As a child I grew up thinking how awful it was that people used to torture back in the middle ages or in Nazi Germany.

Then I got older and a little wiser and thought smugly how superior the US was to all the "modern" foreign countries that still torture today.

Then I got older and immensely sad and angry when I found out that we torture in the US. And that we still torture. All the time.

I dare everyone to read this. All 14 pages. It's hard. I keep asking my self: we allow this?

Or rather:

WE ALLOW THIS?????

http://www.alternet.org/investigations/i-thought-solitary-confinement-iran-was-bad-then-i-went-inside-americas-prisons

See if you can read it through without getting sick to your stomach. If you think it's "ok" because these are convicted prisoners, then ask yourself, ask all of us, what have we become?

No, there's a difference between an accident and the results of carelessness.

It's an accident if I cut myself when shaving.
It's an accident if I spill my coffee in the morning.
It's an accident if our new kitten knocks over a stool.

It's not an accident if I fall while tightroping without a net.
It's not an accident if I kill someone when driving drunk.
It's not an accident if I give a gun to a psychopath and he uses it to kill someone.
It's not an accident when we let our government go to war where they don't belong.

I'm looking forward to finding out what our General means by "We take full responsibility".

I suspect he doesn't mean war-crimes trials for the helicopter gunners.
I suspect he doesn't mean war-crimes trials for the authors of our rules-of-engagement.
I suspect he doesn't mean war-crimes trials for the members of congress that voted for the war-powers act.
I suspect he doesn't mean war-crimes trials for Bush or Cheney or Rice or Wolfowitz or Powell
I suspect he doesn't mean war-crimes trials for the citizens of the US that allow these wars to continue in our name.

Really, just what does he mean?

I'll guess he means they're really very sorry. Honest.
I'll guess he means they'll try to avoid killing more little boys ... well, if it's not too inconvenient.
I'll guess he means they won't let the chopper crew put up a couple of donkey stickers on the outside of their craft.

Yeah, I suspect that's all he means.

Oh no no no no! There's a difference between borrowing to invest in the future and borrowing to pay operational expenses.

People don't buy a new house every week without selling their old one first. Comparing Federal spending to buying a house is just a lousy comparison.

It makes sense to borrow to invest in the future, or to recover from an unusual, unexpected situation. But it does *not* make sense to add long-term debt to cover routine, recurring expenses.

Two examples ... would it make sense to always put your monthly electric bill on a credit card account -- and then only pay the minimum charge on the bill when it comes? Or to go on a permanent vacation (borrowing for all your expenses) until your credit runs out?

Of course not, that's just living beyond your means and before long you'll be buried in debt and unable to make even minimum payments.

Acquiring new debt makes lots of sense when it's an investment in the future or for covering unexpected emergencies. But routinely increasing your debt, spending more than you have, is a path to destruction ... for individuals, businesses, or governments.

And no, I'm not a right-wing troll. I'm way left of Obama and most of the folks here on DU. But I believe in raising taxes to pay for what we spend unless it's a capital investment or an unusual expense that can't be deferred.

Please, no more buying-a-house comparisons.

I finally found a reason to accumulate a lot of wealth (only 1.5B for a party of two).

Boulder company to offer trips to the moon

http://www.dailycamera.com/news/ci_22139059/boulder-company-offer-trips-moon




Oh nuts, later on it says:



And here I thought they had some serious credibility going for them. Oh well.

Looks like Starbucks has taken a page from quantum mechanics. It tells investors one thing (UK operations are doing well and making a profit) and the opposite to the tax man (UK operations have been losing money every year).

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/15/us-britain-starbucks-tax-idUSBRE89E0EX20121015

Amazing doublespeak and nonsense, all in the name of hiding from taxes.

I can't believe how angry this still makes me. It's a completely revolting quote from a former Bain Capital Partner regarding the "benefits" of outsourcing labor. I'm surprised that this didn't get any coverage after Chris highlighted it on his program.

Here's the quote:

And the video clip if you'd like to watch Chris Hayes read it.



Mitt, tell me again about all the freeloaders that vote for Obama?

It's not class warfare if we don't fight back.

Doesn't anyone else notice the congruence between Trayvon Martin and Iraq?

And between the Bush Doctrine and Florida's "Stand Your Ground" (aka shoot-first-if-I'm-scared) law?

If we shoot at foreigners just because we're afraid of them, it is so surprising the same thing happens at home?