semiotic_pirate: (Pirate Grrl - RIOT)
Although I've never tried the sauce myself. I have many friends who swear by it and I am ready to defend their culinary choices. I'm posting the below b/c some people are seeing only a paywall while others are not encountering it at all and can see the article without problems. I don't know what the issue is with the website - and if it is just a matter of reading it on a mobile browser, or what. So. This post will self destruct in 24 hours or when I remember that I've got to self-destruct it. Okay?

Save Sriracha!
Save a beloved hot sauce from smelly politics
March 21, 2014|By Ernesto Hernandez-Lopez

Local politics in California has ignited fear for fans of Sriracha, an extremely popular hot sauce, created for pho, a Vietnamese soup, and now fancied for Asian, taco and fusion dishes, sushi and street food. Celebrities, home chefs, even workers from the mailroom to the top offices are fans. Sriracha lovers around the globe are closely monitoring the actions of a small Los Angeles suburb that recently went to court to stop its production. The small city of Irwindale, east of Los Angeles, argues that Huy Fong Foods, maker of Sriracha, a hot chili sauce, emits harmful odors from a new plant within the city boundaries.

Read the rest behind the big curtain. )
semiotic_pirate: (speak your mind)
All previous reports are bullshit. In the words of The Fair & Balanced News commenting on Sat, 2007-05-26 23:42:

"The EEVS System is addressed beginning on page 196 or so of the PDF. NO WHERE in the wording does it state that ALL employers of ALL employees will be required to obtain pre-approval from the System. Of course, any Govt agency can do whatever the hell they want at any time the want."

Before I had gotten to this guy's statement, the only person out of all the commenters here who actually appears to have read the immigration bill, I decided to go looking for myself. Someone had given false directions to where to look earlier in the comments and instead of just walking away from it I actually started to read the damned thing to find what everyone was going on about.

I found it. I say again: All previous reports of "the sky is falling" are bullshit. If you open the pdf file, here are your directions to finding the refutation of all the headless chicken action going on the last day or so - page 217 Unlawful Employment of Aliens, page 221 Document Verification Requirements, and the kicker... page 228, lines 18-22 No authorization of National Identification Cards... and much more as I continues to read the document.

Baisically, the hoops we already have to jump through - using our license or passport - to prove our identity to our prospective employer during the initial hiring process is THE SAME. Nothing has changed for U.S. Citizens. There are no requirements to participate for employers in the U.S. at this time.

Page 228, line 18-22: "(6) NO AUTHORIZATION OF NATIONAL IDENTIFICATION CARDS.--Nothing in this section may be construed to authorize, directly or indirectly, the issuance, use, or establishment of a national identitification card."

The Electronic Employment Verification System seems like just an extension of what the IRS in conjunction with the Social Security Dept already has in place. Recordkeeping seems to be the same for employers as before... Info about the EEVS starts on page 228 line 23 - employers and employees of said employers are already required to register themselves and be tracked in databases via the IRS, using state & federal employer ID numbers and state & federal ID cards (social security card and state license or other id). Reminds me of how Homeland Security swallowed the US Coast Guard.

Something that seems new for the prospective employee appears on page 233 under INFORMATION REQUIRED: that employee must provide to the prospective employer: "(III) the employment identification number of the individual's employer during any one of the 5 most recently completed calendar years" which, in an additional section on page 234 said previous employer is required to provide to an individual upon request in order to comply with their new employment situation.

For flubs in the system, where a person cannot be confirmed (as a citizen or employable alien) which is actually referred at this point as "tentative nonconfirmation" people DO have an opportuntiy to CONTEST (within 10 days of written notification by prospective employer) and that (page 236 line 23) "An individual's failure to contest a tentative nonconfirmation shall not be considered an admission of guilt with respect to any violation of this Act or any other provision of law." and if contested, it will be cleared up within 30 days.

Page 243 line 18 begins another section on Contest and Self-Verification. This new power by "The Secretary" is in consulation with the Commissioner of Social Security. There is a provision for an idividual to "seek to verify the individual's own employment eligibility prior to obtaining or changing employment, to contact the appropriate agency and, in a timely manner, correct or update the information used by the System. Which reminds me of the working permit you have to get when you are a teenager in school... interesting parallel there. And I am sure that the employers will look favorably on prospective employees who allow the burden of confirmation to fall on their individual shoulders.

