IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New we are fortunate indeed, here
…to have your penetrating analyses of current trends and events, grounded in your encyclopædic knowledge of constitutional law and legislative procedure. I can’t begin to imagine why I bothered with this guy’s take instead of applying directly to you.
New you are and thank you
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
New Speaking of encyclopædic..
This link-[2] to an npr/Fresh Air interview has some {still juicy} takes on our Survelliance State ... though moderate in tone, despite the Uglies espied.

Sample:

On whether we're living in a Big Brother society

"Big Brother is a very imperfect analogy. On the one hand ... I see no evidence that the government is assembling these tools in order to spy on political opponents or corruptly to serve some private interest, or things that you worry about with the Big Brother analogy.

"On the other hand, it has accumulated powers that were beyond all imagination of George Orwell — that dwarfed the surveillance capabilities of Orwell — and as it has done so — as it has made the whole world and the U.S. population more and more transparent — it has become more and more opaque about what it's doing. So, increasingly we are living behind one-way mirrors in which the government knows more and more about us and we know less and less about what the government is doing."



Pretty succinct rephrasing of ~ [get in line..] climate, Ignorance, attenuated attention-span, Climate -vs-
exponential accumulation of stuff--as population goes all exponential (too)
..and just plain La-La-La I-don't-want-to-Hear. (Then, Piet Hein pens his last Grook), rhyming caffeine with En Fin?
     What could possibly go wrong? - (rcareaga) - (19)
         Re: What could possibly go wrong? - (boxley) - (18)
             we are fortunate indeed, here - (rcareaga) - (2)
                 you are and thank you -NT - (boxley)
                 Speaking of encyclopædic.. - (Ashton)
             Congress only needs to be Republican led on 11/4 (or thereabouts) - (drook) - (14)
                 reread the document - (boxley) - (13)
                     Read it yourself - (drook)
                     Not for that they aren't in control. - (malraux) - (11)
                         Ah, but the New congress would decide. - (Another Scott) - (10)
                             Better, but ... - (drook) - (9)
                                 the house can vote to disenfrachise the electors as discussed in 2k -NT - (boxley) - (8)
                                     Details? -NT - (drook) - (7)
                                         via objection - (boxley) - (6)
                                             That only works if the Republicans deliberate - (drook) - (5)
                                                 first the state courts would rule on the matter - (boxley) - (4)
                                                     Explain your timeline - (drook) - (3)
                                                         currently Republican controlled, but vote blue, decide to appoint new Electors - (boxley) - (2)
                                                             I hope that's true - (drook) - (1)
                                                                 gotta remember the rats will start abandoning USS Donny once the election looks to go south - (boxley)

Deep down facial creases!
43 ms