of him such as his honor, war veteran gimp-cred (see also; pity party), honor, family valus, Iraq, more honor, how so awesome he is for nominating Palin (woo.) and, of course, "that other candidate" ... What's his name, Obama? (or as someone stated, Osama)

[Josh_Kablack]

Voting republican to stave off gun control isn't idiotic because our own country's history has shown us the corruption of leaders and the neccessity of being able to fight back.

When was the last time that actually happened? .

Well what you count seriously depends on your politics, but here are a few cases that might apply:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Brown ... nist)#Raid

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_Strike

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Heemeyer

[Prak]

Thank you, Josh.

Koumei, I just realized it was you that asked that, and added in to that realization that you're austrailian... So you might have been seriously asking. If I'd realized that, I'd've still failed my Kn(History) check but I would've fessed up to it...

[Koumei]

Yeah, for once I wasn't being facetious and was actually curious.

Still, it seems that, aside from that awesome homemade tank incident, no-one has made much of an effort to rise up, other than people who mysteriously vanish and the secret service have no idea about the whereabouts of, although someone in Poland might swear to have (briefly) seen them.

[PhoneLobster]

You know a while back someone mentioned democrats and their strategic cowardice.

I just saw a nice little video that reminds me that the democrats have both a burning motivational reason why they MUST win that is also a simple easy and guaranteed strategy for victory.

But they won't use it because it is mean and the right wing bobble heads in the media might cry if they do. (while simultaneously that won't matter because it is a massively popular strategy with the electorate)

We all know what it is.

[Crissa]

CBS News[/url]]Patriotic Montage Shown At RNC Featured Actors Hired For One Day Shoot, Not Military

It was a video that was supposed to elicit soaring patriotism and real emotions about the Pledge of Allegiance. But to do that, it used fake soldiers and a staged military funeral instead of the real thing.

...

After a Web search of videos played at the Democratic National Convention last week, CBS News found no obvious use of stock footage.

The RNC did not respond to CBS News’ request for a comment.

[SphereOfFeetMan]

The best part of that is the hypocrisy. The Bush administration forbade the press from taking photographs of caskets coming home from the war (violating constitutional rights). Even when the families wanted the press there.

So the Republican moral of the story is:
-It is Just to violate the constitution (free press) when it would hurt the Bush administration/Republicans by showing real military funerals.
-It is Just to use a staged false military funeral at a Republican political event to rally support.
...
I hope some third party group runs attack ads to point this kind shit out when it gets really close to the election.

[tzor]

I have to agree with SphereOfFeetMan here. That's just wrong in so many ways. More fake than the Greek columns ... at least they weren't protrayed as the real McCoy.

But I'm starting to get tired of Greek columns, fake funerals, insulted community organizers and pigs with lipstick. Let's go back to the chorus of who does the most flip flops in the course of a campaign.

Obama: I'll take public financing ... oh wait, no I won't.
Palin: I'll take money for the bridge to nowhere ... oh wait, no I won't.

Truth in insulting: Obama never really took the money. Palin did take the money, she just didn't take it "for the bridge." It was reallocated to other highway projects in the state.

[Crissa]

What false equivalency, a candidate opting for the voluntary spending limits vs a candidate actually lying that they refused federal funds when in fact, they never refused the funds and or the project they were associated with.

Great. A someone changing their mind vs someone completely being untruthful about what's in the public record.

-Crissa

[PhoneLobster]

Tzor are you absolutely sure you aren't a double agent employed to bring up points of supposed Obama criticism which are actually significantly more embarrassing for McCain?

[Maj]

More fake than the Greek columns ... at least they weren't protrayed as the real McCoy.

I didn't understand that whole bit. I thought they were supposed to represent the columns of the White House or Capitol building. It's not like Obama's running for the position of head of the Olympic Pantheon; He's running for President.

Unless, of course, by putting fake Greek columns on the White House and Capitol building, we're elevating out government to Greek Deity status...

Let's go back to the chorus of who does the most flip flops in the course of a campaign.

I don't mind flip flops when a candidate can say that s/he got more information and tried to make a more informed decision. Obama's not perfect, but he's pulled that trick a couple of times, and I respect him for doing so.

[Neeeek]

Obama: I'll take public financing ... oh wait, no I won't.

Of course, that's not even remotely close to what he actually said.

[JonSetanta]

So the Republican moral of the story is:
-It is Just to violate the constitution (free press) when it would hurt the Bush administration/Republicans by showing real military funerals.
-It is Just to use a staged false military funeral at a Republican political event to rally support.
...
I hope some third party group runs attack ads to point this kind shit out when it gets really close to the election.

Good call. I hope someone picks up on that soon.
Elections are in November.
Fate of the world may hang in the balance.

Well, except China. They are their own world as it is.

[angelfromanotherpin]

Let's go back to the chorus of who does the most flip flops in the course of a campaign.

The Official McCain Flip-Flop List.

[Crissa]

Seems pretty simple, then.

Who did the most flip-flops in the campaign is... McCain.

Sure, Obama didn't choose public funding after winning the nomination. How choosing private funding is a flip-flop, I'm not sure, as he didn't campaign under the platform of 'public funding limits!' - it was instead, 'no corporate donors!' Which is a promise he's kept since February.

McCain, however, applied for (and received) a loan with the stipulation he would stay in the public funding in the primary. He did not, violating both the rules of his loan and of the federal campaign finance limits on spending while being publicly funded.

-Crissa