America's best chance for nationwide privacy law could do more harm than good Introduced in April, the American Privacy Rights Act (APRA) was - in the words of its drafters - "the best opportunity we’ve had in decades to establish a national data privacy and security standard that gives people the right to control their personal information." That opportunity may have been squandered thanks to …
Just remember the democrats support things like FISA section 702 just as much as the republicans. I don't see apple, google, meta etc. being particularly republican leaning and those will be the parties most interested in keeping privacy off the books.
"Worst case, we'll end up a dictatorship next year."
Ah, protecting 'our democracy'? Which really means 'maintaining the status quo of corruption and uniparty rule'.
Aw, come on, you rabid polarized forum warriors! This is why the USA is going down the drain: Because the important thing nowadays is being against "the other", the Archenemy, and definitely not doing something (anything) constructive. That's for weaklings.
"Better die a [some side] than live in a nice, pleasant country". Well, you'll get what's coming to you!
You don't want a flat out dictatorship next year? You don't want a crew of SEL infecting the US state?
Vote Blue down the whole ballot.
Vote Blue like the future of your entire 250YO Democratic Republic depends on it.
Because between The Fat Old Crook and his 34 Convictions, Leonard Leo and the Federalist Society nutjobs packing Federal Courts and the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 it actually does.
Ignoring the fact you are already in a dictatorship with a puppet leader.
Vote blue to continue the corruption, vote blue to continue the oppression of people of colour, vote blue to ensure the destruction of Gaza and Ukraine, vote blue to increase the wealth gap...
Yes I think the AC is both.
One of Diaper Donny's little cultists.
Or as the FOC might put it "Sad."
I'm rather looking forward to the debate. Mostly to what excuses the FOC will use to back out of it / explain his failure in it afterward.
Bone spurs acting up? Gag order? Biden on drugs? Can't handle standing for 90 mins? No one to change his diaper? "They cut me off half way through my reply" AKA 10mins of rambling s**t.
And lets not forget "I terminated Roe V Wade." He's so very proud of that little quip, and I think it should be remembered. Along with the classic "Yes I think women should be punished (over having an abortion)"
I never believed that America could set the scene for The Handmaid's Tale a)Without a nuclear war (the background to the book) and b) In my lifetime.
Spoken like the true disciple of Fox News/NewMax* you obviously are.
Brain washed cultist gotta cult, right?
*Top tip. If they have to put the word "News" in full in the usual name it's probably not actual news. In the case of FN it's Rupert Murdoch's personal puppet show.
Says the person spouting 'vote blue' like a trained parrot. You've got no actual rebuttal other than insults.
Even if Biden died during the debate this week you'd still claim a win and vote for him. You probably still believe the 'fine people' hoax too.
Just to correct you're rather rosy vision of the FOC.
Trump pulled out of Afghanistan, leaving Biden to clean up his mess. He pulled out of Syria, betraying support for the Kurds. He pulled out of the enrichment agreement with Iran, allowing them to enrich up to bomb grade level and he insulted the leader of Korea to the point that the head of the DHS was running secret war games to prepare for a possible Korean nuclear strike. They were secret because he didn't want the FOC knowing about the emergency powers that are available to the President. January 6th showed how right the head of DHS was to scared at what the FOC would do.
The Handmaid's Tale describes a world in which women have no reproductive rights of their own. That sounds a perfect description of what the state legislators in Republican states are trying to impose on limits for abortions, their complete exclusion on the grounds of rape, incest or even life threatening complications of the Mother. Proposals to require registration of pregnancy to stop women going out of state to get an abortion. BTW the "Life begins at conception" claim by the Alabama Supreme Court is medically bulls**t. The Loon-in-Chief of the court knows jack about actual human anatomy. BTW the book was written when a previous Republican President was also being backed vigorously by the "Christian" Right. I think "American Taliban" is a more accurate characterisation of them.
Trumps a bully and a coward. He'd invade anyone he wanted if he thought it would make him more popular and you'd have to be retarded to think he was some kind of anti-war guy. He's got no problem sending anyone else off to a foreign war, as long as it's not himself that's going of course. Y'know, those pesky bone spurs.
BTW anyone who thinks Ukraine can't win against Russia should remember what happened to Russia in Afghanistan, another non-nuclear country. The more you look at the Russian military the more you see it's a paper bear. It just needs some gas and matches.
I also note you don't have the balls to put your actual name to your posts. Don't want to lose your reputation for your more sensible posts? Why? Aren't you proud to be MAGA? Or are you worried about Liz Cheyney's comment about "The dishonour you bear" will last long after the FOC is either dead or in prison?
" insulted the leader of Korea"
I assume you mean North Korea, in which case insulting Kim Jong Un was very funny and no-one is scared of them.
Hmm.. wasn't Trump the FRIST US president to meet with a North Korean leader?
I'm pretty sure that Iran was in major violation of the agreement on uranium enrichment. Obama and his many 'red lines' where he, er, talked, er, a lot and actually did nothing. Iran, Syria, Crimea.
"The Handmaid's Tale describes a world in which women have no reproductive rights of their own"
I'm aware of the book and that the author is a frothing at the mouth lefty. This is actually a lefty feminist utopia.
