March 17, 2008
Seattle billboards are making some people mad.
They each read:
"When you cast your vote, remember September 11, 2001."
"If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free. --P.J. O'Rourke."
"Universal Healthcare=Socialized Medicine. Universal Healthcare will be compulsory 'There ain't no free lunch'."
"I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle. --Winston Churchill."
The small print at the bottom reads:
"Paid for by Concerned Citizens for a better America."
But according to Robert Colaco, national chairman of Citizens for a better America, "...it's not us, and I'm not a happy camper about it."
More information here. Originally found here.
Posted by Carl at 12:58 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
March 14, 2008
News Items: Pacemakers; Al-Qaeda; Liberia and Cannibalism; Obama's Pastor.
First up, pacemakers: apparently they can be hacked.
Next, Al-Qaeda gives an ultimatum:
"Al-Qaeda's North African wing has given Austria three days to secure the release of some of its members held in Algeria and Tunisia in return for two Austrian hostages it is holding. The group said in a statement posted on an Islamist website that it had informed the Austrian government of the ultimatum, which will start at midnight on Thursday, without giving a time zone. 'Austria would be responsible for the lives of the two hostages should the deadline come and our demands are not met," it said, adding that the demands and a list of the names of the prisoners were sent to Vienna through unidentified mediators."
There is only one proper response to a threat like this: swift and violent deadly force.
Next, "Former Liberian President Charles Taylor ordered his militias to eat the flesh of captured enemies and UN soldiers..." (Source.)
Yikes.
Finally, a look at Obama's pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright. He is quoted as saying, among other things, "God damn America."
"In addition to damning America, he told his congregation on the Sunday after Sept. 11, 2001 that the United States had brought on al Qaeda's attacks because of its own terrorism. 'We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye,' Rev. Wright said in a sermon on Sept. 16, 2001."
(Source.)
I didn't know about the absurdity of that man until I watched a video of him over at Anthony's, which can be found here. The man is obviously clinically insane.
Posted by Carl at 07:02 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 20, 2008
In the news...
Global Warming: (I'm hot just thinking about it, aren't you?)
--"Adaptation 'key to climate deal'." Didn't somebody already say that?
--"Obesity 'requires climate plan'." Pretty sure that says it all.
--"Climate focus ignores wildlife [and poor]" Hmm...seems pointless to save the environment for nobody if you ask me.
--"Gore climate plea to US and China." "I don't deserve to live. It's not fair that I breathe. Whenever I breathe, all over the world butterflies start dying. They are the *real* heroes. They deserve this Nobel prize, not me."** (**Not really what he said..) He *did* however refer "to climate change as a 'planetary emergency'." And he's right. Climate change does "resemble the physical or orbital characteristics of a planet or the planets." And nothing more. God bless him for his honesty."
Technology:
--"Self-healing rubber." Upside? Heals itself. Downside: "contains a component of urine." (I'm a plumber, so it don't bother me. The rest of you are out of luck though.)
--"Wikileaks.org is, apparently, offline." I'd never heard of Wikileaks before today. And now it's offline. Unless you go to Wikipedia and do a search.
--"Machines 'to match man by 2029'." I'll believe that one, when I see it.
Health:
--"Obesity 'may be largely genetic'." Are you sure obesity ain't got nothing to do with eating? On a side note..."largely," really? No other word would do?
And in a related story...
--"Labels 'key to tackling obesity'." While this may sound good to some, I don't believe calling people names is the answer.
Posted by Carl at 10:47 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
November 07, 2007
ENDA: Thank God!!!
It passed the House, but...
"Even if a final version is approved by both houses it is likely to be met with a presidential veto."
(Source 365Gay.com.)
Thank God, I say. Thank God.
Posted by Carl at 08:14 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
October 29, 2007
"The hopes for freedom...rest with the legislative branch of our governement." --Al Gore.
""This is the greatest country on the face of this earth; and the hopes for freedom and the viability and efficacy of self-government rest with the legislative branch of our, of our government in this day and time."
(Emphasis Mine; Source YouTube.com video.)
[Loud, annoying, game-show like sound] ...WRONG. C'mon former Vice-President-Al, Just what the heck do you think self-government means, anyway? Sounds like you might need more than just science lessons.