Page 240 line 15 provides protection to individuals who are in a process of contesting: "(viii) PROHIBITION ON TERMINATION.--An employer may not terminate the employment of an individual based on a tentative nonconfirmation notice until such notice becomes final... or a final nonconfirmation notice is issued for the individual by the system." however they allow a loophole immediately following "nothing in this clause shall prohibit the termination of employment for any reason other than such tentative nonconfirmation."

Another caveat in favor of the prospective employee is found on page 246 line 18-24: "(i) IN GENERAL.--If the Secretary makes a determination under subparagraph (C) that the final nonconfirmation notice issued for an individual was not caused by an act or omission of the individual, the Secretary shall compensate the individual for lost wages... beginning on the first scheduled work day after employment was terminated and ending 180 days after completion of the administrative review process described in this paragraph or the day after the individual is reinstated or obtains employment elsewhere, whichever occurs first." Of course, the source of funds for this compensation is a bit vague. You can contest, appeal, and even go on to obtain judicial review by a civil action commenced "not later than 60 days after the date of such decision..." wherein the above compensation kicks in.

There is a limit on the amount of information collected and penalties for collecting more than the "minimum requirement" for the purposes of identification of confirmed employability. There is allowance (compliance) with the rights for individuals and entities to file complaints (and one may assume, civil suits) giving investigative authority to our friend The Secretary of Labor under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and so forth.

Overall, this is a confirmation process of U.S. Citizenship and registered aliens that are allowed to be employed in the U.S. specifically geared toward disallowing employment of illegal aliens. Of course, it does not take into account the possibility that there will likely be an increase in "under the table" employment. Protectionists should be ecstatic that some percent of jobs will be "safely preserved for people who need them and are entitled to" however, this extra hoop to hop through is disturbing. Mainly because the policy and procedure already in place should be enough to get this self-same job done. This just seems like another power grab by Homeland Security, and they are assuming that none of the people who want to commit terrorist acts in the U.S. can be U.S. citizens. Timothy McVeigh anyone?

Of course, before any of this can be implemented, the program needs to appropriate $400,000,000.00 first... and that appropriation needs to be annual btw. Gah. Four hundred million dollars and it would probably be a lot less if it were just added to the policies and procedures already in place for verification purposes.
semiotic_pirate: (Default)
something I just found out about yesterday. fascinating. its a shame that the republicans got a bunch of states to ban the practice because they don't want to fight "against the world" (wouldn't that be against the people who you want/intend to represent?) or cater to anyone else, etc.

fortunately, connecticut is one of the handful of states where it is still legal. read about it here and here. I love the idea that a party can be beholden to the few percent that tip the scale in a close vote. reminds of of why OPEC controls oil prices too. strange.

hell, if we were able to do this in every vote, on every matter, including the presidency, we might not be in the shithole we are now. especially bush being president. damn.

why haven't we repealed the bans? when does the other party candidate/party decide who they give their votes to? before, or after the votes are tallied? the little people would have more power if it was after.

comments? debate? let's go people.

(yeah, I'm mostly ignoring capital letters at this point. should I go wholesale and even not capitalize I or proper names? hrm. perhaps. would it annoy the hell out of my f-list? maybe.)
semiotic_pirate: (ExhibitA)
CIA Leak Investigation C-Span

Current interviewee: Victoria Toensing

Panelist repeatedly, when VT tries to monopolize the panelist's time to ask questions of her, "I am reclaiming my time."

Interpretation into plain language: "Shut up bitch."

I swear, the way that she said it with contmpt, that is what she sounded like she was saying. All the while VT is saying "under my interpretation of the law" while repeatedly deflecting everything thrown at her and Never admitting anything... No admission of wrongdoing on her part or anyone else's part about the leak.

As the Crabby Ol' Bastard said George Herbert Walker Bush (as a former director of the CIA) was quoted as saying (when this first came to light) "In my day at CIA, outting an undercover agent would be treason."

Apparently VT's only there because the minority insisted on having one of their own people dissemble concerning a twenty five year old act concerning a CIA agent's length of covert status. "She didn't serve overseas for over five years, under the law she would not be considered covert... under my interpretation of the law."

And now... back to doing econometrics homework. *sigh*
semiotic_pirate: (Icon of Doom)
I think I'm almost finished blogging for the day. I've been very expressive today - though really I'm just reading a lot of articles that I then want to either talk about or just post them. Easier to post them than to print them as PDF's in my Documents Folder.