Read "Full Surrogacy Now: Feminism against Family". The whole concept of a leftist woman being a 'mother' is seemingly so utterly repugnant to them that they must have a surrogate available by law. It would get in the way of their career and holidays. Let someone else suffer the stretch marks, morning sickness and other nasties of actually having a baby.
Just another inconsistency of the lefty arguments. 'The GQP want tradwives who stay at home and look after the kids and don't want the govt interfering, that is so horrible' and 'we wrote a book to laugh at the GQP and how they don't want to have their own babies and want the govt to force others to do it for them'. The lefty 'women's healthcare' argument would hold a little more water if the most affected demographic was different. It still looks like planned parenthood is running true to its founders wishes.
"backed vigorously by the "Christian" Right"
They don't really like Trump. They vote for him as the alternative is the far left and their armies of black clad thugs.
Run entirely for the benefit of men.
I now see why you post AC.
You are quite literally insane
And the American Taliban may not approve of his "morals" but he's going to let them lock up every woman's womb, effectively end divorce (except for special people of course IE men) and end any kind of rights for anyone identifying as LGBTQ+.
The American Taliban's vision of the perfect American society.
I'm not going to waste any more time on you. I'll leave you to the rest of the trumpets.
You do know that a lot of what you call the 'American Taliban' are women and that women vote for Trump too.
If you want something run entirely for the benefit of men then you need look no further than the TQ+. A very misogynistic, homophobic group who demand access to women's spaces and demand special treatment over actual women. After decades of breaking down gender stereotypes they are now back with a vengeance. So we must bow down before this outpouring of hypocrisy, sexism and mental illness as it is 'progressive'.
Yet wanting to have a family with 2 parents is somehow evil.
Take your pick between the blatantly exploitative sociopath party and the other party that makes its living off of decrying the sociopaths on ethical grounds, while at the same time falling in line with most of their profitable ambitions and policies anyway. They both know your outrage will be brief, easily distracted and if necessary, limited to the amount of time you want to be jailed and / or beaten by a militarized police force.
Well since you put it like that I think the choice is fairly easy to make.
I'll also say this.
Every country gets the government it deserves.
Not wants. Not needs. Deserves.
In an actual functioning democracy "democracy" is everyone's business. It is not "Somebody else's problem," it's your problem.
"If voting changed anything they'd ban it" is exactly the cry of every Authoritarian who lost a vote because their policies are bats**t crazy, the people knew it and wouldn't touch their plans with the end of a very long shi**y sick. It's the reason Leonard Leo has spent decades packing the US Court system with right wing highly biased hard line religious loons. Leo is a Fundamentalist Catholic who is anti divorce, anti-abortion, and anti-any kind of civil rights. Basically he knew the majority no longer accepted his views but he planned to force their acceptance regardless.
Like a man who invites a woman out and when she says no pulls a gun on her and rapes her, but to the whole country.
Curious that the use of red and blue was originally just random choice, with different outlets using the colours swapped over even whilst covering the same election.
Now it has ossified, even fossilised, set in stone which one means what - and so, it seems, at the same time have the parties themselves. Don't expect any new and exciting ideas, just the same old arguments, only the volumes and sneering sometimes change.
O Brave new world that has such people in it!
Temper your expectations, Miranda, neither brave nor new anymore.
Originally, Red was for the "Commie" D's & Blue was the "True-Blue" Rs. (During the 1950's) Then one of the news organizations organizations realized that red was an alarming color, so they made the R's red & the D's blue on the map of the presidential election. (I think this was 1980.)
The Republicans knew better than to try to fight it, and so here we are.
one of the news organizations organizations realized that red was an alarming color
Oooh, the evil "mainstream media" and their "liberal bias" at work again! Poor Republicans.
Citation definitely needed.
The color scheme varied among outlets and elections until 2000. The evidence included in that article suggests that it was largely accidental; editors just converged on the same choices until it became a de facto standard.
Red was the color of the people's revolution long before the post-WWII era. As for the Smithsonian, I became an activist in late 1993. The colors were already well-established, and the term "Republican Red" was well in use. In fact, I learned about the "commie" & "true blue" colors from an old legistator, who was commenting about the flip.
The Smithsonian isn't at all apolitical. Look at how their Enola Gay exhibit has changed, for instance.
...can we not do politics?
Like I said before, each state should set its own privacy laws. While it might be a national issue in other countries, under the Constitution, this is not a Federal issue.
"But," you say, "this means there will be (at least) fifty different sets of regulations! It would cripple trade and business!"
There's nothing to stop Oregon from copying California's laws, or Oklahoma from copying Texas' version. In fact, the federal government can even recommend a framework, which each state could modify if it saw fit. This won't be an issue.
The actual issue is the distant career politicians in Washington legislating even *more* of our day-to-day lives. I'd much rather have the state rep who lives down the street deciding, than some federal yahoo.
Because that's worked so well with abortion since Trump "Terminated" (his word) Roe Vs Wade.
I've seen some of those "State reps."
That bunch of God bothering SEL's don't seem to be very familiar with your Constitution (Y'know the thing you're meant to uphold).
Especially the bit about "Separation of Church and State."
"Can we not do politics"
Data fetishists do nothing but "politics"
If you can't figure that out perhaps you shouldn't vote?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