And besides, if what you're saying's true: we are friggin' doomed. Doomed, I tell ya.
Posted by Carl at 10:54 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
October 08, 2007
Delinquent Parents; and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
"Zola and Veronica are two-year-old twins.
Their parents took them to Folsom Street Fair where they waddled amongst strange men, some wearing fishnets and leather crotch pouches, others were semi and fully nude. The parents dressed the twins in animal collars purchased at a pet store.
The parents wanted to expose their children to San Francisco's diverse community. "Every parent has to decide for themselves what is right for them," said one of the two dads. "And I respect that. And we decided that this is right for our children."
Is this good parenting?
Some fairgoers didn't think so.
"Why do (these people) bring kids here? This is a leather fair for god's sake," said Bahran Aliassa, who was masturbating in public. He has been doing it annually for the past six years." (Source here.)
Sad. Just...sad.
Second, check out this link. Apparently Dr. Ahmadinejad thinks so much of America he lets his guest use our flag as a carpet.
Gee, now I see why Columbia thought he should get his 15 minutes...
Rubes.
Posted by Carl at 11:40 PM | TrackBack
September 22, 2007
The most reasonable comment I've read so far about the Jena 6 story.
First, here's a link to the story.
Second, here's the comment.
"The bottom line is that you have one group who did something ignorant and another group who did something illegal. There is no gray area here."
--purplepeep
(Source here.)
Posted by Carl at 09:33 PM | TrackBack
August 27, 2007
Westside Middle School: Legally in error?
This is that last post I shall make on this issue.
It seems to me that Mr. Barrett broke the rules of the Whitfield County School System by showing a clip of the "R-rated" movie 300 to sixth graders without parental consent. That is, if "The Whitfield County school system's policy states that a movie must be on an approved list before it is shown in class. If it is not, then the permission of the principal is required. There are no R-rated movies on that list, including '300,'" then he clearly broke the rules.
I was reticent to continue looking into this matter because so many people on so many sites showed so much support for Mr. Barrett. And in all honesty, it seems quite reasonable to me that Mr. Barrett showed the clip in order to 'spark the kid's imaginations.' An error of judgment I was sure he had made; but was he also legally in error?
But now, since "Whitfield County school administrators defended the teacher's decision to show it. [A clip from the movie "300." And since] ...School officials say the teacher, Brad Barrett, made the right choice. [Saying] "We saw nothing in that clip that they would not see in a regular tv program," administrator, Richard Schoen said...Administrators say the clips were educational and fit in with Barrett's lesson. The teacher will not lose his job." Because of this, whatever legal responsibility Mr. Barrett had is now at an end. The "School Administrators" are now legally responsible; in my opinion.
"It shall be unlawful for any motion picture theater owner, operator, or projectionist to display to the audience within the theater scenes from a film to be shown at the theater at some future time when the viewing of that film from which the scenes are taken is restricted to adults or requires minors to be accompanied by a parent or guardian. Scenes of such restricted films may be shown within a theater if the audience has been similarly restricted as to viewing age and conditions." (Emphasis Mine; Source: TITLE 16. CRIMES AND OFFENSES; CHAPTER 12. OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC HEALTH AND MORALS; ARTICLE 3.; OBSCENITY AND RELATED OFFENSES; PART 1.; GENERAL PROVISIONS; O.C.G.A. § 16-12-85, 2007)
If it is illegal for this kind of occurrence in theaters, why should the "school administrators" be allowed to permit it? That is my question.
Logically, if the school's rules disallowed what was shown, Mr. Barrett is in the wrong. Logically, if the school administrators side with Mr. Barrett, they are more culpable. Logically if no child is allowed to view an r-rated movie in a theater, they should also not be allowed to view portions of it at school without parental permission.
Everything else that people have said on various other sites is mere cant. It is fine that Mr. Barrett is a good teacher. It is fine that Mr. Barrett had good intentions. It is fine that the "school administrators" found that nothing untoward was shown. But all of this is irrelevant. For the only cogent point at hand is this.
A rule was broken and the "school administrators" countenance and agree with the breaking of the rule. That is all.