You know that desire to laugh that you get when you are so offended you don't know what else to do? Expand that offensiveness for two hours and you get Borat. I think, like Carpetbagger, I am offended by it because it was based entirely on deception. People signing releases that they didn't read because they made assumptions about the veracity of the person who explained that they were something other than what they were. Entirely understandable is the reaction that the government of Kazakhstan is having over this movie. Now, I haven't seen it myself yet, and I don't know when or if I will. I'm not entirely sure of the motivations of the people who made this film. Was it to expose people and what they truly feel like under their P.C. facade or was it intentional entrapment of individuals who were pushed and induced into behavior by the supposed charismatic journalist? Again, the reviews I'm reading are saying it is so offensive they are disgusted by it and the guffawing amusement that the average moviegoer exhibits. Carpetbagger is a NY Times blogger.

November 14, 2006, 9:31 am
Throw the Borat Down the Well

Read more... )

In other news, the Rev. John Hagee of San Antonio said support for Israel was “God’s foreign policy.” Many conservative Christians say they believe that the president’s support for Israel fulfills a biblical injunction to protect the Jewish state, which some of them think will play a pivotal role in the second coming. Many on the left, in turn, fear that such theology may influence decisions the administration makes toward Israel and the Middle East. Some of this is a replay of news from last year, but focused on how it is playing out in the ongoing negotiations for negotiations with Iran. *sigh* Don't these people realize that bringing on their version of the end of the world isn't what they are supposed to be pushing for? Besides, what use the self-fulfilling prophesy? Forknowledge influences future events by creating reasons for decisions in the present. This argument is ancient, whether our lives are ruled by destiny - which is much easier to believe in - or whether we create our own futures based on the choices of each individual overlapping. Then again, The Israeli government and its American allies have been building their alliance with evangelicals for decades. Israeli officials began working closely with Mr. Hagee and his church, for example, a quarter century ago, when he met several times with then-Prime Minister Menachem Begin. Moreover, (white )evangelicals make up about a quarter of the electorate. If you recall my previous posts on mega-churches and their growing influence, ever since Pat Robertson and his ilk started evangelizing on television even. Gah. Reminds me of Stigmata and End of Days and the rift that has always existed in the christian flavored church. Here's a thought, would the people who worked diligently to bring on the end of the world as we know it be held responsible by their god for all the people who die as a result of their maneuvering? Evangelicals are scary. Just the word evangelicals makes me think evil angels.
semiotic_pirate: (BeenNaughtyB&W)
Will they do it? Is it really gonna happen? Will the festivities continue? One can only hope. If they actually have the evidence for this, and win... What happens to all those people who were convicted if they were "only following orders"? Not that I condone torture but how do you do one without doing the other? And what about rendition? Where does that fit in? Because the claim that "everyone is doing it" is supremely childish and isn't an acceptable excuse for torture.

Rumsfeld faces German legal test

A lawyers' group has asked Germany to sue former US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld over alleged prisoner abuse in Iraq and Guantanamo Bay.

Read more... )
semiotic_pirate: (Default)
Just started to read this on my flist - interesting shit, neh?

Wish I could've gotten a link to a newspaper source though... yet again I find an interesting subject for a paper! damn.
semiotic_pirate: (Juicy Oranges)
I realize this is an old article (late june issue of business week) for some of you... However, as I was working out at the gym (yay! finally found a nice gym without any of the environmental factors that previously kept me out of one.) I discovered this article an read most of it while I was on the recumbent bicycle. I found it not only fascinating but also something that common sense should have had us recognizing. We are living longer, we are healthy and can be productive within our society longer... Why, in a culture where we sometimes define ourselves by what we do would we retire so "early" that we feel useless (to ourselves) instead of carrying on like we always have? I like the implications that as we become more at ease in our positions over time, we become better at doing our jobs, we work smarter... a master craftsman as it were in our profession. The secretary for my department had retired a couple of years ago, and it took two people to replace her - and they dreaded letting her go when she finally decided to retire because she was so efficient. Of course, I am really fascinated to see how this plays out economically. It makes sense though, and gives people a chance to try out a couple of different careers before settling into the one that they can, like a good wine, get better at with age/experience. This also gives people who return to college at a later date - another form of career switching I guess...

