...cont'd...

But no, this current annoyance doesn't mean the law is wrong.  I've been bugged by this law for many years.  It just seems wrong that the Federal government should have a say-so in whether or not I'm allowed to work.  It's not an explicit power in the Constitution, and it seems to exceed the "necessary and proper" clause.  (Maybe we could argue necessity, but proper?)

It's not a matter of their prosecuting me, if I were an illegal immigrant or someone on a non-working visa.  That I would agree with.  What makes me cringe is that they've created a system of prior restraint.  You're presumably not allowed to work, unless you can prove you are.

I understand this makes it easier to catch illegal aliens (etc.) than if they had to wait until illegal work is done and then investigate and prosecute it.  Prior restraint is probably always easier than the alternatives.  And I'm against amnesties and want to keep illegal immigration...illegal.  

Maybe this is the most practical system we can have.

But I hate it.

Well, don't get me wrong, folks.  I knew to bring my SS card with me, and I simply forgot to pack it.  That was simply my fault.  And the personnel people did push me to get as much paperwork done before I began as they could, but given my schedule as a professor, I couldn't get there until the day before my first class.  Now, once I found out that I'd forgotten my SS card, the question was a matter of immediately running a longish trip back home to get it or waiting until the weekend, when I'd be heading back anyway.  Not knowing I had to have it within exactly three days, I opted for the latter.  (And hopefully Foxfier is right that they'll have to pay me for that time—I don't know if the three day thing is law or policy; I've been suspecting law, but I don't know.)  

But anyway, that much is just my grumbling a bit out loud, not a matter of immigration policy.  [cont'd]

I've got the D.K. "Ultimate Spy Book," and yes, this is in there.  In fact, I think this is the exact photo from the book.  As I recall from the text, it was a WWII weapon, meant for shooting your opponent during a punch.  It wasn't something to sneak on him while shaking hands or being casual.  I wonder now if the use was to be something like with the "Liberator" single-shot pistol:  target a guy with a weapon, kill him, and take his gun.

No, there was always something to it.  It's just that now, the rest of you in the press have realized it.  

The "something" was always there; they just didn't realize it.  They need to realize the difference between something existing and their being aware of it.

Now, the real punch line to that old joke is, "What do you mean we, pale face?"...but that would be awkward to tell about the President.

No, but there's some guy named Schecky on the line, claiming I'm cutting in on his gig.

Thanks, Larry, I try!

Emergency (my words) press conference called by the White House to deflect criticism over the IRS scandal (they've admitted to targeting conservative non-profit groups) and Benghazi.

The shocking thing to me is how tough the reporters are being on Carney.

That's hilarious!  I love it.

This reminds me of an old Saturday Night Live fake ad:  "Brought to you by the Ad Council.  Wasting your time in various ways... for no good reason."

I think you're right, at least at this level of the technology.  Some day, it may be that useful, practical guns can be printed easily and cheaply.  This seems more like a proof of concept.  But it's provoking the issue, anyway.

I haven't seen anyone else mention this connection, but the development of a 3D printed gun, and the distribution of the plans over the internet, remind me an awful lot of the premise of Neal Stephenson's novel Cryptonomicon.

It doesn't spoil too much of the plot (that I recall) to read the chapter where this is brought up.  (Language warning.)

***SPOILER ALERT (eah...no, not really)***

The idea is that one of the characters wants to prevent future Holocausts by distributing his "Holocaust Education and Avoidance Pod" (HEAP) online:  a handbook of guerrilla warfare tactics for oppressed populations to keep themselves from getting slaughtered.

Ouch!  :)

Yes!  This is what gets me riled up the most.  Using taxpayer money to try to convince the people (the government's boss) to take the government's opinion on something.  Propaganda.

I only know a little about ITAR regulations, but I think it applies in some ways to "technology" in the sense of plans, as well as physical things.  I was a grad student at the Space Telescope Science Institute (which runs the Hubble Space Telescope), and an Italian friend of mine was working on some camera designs for them.  Some of the technology was controlled under ITAR, and he had to excuse himself from the engineering meetings until they came up with a work-around.  In his case, as I remember it, they got him something like a license to import and export arms!

But I'd like to see a legal test case made of blueprints.  I think a strong case could be made that they're protected under the First Amendment, even if they're posted on an internationally-accessible website.

Right on.  I like Fox News, and I watch Special Report regularly.  But she needs to stay in the mainstream press (although really, Fox should be considered part of the mainstream—it's the most popular cable news network!).  She, Jake Tapper, and other reporters who will do a decent job like this need to spread out and leaven the rest of the press, where they'll have the most influence.  

It's better than having one nice, rising lump among a bunch of flat...  OK, I'm running out of metaphor, here, but I think y'all get it.