Seems to me that the "school administrators" allowance of this is a "Willful neglect of duties." (O.C.G.A. § 20-2-940, 2007) But I may be wrong.
Every link I have found pertaining to this story:
Get that silver spoon out of your mouth.
Dalton Daily Citizen, Commentary
Military Photos.net (Near the bottom)
Posted by Carl at 02:01 AM | TrackBack
August 25, 2007
Westside 300, Once more.
Couple of News links and quotes:
(**Emphasis Mine. Source: Channel 3) "Friday, Whitfield County school administrators defended the teacher's decision to show it. [A clip from the movie "300."] ...School officials say the teacher, Brad Barrett, made the right choice**. "We saw nothing in that clip that they would not see in a regular tv program," administrator, Richard Schoen said.
Administrators say the clips were educational and fit in with Barrett's lesson. The teacher will not lose his job. "
Notwithstanding, I suppose, that the movie is Rated "R," and no one under 17 is allowed to view such movies. Notwithstanding, I suppose, that the Whitfield County School systems rules were broken: "The Whitfield County school system's policy states that a movie must be on an approved list before it is shown in class. If it is not, then the permission of the principal is required. There are no R-rated movies on that list, including '300.'" He made the right choice alright; that is, if breaking rules is the "right choice."
(Source: Channel 12) "Officials determined the first five minutes of the movie had been shown, but found nothing questionable about the content."
Irrelevant "determination." Whitfield County disallows unapproved movies without permission. If it cannot be proved that this movie was approved--and from what I have read, this seems to be the case--then the movie should not have been shown; period.
(Emphasis Mine; Source: Channel 3) "Also, a fellow bus rider, who has a sibling in Mr. Barrett's class, was talking about the incident and said that Mr. Barrett asked the students if their parents would object to their watching this clip and none of them spoke up. Had they done so, knowing him, he would've let them stand outside the door until the clip was over."
Apparently the teacher did seek permission to show the movie. Those dang newspapers! They get everything wrong. More from that comment thread.
Yet another blog post: The Theologians Cafe.
That about covers it for now.
UPDATE:
Just found this.
"Teacher Fired for Showing an R-Rated Film in High School: Sloan Roach, a spokeswoman for Gwinnett County Public Schools told reporters that Youngblood had failed to go through the proper channels. "Mr Youngblood did not ask for a local review of the film prior to showing it," he said. "Nor did he allow parents the option of opting their students out of the viewing." (Source: Guardian.co.uk, via World Magazine Movie Blog.
Now by citing that story, I am NOT saying that the teacher at Westside should be fired. I am simply observing the consequences to another teacher who acted in a similar manner. That teacher was also from Georgia.
UPDATE:
Yet another site carries the story.
Posted by Carl at 12:11 AM | TrackBack
August 24, 2007
Westside Middle School, "300," Again.
Found a few more links to the story. More fun quotes. I might comment on this later, but for now I'm just linking all the sites together. First a bit about the story.
(Source: Dalton Daily Citizen; Comments on this article here.) "A screening Wednesday of the first few minutes of the R-rated movie “300” in a Westside Middle School classroom has left more than one parent and some students upset.
Richard Schoen, executive director of assessment and accountability for Whitfield County Schools, said about five minutes of the movie was shown.
According to two parents, history teacher Brad Barrett showed the first 7-9 minutes of the movie as part of his class. Barrett could not be reached for comment."
(Source: The Dreamin' Demon) "How much you wanna bet me that at least half of those kids have seen any of the Lord of the Rings series?"
"The teacher's an idiot for showing any part of 300 to a bunch of middle school kids. The parents are more than a little irrational, though."
(Source: Comic Book Resources)
(Source: Wordforge; Best quote so far, unrelated though it is. And no, I cannot quite bring that passage to mind...lol!) "You don't remember the part in the Bible where Satan bets Jesus he can't eat fifty eggs?"
Posted by Carl at 11:19 PM | TrackBack
Whitfield County Social Studies Teacher Shows portions of the Movie "300," UPDATE.
People are talking. Some nice, some not so nice. Here are a few more links and a couple of quotes about what people think. I will get to some comments from Channel 9. Those are hilarious!
