How he has the gall to just keep going is both awesome and hilarious.
From YouTube, via Happy Place
The latest of Ron Paul’s moneybombs has a goal of raising 250k$ as a rally to end the TSA – in the unlikely event that Ron is elected. This comes on the heels of Ron Paul’s son, Senator Rand Paul being detained by the TSA on January 23rd. (Rand is short for Randal and used to go by Randy — he is strangely not named after the libertarian queen, Ayn Rand.) The naked body scanners at the airports, which are notoriously unreliable, picked up an anomaly in his leg, so the TSA wanted to do a pat-down. Rand refused and offered to go through the scanner again, but the TSA wouldn’t have any of that. Eventually, they let him go through security again, but not until he missed his flight.
Ron Paul introduced legislation in Congress in 2010 that would remove immunity for federal employees (like the TSA’s) from actions that regular people can’t take — actions like groping and taking pictures with x-ray glasses. He reintroduced the bill in the current Congress.
Ending the TSA is nothing new, either: thanks to the well-documented theatrics of airport security, a petition to abolish the TSA was the fourth most popular petition on the White House’s website; the head the TSA answered the petition and said he thinks his job matters. The Congressman who created the TSA though, disagrees; as do Congressional Republicans, who called for an overhaul of the mammoth failure of an agency.
If you want to donate to the End The TSA Moneybomb, you can do so at Ron Paul’s 2012 campaign website.
See also:
The Internet’s been grumbling about Google consolidating its various privacy policies into one, and a couple of funny privacy matters shook out of the whole affair.
A search engine called Skipity has the worst (yet funniest) privacy policy ever. It’s a riot to read — so you should do that, — but to summarize: it starts out with legal nonsense, then goes on to say they don’t think you really care about privacy and that they will use whatever information they can get about you, if it can turn them a profit. You also grant them permission to insert a microchip in your body, use your secrets, watch you through your webcam and lie to you. If they get a chance to sell your data, they “will jump at that opportunity like a pitbull on a fresh steak.” Paragraph 8 reiterates that it’s not a joke:
8. We are serious about all of the above. So don’t go trying to sue us later with some nonsense like ‘I thought that was all satire.’ All your privacy are belong to us. We mean it.
They also disclose that they like chocolate chip cookies and bacon. It may be the only honest privacy policy on web, and a brilliant publicity stunt.
An Ars Technica writer tweeted about a Google page she found where you can see in what gender and age-bracket demographic Google thinks you belong. (Apparently Google is trying out for a job at the carnival.) Slate did an informal poll around their office and found it was mostly wrong: it guessed 4 out of 16 people’s demographics completely right, but thought a bunch of women were men, that people in their 30s were twice as old, and had no guess at all for three people. Slate also adds that besides Google’s guess, you can also see what other companies think of you: BlueKai, AOL Advertising, Bizo, Lotame, Yahoo, and Exelate. You may be thinking that you’ve never even heard of most of those, but they have certainly heard of you. The good news is that most of them give you the ability to opt out of from them tracking your every move.
And finally, a couple of years ago, The Onion had a very funny and relevant article called Google Responds To Privacy Concerns With Unsettlingly Specific Apology.
From Skipity, Slate, and The Onion via Slashdot, Forbes and Neatorama
Immigration
Each time I look at that flag, I’m reminded that our destiny is stitched together like those fifty stars and those thirteen stripes. No one built this country on their own. This Nation is great because we built it together. This Nation is great because we worked as a team. This Nation is great because we get each other’s backs. And if we hold fast to that truth, in this moment of trial, there is no challenge too great; no mission too hard. As long as we’re joined in common purpose, as long as we maintain our common resolve, our journey moves forward, and our future is hopeful, and the state of our Union will always be strong.
Thank you, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.
A transcript of the entire speech is available on NPR’s website, and the video is on YouTube.