If you wanted to, a woman could look at this and say - I do have time to do everything. The only issue is finding a partner enlightened enough to understand and mature enough to grow with you over time, oh and committed enough to stay the course (of course, the eternal marraige ideal is changing too). A woman can have her children when she is young and it is healthier for her to have children, she can go back to school after staying at home (unless the father is the one who decides to stay home)... Or she can get her degrees, establish herself in her field, take time off for having children, retrain a bit and get back into the workforce. Needless to say, because of our greater lifespan we have more optionson what we do with that life. Because of increasing flexibility in both societal expectations (gender roles, profession choices, etc.) we can change, adapt, thrive. More chances, the ability to have 3-4 careers, and so forth. The only roadblock for this is knowing that it is possible - like any other chances or possibilities in life - you have to KNOW WHAT YOUR OPTIONS ARE. Hence, when someone tells a child: "you can do anything you put your mind to, you can be anything you can think of" you are inspiring that child to go out and find that what/who/how.

Great stuff.

Old. Smart. Productive.
Surprise! The graying of the workforce is better news than you think

Emma Shulman is a dynamo. The veteran social worker works up to 50 hours a week recruiting people for treatment at an Alzheimer's clinic at New York University School of Medicine. Her boss, psychiatrist Steven H. Ferris, dreads the day she decides to retire: "We'd definitely have to hire two or three people to replace her," he says. Complains Shulman: "One of my problems is excess energy, which drives me nuts."

Oh, one more thing about Emma Shulman. She's nearly 93 years old.
Read more... )
semiotic_pirate: (bushy weasel)
This was a heartrending tale that emerged from the experiences of two California paramedics who were in NOLA during the recent hurricane debacle. It amazes and disturbs me that people who are supposed to "serve and protect" were acting in such a horrendous unfeeling manner. Panic - deer in the headlights reactionary gun-waving tactics. I realize that without any overall directions from up above on the food chain makes people a bit techy, however, that doesn't excuse inhumane treatment of victims.

via: EMS Network

Note: Bradshaw and Slonsky are paramedics from California that were attending the EMS conference in New Orleans. Larry Bradshaw is the chief shop steward, Paramedic Chapter, SEIU Local 790; and Lorrie Beth Slonsky is steward, Paramedic Chapter, SEIU Local 790.[California] Their tale in just one of this type now appearing in many newspapers, online and with listservers. The fact they are paramedics is largely irrelevant to the tale, however, there are many EMT/Paramedic personal accounts online - some even more incredible.

Read more... )
semiotic_pirate: (Riot Pirate Grrl)
Okay, I've sent an email to FX requesting them to reair the movie Oil Storm for the benfit of the American Public. For all of you who haven't seen it, here is some more information about it.

Aired on Sunday, June 5th, 2005 – Oil Storm; America’s Lifeline Has Been Severed.

As per the Synopsis of Oil Storm on

Oil Storm examines what happens when a Category 6 hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico slams into Louisiana, crushing the city of New Orleans and crippling the vital pipeline for refined oil that is Port Fourchon. It examines the ripple effect of that event and the ensuing cascade of disasters associated with it, though the eyes of public officials, a brutal winter, and a ranching family in South Dakota who have their subsidy’s completely taken away and question whether we need oil or food to survive.

As the country reels from the loss of life and energy reserves associated with the hurricane’s fury, the price of crude oil skyrockets and the United States government sets forth to take immediate action. It puts in motion efforts to rebuild the infrastructure of Port Fourchon (8 months minimum) and the sagging and disabled deep sea rigs in the Gulf of Mexico (of equal length). It re-routes activity normally associated with the Port Fourchon shipping lanes to the Port of Houston and compels Houston to work 24/7 in order to get the crude to our refineries and out to the public.

As gas lines quickly begin and the price per gallon passes three dollars, the government reaches out to our good friends in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia, to increase its oil production. However the decision by the Saudi’s to help the Americans inflames an already unsteady Muslim population in that country already emboldened by the continuing challenges in the war in Iraq. Extremists’ interests then commit a terrorist act in an upscale shopping mall in Riyadh, killing some 300 Americans employed by multi-national oil companies in the country. With big business directly impacted and the need for more oil keen, the United States government agrees to send American troops to Saudi Arabia to help protect the oil infrastructure.

Meanwhile, in Houston, the increased activity in their notoriously narrow shipping channels has inadvertently created another challenge to the oil crisis when two, large tankers collide, creating a huge oil spill that shuts the channel down completely for an extended period of time.

As the country absorbs the Houston blow and anticipates increased production from the Saudi’s, those same terrorist interests strike again by assassinating the Saudi Oil Minister responsible for advocating the deal with the US and then, in an enormous act of cowardice, those same terrorists blow up sections of the huge Ras Tanura facility on the outskirts of Riyadh killing a vast number of American soldiers sent there to protect the infrastructure.