"Nothing wrong with the introduction, assuming that you want to give kids the grity (sic) version of the history and not the whitewashed, cleaned up version that most government schools seem to prefer. When I went to see it the first time in the theater, the family next to me brought their child who appeared to be six years old or so. Now THAT, is messed up." (Source: On a Sports Board)
"This teacher was trying to make this rather boring subject somewhat interesting and this whiny B**ch is having none of it." (Source: Get that silver spoon out of your mouth)
"I don't know how anyone else feels about this but I own this movie....bought it the day it was released......absolutely love it.......great movie.......any mother who protects her child to this extent should have her ass kicked..." (Source: Wicked Vixen)
The last quote would have satisfied me more if the author had explicated the degree of kicking necessary and a more precise location posteriorly. But that's just me.
Other links about 300:
"A technically exciting videogame (sic) of a film, 300 loses touch with a critical and moving event in Greek history...To judge this film's adherence to historical fact (insofar as we understand it) is to do it a disservice, for the film does not even pretend to be historically accurate. It is based on a graphic novel developed by Frank Miller and Lynn Varley, whose previous credits are mainly as comic book and graphic novel writers and illustrators." (Emphasis Mine. Source: Archeology.org)
Posted by Carl at 05:30 PM | TrackBack
August 23, 2007
Whitfield County Social Studies Teacher Shows portions of the Movie "300."
Apparently a teacher in Whitfield County thought it was appropriate to show portions of the movie 300 to sixth graders. The as yet unnamed teacher works at Westside Middle School. According to News Channel 9:
"The Whitfield County school system's policy states that a movie must be on an approved list before it is shown in class. If it is not, then the permission of the principal is required. There are no R-rated movies on that list, including '300.'" (Quote Link)
Story Links:
Until I read more about this, I have only three questions and a comment.
1. How much, and what portions of the movie were shown?
2. These are sixth-graders! Aren't "R-rated" movies for 17-year-olds and older?
3. Was legal permission from the copyright holder required to show this film in this venue?
4. My wife and I would not allow our children to watch this movie.
More later. Especially some commentary on those comments left at News Channel nine! They're great fun to read.
Posted by Carl at 10:39 PM | TrackBack
February 20, 2007
"Muslim cabbie runs over students after religious argument."
This is just a warning. Please be careful who you discuss religion with. I shudder to think what might have happened if the driver had been a Christian!
Posted by Carl at 11:40 PM | TrackBack
February 01, 2007
BLOGUL: Blog-Mogul
I don't claim to be a "blogul." Neither do I claim to have coined the phrase. In fact, I'm not too sure I understand the necessity of Creative Commons, or Numly, or any other such service. After all, we do have the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, do we not? But here is what I found humourous:
While reading this post on CrumleydotOrg, I noticed that she referenced blogul; and by following that link I discovered that Sunita Torres claims to have coined the word "blogul."
" ESN 7142806123163141642Document Name: Copyright for word: BLOGUL
Document Description:The word Blog-ul was coined on December 30th of the year 2006 by Sunita Torres. The meaning of BLOGul is as follows:
BLOGUL:
A mogul of blogging.
A powerful person in the blogging industry.
You may NOT use this word in conjunction with any application, program, blogging tools, names, and such without explicit permission from this copyright holder." (Link)
My question is, how could Sunita coin a word on Dec. 30, 2006 that was used, if not first at least already, on Sept. 23, 2005 (Scroll down until you find the article: "Arrianna's a Standup Gal"; Bottom of the article gives date of publication.)
Posted by Carl at 11:05 PM | TrackBack
January 22, 2007
Insurance cap in Florida.
Something about this just doesn't seem right.
(I found that while googling for the homeless information.)
Posted by Carl at 10:00 PM | TrackBack
January 06, 2007
Harriman Utility Board using absurd laws to steal from citizens.
Harriman is a city in Roane County, Tennessee. Now, if nothing else is able to convince the rest of the nation that we ain't rednecks, maybe this story will.
Continue reading "Harriman Utility Board using absurd laws to steal from citizens."
Posted by Carl at 01:24 AM | TrackBack