Definition of “binge“, from Merriam-Webster:
a: a drunken revel : spree
b: an unrestrained and often excessive indulgence <a buying binge>
c: an act of excessive or compulsive consumption (as of food)
A couple of weeks ago, the CDC released a supposedly alarming report saying that 17% of Americans went on at least one drinking binge in the month before. The report is based on a survey which took place in 2010 and measured three drinking parameters:
One of the main issues people have with the study is that binge drinking is defined as five or more drinks in a sitting for a guy — four for a woman. That definition was clearly thought up by someone who has never consumed alcohol and is at least somewhat ridiculous, because five beers over the stretch of a football game won’t even get most people legally intoxicated, much less on par with “a drunken revel.” (The blood alcohol concentration for a 180lb man after drinking five beers in 3.5 hours is about 0.05%). The main issue is the terms of the definition, which uses a vague “drinks per sitting” measure instead of the more precise “drinks per hour.” For example, five beers in a one-hour sitting is probably binge drinking; five beers in a five-hour sitting… not so much. And the survey treats both of those events as if they were the same.
Thanks to raw data though, the CDC’s poor definition is not quite as important: the actual number of drinks consumed are present, even if the length of the drinking sessions is missing. The prevalence and frequency statistics, however, are just given in terms of binge drinking (e.g., percentage that binge drink), so due to the definition issues, for the purposes of the below, take the “binge” part with a grain of salt. Armed with that, here are the most interesting numbers:
The CDC’s recommendations all revolve around reducing the supply of alcohol by making it more expensive and less available: raising prices via sin taxes and selling it in less places and during fewer hours. The reason given for these recommendation is that binge drinking causes around 40,000 deaths a year. To add perspective to that figure, according to another CDC report:
In that report, binge drinking itself is not considered a cause of death, because it’s secondary: it may lead to accidents, but is not the immediate reason someone dies.
Brainstorm Digital, the company the does the computer graphics for Boardwalk Empire, released a video showing before and after shots of of scenes doctored by them. The take-aways are that the people at Brainstorm are fantastic at their jobs, and that besides the actors, basically the whole thing is computer generated.
The same came to light in a similar video done for Game of Thrones, by Bluebolt, several months ago.
According to Wired, in a rare case of unanimity on a privacy matter, the US Supreme Court ruled (PDF) that police placement of a GPS device on someone’s car is equivalent to a fourth ammendment search:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. (4th Ammendment to the US Constitution)
The majority opinion, written by Justice Scalia, more or less said that the government was using an electronic spy to do the searching. Just because they didn’t have an actual person rifling through the car, doesn’t mean it’s not a search, because “the government obtains information by physically intruding on a constitutionally protected area.”

The US Supreme Court in 2009. Scalia is second from the right, on the bottom. John Roberts is left of him.
The one thing the Supreme Court wasn’t unanimous on, was the point at which a warrant is required for such a search. The specific case they were hearing was of a D.C. drug dealer that was tracked by the FBI, via a GPS device on his car, for 28 days. All nine justices agreed that for tracking someone for that length of time, the feds had needed a warrant. As to the the maximum period the police could track someone without a warrant, five of the justices stayed silent; the other four said that to avoid ambiguity, they should always just seek a warrant.
The case probably went south for the Obama administration when Chief Justice Roberts asked their lawyer if the FBI could attach GPS trackers to the justices’ cars, secretly and without a warrant:
So your answer is, ‘yes,’ you could tomorrow decide that you put a GPS device on every one of our cars, follow us for a month; no problem under the Constitution?
For that, and other details of the deliberations back in November of 2011, check out the Wired article from back then.
From The US Supreme Court (PDF), Via Wired
A video of Ron Paul giving a speech on the floor of Congress in April of 2002 has been going around, because it’s five minutes of him making roughly a baker’s dozen predictions about major events of the following decade.
