Whatever. "Los Angeles" is clearly typed in the description part of the header, so it qualifies as "Locals Only."
And: Not un-literate; unafraid of throwing parentheses about. (If you know what we mean.)
They came for our guns, now they have our speech, next they will take our healthcare. It’s 1917 Russia all over again.
As repeatedly stated to several in the media over the last week, former Governor Sarah Palin is not committed to attend the Simi Valley Republican Women’s event at the Reagan Library and in fact is not attending the event. Neither the Governor’s state staff nor SarahPAC has ever committed to attending this event or speaking at this event, and even requested that the Governor's name be removed from the invitation several weeks ago. The Governor has other work and commitments to take care of at that time. She looks forward to visiting her friends in California soon.The WTF? moment:
All event requests must be confirmed with Meghan Stapleton of SarahPAC. Additionally, all invitations bearing the Governor’s name must be approved by her attorney before proceeding. Thank you. Meghan StapletonJust where are the invitations going to "proceed" once the legal staff approves? When the masses rise to say "Poopy-Doody" to us elitists by electing Moose-ilini, will we then have gov't. by attorney? "Look, Putin's head! Call the Dep't of Law!!" Who's the "Governor" to whom Stapleton refers? Is Meghan one of Sarah's high school buddies? (That being the only reasonable explanation for the continued incompetence & illiteracy.)
Before joining the Tax Foundation, Scott was Director of Tax and Budget Policy at Citizens for a Sound Economy. He also spent ten years at The Heritage Foundation, including eight years as Heritage’s Grover Hermann Fellow in Federal Budgetary Affairs. Scott began his career in Chicago where he helped found the Heartland Institute in 1984. He holds a degree in political economy from the University of Illinois at Chicago.His frightening to non-working coupon-clippers & dividend-depositors headline of course ignores the real question, which is how much of what's been created by the working people of this country is owned or controlled by the 1% parasites, compared to just how much wealth the 95% who made it own/control. We imagine Mr. Hodge could have had a flunky look it up, but that would imply he gave a shit about anything or anyone beyond his masters. And that just wouldn't do, would it?
"That's why I hate the police," Tuma said. He told the Huffington Post that in a loud sing-song voice, he then chanted, "I hate the police, I hate the police." One officer reacted strongly to Tuma's song. "Hey! Hey! Who do you think you're talking to?" Tuma recalled the officer shouting as he strode across an intersection to where Tuma was standing. "Who do you think you are to think you can talk to a police officer like that?" the police officer said, according to Luke Platzer, 30, one of Tuma's companions. Tuma said he responded, "It is not illegal to say I hate the police. It's not illegal to express my opinion walking down the street." According to Tuma and Platzer, the officer pushed Tuma against an electric utility box, continuing to ask who he thought he was and to say he couldn't talk to police like that. "I didn't curse," Tuma said. "I asked, am I being arrested? Why am I being arrested?" Within minutes, the officer had cuffed Tuma. The charge: disorderly conduct -- just like Gates, who was arrested after police responded to a report of a possible break-in at his home and Gates protested their ensuing behavior.Fascist laws for a fascist nation. Note well that when we type "Free Speech Isn't Free," we kid you not!
I’d rephrase that to lose the words “black man” when dealing with the police. That’s because I’m a white guy who had that experience twice with our own local cops in Newport Beach. It wasn’t a racial thing that got me put in handcuffs; it was an “I’m a cop; you have no rights thing.”As always, no matter the skin-tones, dialects or any other superficial differences between those involved, it's a uniformed bully w/ a badge vs. a citizen w/o immediate physical power or armament. Or in the second case, a cop in a police car who ran a stop sign & was challenged on it. You can imagine the officer's reaction, if you aren't an ignorant sheep who licks the jackboots of his oppressors.
This afternoon, Bill Shine, SVP of Programming told TVNewser, "During Fox & Friends this morning, Glenn Beck expressed a personal opinion which represented his own views, not those of the Fox News Channel. And as with all commentators in the cable news arena, he is given the freedom to express his opinions."Tell us something, Mr. Shine. If the Fox News Channel is a "news" source, why would it even have any "views?" How can a network claim to be "Fair & Balanced" if it admits it has "views?" We wonder if Mr. Shine could tell us what the "views" of the Fox News Channel are?
The issue is not how nasty the discourse between the two might have been, but whether what Professor Gates said--assuming, for argument's sake, the officer's version of events as fact--could by any stretch of both law and imagination constitute a ground for arrest for "disorderly conduct" (the charge leveled) or any other crime.Thank you, Harvey A. Silverglate, assisted by Kyle Smeallie, for dealing w/ this from the only possible perspective. After all, in the Freeman's Libertarian Paradise that is AmeriKKKa, the customer is always right. The customer, in Magic AmeriKKKa, being he who pays the pigs for protection. And in this AmeriKKKa, it's the protection-payer who's boss, not the bully/thug w/ a stick, badge, gun & handcuffs, & the boss can always tell employees what to do.