Let’s see how he did:
Mr. Speaker, our government intervention in the economy, the private affairs of citizens and the internal affairs of foreign countries leads to uncertainty and many unintended consequences. Here are some of the consequences about which we should be concerned:
I predict US taxpayers will pay to rebuild Palestine — both the West Bank and the Gaza, as well as Afghanistan. US taxpayers paid to bomb these areas, so we will be expected to rebuild them.
Accurate, but also just common sense. We give a lot of aid and weaponry to Israel, which uses them to bomb Palestine, and we also give a lot of aid to Palestine. The Afghanis are so poor, they definitely can’t be expected to pay for reconstruction themselves, and a functioning country is in our interest so that it doesn’t become a breeding ground for terrorism again.
Peace of sorts will come to the Middle East, but will be short-lived. There will be big promises of more US money and weapons flowing to Israel and to Arab countries allied with the United States. US troops and others will be used to monitor the peace. In time, an oil boycott will be imposed with oil prices soaring to historic highs.
Somewhat accurate. Again, a lot of this is common sense: peace comes and goes in the Middle East, and America provides a lot of money and weapons in the area, as well as most of the global peacekeeping forces via the UN and NATO. While there was no oil boycott, the price of oil did skyrocket in the middle of the decade, for a variety of reasons. But Iran has been threatening to shut down the Strait of Hormuz, through which a lot of the world’s oil flows, so he could be proven completely right.
Current Israeli-United States policies will solidify Arab Muslim nations in their effort to avenge the humiliation of the Palestinians. This will include those Muslim nations that in the past have fought against each other. Some of our moderate Arab allies will be overthrown by Islamic fundamentalists.
Mostly inaccurate. The only part that came true was the overthrow of Arab leaders in the Arab Spring, but it had nothing to do with American policies or Israel and everything to do with the global recession. While he predicted the effect, he didn’t predict the cause, and therefore the roots of the prediction tree are poisonous. Also, Arab leaders are pretty routinely overthrown, so again, it’s common sense to say that it’ll happen again soon.
The UN will continue to condemn, through resolutions, Israeli-US policies in the Middle East and they will be ignored. Some European countries will clandestinelly support the Muslim countries and their anti-Israel pursuits. China, ironically assisted by American aid, much more openly will sell the militant Muslims the weapons they want and will align herself with the Arab nations.
Somewhat accurate. This is more common sense: the same story has been repeating for years. European companies love doing business with Arab countries because they have a lot of money. China, as a growing economy thirsty for energy, has to align itself with Arab countries in order to guarantee its energy supply. It should be noted that when he says that China is assisted by American aid, he probably doesn’t mean direct aid, but rather that a lot of American money ends up in Chinese factories.
United States, with Tony Blair as head cheerleader, will attack Iraq without proper authority in a major war, the largest since World War II will result.
Accurate. This may not have been that hard to see coming a year before it actually happened, but is still kind of impressive.
Major moves will be made by China, India, Russia and Pakistan in central Asia, to take advantage of the chaos for the purpose of grabbing land, resources and strategic advantages sought after for years.
Somewhat accurate. No “major moves” have taken place, but Russia has been dealing with Iran a lot, especially with respect to their nuclear ambitions, and to a lesser extent, with India. China and Pakistan have become close allies. Pakistani terrorists attacked India in 2006 and 2008.
The Karzai government will fail and US military presence will end in Afghanistan.
Inaccurate. Assuming that by “fail” he meant that it will be overthrown, or that at least he would be voted out of office, those things did not come to pass. The US military presence is also still there, but it does stand to reason that it will end at some point.
An international dollar crisis will dramatically boost interest rates in the United States. Price inflation with a major economic downturn will decimate US federal government finances amid exploding deficits and uncontrolled spending. Federal reserve policy will continue at an expanding rate with massive credit expansion, which will make the dollar crisis worse. Gold will be seen as an alternative to paper money as it returns to its historic role as money.