And, to the extent that tossing an expletive at some hothead on the street might conceivably produce a violent reaction, surely such words directed to a trained police officer should not be expected to incite such a response. To be sure, much of police training is specifically directed at producing a peace officer who knows how and when to keep a violent response wrapped under a highly polished discipline. It would be an insult to any law enforcement agent to assume that he or she would respond, with violence, to unpleasant--even offensive--words. Hence, even at its worst, Gates' reaction to the officer's presence and questioning cannot by any stretch be deemed grounds for an arrest. Professor Gates, in other words, was fully protected by the First Amendment. It was the officer's duty to restrain his own response, particularly the exercise of his official powers of arrest.So there, fascist coppers. Stop fucking w/ Americans & their Constitutional rights, or we'll give you something for which you can try to arrest us!! Pin-dick losers!
I see my link to this post still doesn't show up under "links to this post", either. WTF, over? ~This worked once when we linked to that person whose initials are A. A., & who should maybe attend A. A. as well. You know, she whose name one dare not type? Perhaps No. 32 doesn't have his settings set. Could also be the problem here. We may not be allowing link-outs or track-ins or whatever the fuck.
In a call from a January show, on New Year's predictions, the woman discusses aliens, angels and the end of life on Earth, according to an audio clip Morris posted on YouTube this week.Changing The Flag(?)
She repeatedly has called Obama "the antichrist" on the airwaves, and "her phone calls have turned to faxes and threats," according to Morris. "I have actually talked to an angel who came down in human form," she said during the Jan. 1 show. "We will have alien contact in October of this year, in the southwestern USA." One prediction may seem ironic in light of the anger expressed in her diatribe toward Castle: "There will be peace among men and negativity will end," she told Morris.
The crowd applauded and cheered as the woman yelled, "I don't want this flag to change! I want my country back!"She could try voting next time around. (Although we doubt this sadly delusional individual would be allowed to serve on a jury anywhere. There are mental hygeine requirements, which we hope apply to voting as well.)
By the way, I think the same principle should apply to meals. If Americans simply left half their food on the plate, most of our obesity issues would disappear.And what happens to that half of the national diet left on our plates, you fucking ninny? Yes, he means well. We certainly agree that most Yankee pig-dogs should cut down on their consumption (although we don't remember Sully or ourself as being the slimmest reeds in the pond) but if the great public intellectual & published author expresses himself in reverse like that, well, how great an intellect is he? All the thought in any given large empty space is w/o value if it can't be expressed & shared comprehensibly. Perhaps his majesty imagines that some of the left-overs will trickle down to the less deserving.
"Let's not start believing that government is the answer," she told the largely affectionate crowd of about 5,000 at Pioneer Park. "It can't help make you healthy or wealthy or wise. What can? It is the wisdom of the people. . . . It is God's grace, helping those who help themselves."Just how is it, in a democratic republic, that the government is not "the wisdom of the people?" Common sense is just not one of one-time Gov. Palin's strong points, is it? But that ol' "Prosperity Gospel" is.
"It should be so obvious to you," she said. "It is because I love Alaska this much, sir, that I feel that it is my duty to avoid the unproductive, typical politics-as-usual lame-duck session in one's last year in office. . . . I will be able to fight even harder for you, for what is right. And I have never felt that you need a title to do that."If it were her duty, is she incapable of performing it? Is she so weak-willed that she couldn't have resisted the temptations of lame-duckery? Should any office-holder (And Ms. Wasilla, in politics one holds an "office," not a "title." At least try to learn that much about usage of our admittedly elitist English language.) who claims she won't be running again be removed from office the very day it's announced, to avoid the "politics as usual" of lame ducks? Perhaps the first move of her new-found freedom (And wealth. "Country First," you know.) will be in support of a Constitutional Amendment to remove any President the minute he or she is elected to a second term, to avoid lameness? Not to mention that many politicians (ones who, unlike Palin, aren't cowards) use their time as a lame-duck to accomplish things that wouldn't be possible were they seeking reëlection. But somehow Palin's going to "fight even harder for you," just not from a position of power, merely as a private loud-mouth.
... at the media, which she has blamed for distorting her statements and fueling controversies that have surrounded her. "You represent what could and should be a respected and honest profession, that could and should be a cornerstone of our democracy," she said. "Democracy depends on you, and that is why our troops are willing to die for you. So how about in honor of the American soldier you quit making things up?"We can agree w/ that. The media certainly should honor the American soldier. It could start by not repeating lies that send our sacrificial lambs into trumped-up wars of aggression whose purpose is passing money from working Americans to the outstretched hands of the military-industrial-congressional complex. Not "making things up" about Sarah & her
"Stiffen your spine to do what's right for Alaskans when the pressure mounts, because you're going to see anti-hunting . . . circuses from Hollywood . . . [who] use Alaska as a fundraising tool for their anti-2nd-Amendment causes," she said. "Stand tall, and remind them individual patriots will protect our right to bear arms," she said. "By the way, Hollywood needs to know: We eat, therefore we hunt.""WE EAT, THEREFORE WE HUNT!" Twice as good as "Drill, baby, drill." Indeed, right up there w/ "Are we not men?" Final Note: The half-term Gov. uses "apologetics" as if it means, well, apologies. (That from the video actuality, not our cage-liner source.) Watch it if you can stand it.
the idea that intelligence might spring spontaneously from the Internet.No wonder they're experts. There have been well-planned attempts to detect or develop intelligence on the net, but if none of them panned out, why would any one think it could happen spontaneously? Not touching this one w/ a ten-ft. pole:
How would it be, for example, to relate to a machine that is as intelligent as your spouse?This gem just sat unnoticed in the story:
But they agreed that robots that can kill autonomously are either already here or will be soon.Just a matter of time.