Accurate. This prediction is one of the most impressive, in that he foresaw the Great Recession. The cause wasn’t an international “dollar crisis” as much as an international money laundering crisis vis-à-vis the securities repackaging, but it’s close enough. The price inflation that came with the housing bubble contributed to the recession, which caused national debt to more than triple due to deficits and uncontrolled spending. The price of gold more than quadrupled since 2000.
Erosion of civil liberties here at home will continue, as our government responds to political fear in dealing with the terrorist threat by making generous use of the powers obtained with the Patriot Act.
Accurate. This may have been just libertarian common sense, but since the Patriot Act came into being, America has become heavily surveilled and the law itself has been abused all along to encroach on our civil liberties.
Many American military personnel and civilians will be killed in the coming conflict. The leaders of whichever side loses the war will be hauled into and tried before the International Criminal Court, for war crimes. The United States will not lose the war, but neither will we win. Our military and political leaders will not be tried by the International Criminal Court.
Somewhat accurate. Many civilians were killed in the Iraq war — in the hundreds of thousands — but not that many American soldiers. No one was hauled before the International Criminal Court (ICC), though Saddam was tried. America did neither lose nor win the war, though it did succeed in reshaping the country. And of course, no American leaders were tried by the ICC.
The reason he mentioned the ICC so much was probably because it was a hot-button issue back in 2002, which is when it came into being. The court only has jurisdiction in countries that have signed the corresponding treaty, which the US has never ratified; at the time of Ron Paul’s speech, there was a lot of debate on the subject.

Map of the ICC member states; those in green ratified the treaty, those in orange signed it but did not ratify
The Congress and the President will shift radically toward expanding the size and scope of the federal government. This will satisfy both the liberals and the conservatives. Military and police powers will grow, satisfying the conservatives. The welfare state, both domestic and international, will expand, satisfying the liberals. Both sides will endorse military adventurism overseas. This is the most important of my predictions.
Accurate. The government has expanded dramatically in the decade after 9/11. The military, due to fighting two wars. The federal police apparatus was consolidated under the new Department of Homeland Security (formed several months after this speech), and its powers have grown, alongside with local police. The country is well on the way to becoming a panopticon, in which police can see everything through the use of red-light cameras, scanners on police cars, and even flying drones.
The welfare state has also expanded, partly due to the ever-aging population that requires more government aid, partly due to the passage of the healthcare overhaul, and partly due to the high unemployment rate, which has required extensions of unemployment benefits.
And both sides endorsed military adventurism in Libya.
Policy changes could prevent all of the previous predictions from occurring. Unfortunately, that will not occur.
In due course, the Constitution will continue to be steadily undermined, and the American republic further weakened. During the next decade, the American people will become poorer and less free, while they become more dependent on the government for economic security.
Accurate. In the ten years following his speech, we have undoubtedly become poorer and less free, thanks to the Great Recession and the Patriot Act. And due to the volatility of the economy and high unemployment, government is the single biggest source of economic security.
The war will prove to be divisive with emotions and hatred growing between the various factions and special interests that drive our policies in the Middle East. Aggitation from more class warfare will succeed in dividing us domestically. And believe it or not, I expect lobbyists will thrive more than ever during the dangerous period of chaos.
Accurate. The Iraq War was almost as divisive as the Vietnam War. And class warfare culminated in the Tea Party and Occupy Movements.
I have no timetable for these predictions, but just in case, keep them around and look at them in 5 to 10 years. Lets hope and pray that I’m wrong on all accounts. If so, I will be very pleased.
In the end, is he a prophet? Obviously not: his more specific predictions (on the middle East, Afghanistan) betray his fallibility. And some of them were simply common sense. But many, including the most important ones, were almost clairvoyant: the Iraq War, the Great Recession, the rise of the police state, the government’s financial problems, the Occupy Movement. All of these could not have been predicted by mere chance.
Clearly Ron Paul has no superpowers, but it’s also clear that he does have something: excellent powers of observation and logic that allowed him to make a remarkably accurate guess at the general direction in which the country was heading.
From YouTube