Lines at the gas pumps are the least of our worries. As the country grieves, winter has set in and heating oil is not only expensive, it’s often not available. Many in the country die from the cold. So the government turns to Russia for help and strikes a deal for 3 million barrels of oil per week for the foreseeable future. The Russians however are compelled to shop the deal to the other, largest consumer of energy in the world, China. The Chinese outbid the Americans for the oil, leaving the United States diplomatically exposed and with growing chaos on our streets.

As the year of 2005 continues, the true spirit of American sacrifice emerges. Aspects of a new agrarian philosophy take root, alternative sources for energy are put on a fast track and the basic decency of Americans rises to the occasion as the country attempts to take care of itself in ways that hearken back to a more simple time.

While this occurs, the United States government steps into the Russian oil deal and with diplomatic skill, heretofore abandoned, manages to put the deal back on track changing the course for the oil from China back to the United States.

As the story concludes, an awakened populace reconciles its losses and learns more about the character of our great nation. Our government expends all its financial, political and diplomatic resources to get the country’s infrastructure back on track. And our country emerges from these terrible events, stronger and more dedicated to protecting the American way of life; a way of life that now means a permanent gas price of almost 4 dollars a gallon.

But something nobler comes to pass. We are now amid a great shift into the future, a future filled with renewed purpose and renewed exploration of all means at our disposal for survival in a world that is not the world of our parents, but the world of our children. It’s a world that does not forego oil as an energy source, but rather creates a more healthy association with it. It’s a world that invigorates, in real terms, a look at all forms of energy creating an approach to that vital industry that will allow our children to thrive in the 21st Century.

To make a request of your own, send an email to FX at this address:


Aug. 27th, 2005 04:28 am
semiotic_pirate: (Hand on Flintlock)
As I wait for normal business hours to begin so I can get into the doctor's office for a strep throat test, I decided to stay up the rest of the night and scan the news for interesting tidbits. I found horror. I am sure that Chen will be supported by a groundswell of international groups and individuals who are outraged by China's actions. Excuse me, to be PC... who are outraged by local (Linyi) Chinese official's actions!

Now if they used education to decrease the population increase, that has been found to work, and voluntarily at that. What did that study a while back find? The better off, and better educated you are, the less likely you will be to have children? (because you are more aware of the population issue I hope.)

Who Controls the Family?
Blind Activist Leads Peasants in Legal Challenge To Abuses of China's Population-Growth Policy

By Philip P. Pan
Washington Post Foreign Service
Saturday, August 27, 2005; A01

LINYI, China -- A crowd of disheveled villagers was waiting when Chen Guangcheng stepped out of the car. More women than men among them, a mix of desperation and hope on their faces, they ushered him along a dirt path and into a nearby house. Then, one after another, they told him about the city's campaign against "unplanned births."

Since March, the farmers said, local authorities had been raiding the homes of families with two children and demanding at least one parent be sterilized. Women pregnant with a third child were forced to have abortions. And if people tried to hide, the officials jailed their relatives and neighbors, beating them and holding them hostage until the fugitives turned themselves in.

Chen, 34, a slender man wearing dark sunglasses, held out a digital voice recorder and listened intently. Blind since birth, he couldn't see the tears of the women forced to terminate pregnancies seven or eight months along, or the blank stares of the men who said they submitted to vasectomies to save family members from torture. But he could hear the pain and anger in their voices and said he was determined to do something about it.

Read more... )
semiotic_pirate: (grrl w/gun)
This is very reminiscent of all those spy thrillers, and actual training dating back thousands of years... To blend in, to become invisible to the surrounding populace in order to achieve your objective. We teach our own special forces (and spies) to do just that. Why does it take so long for it to be considered as something the enemy might do? Curious.

My one problem with the implementation phase of prevention is that it is a great excuse for anti-homeless enforcement goons to sweep the streets clean of those who have chosen (or been driven to, or have fallen into - I realize that each individual has a unique story of how they came to be there) homelessness. What would happen to all those people? Are they going to be institutionalized? Some of the homeless are those who were released into the world when asylums became politically incorrect due to all of the abuse scandals and of course, the cost. There has always been a call to help the people who fell through the cracks and got themselves into a situation where they ended up homeless. To set up halfway houses to reintegrate them into society, a leg up so to speak. Then there are the treatment centers that would have to be established for those of the homeless who have become homeless because of their various addictions. So part of me is outraged, because this may be used as an excuse to "Disneyfy" city streets (as people referred to Guiliani's reforms of NYC) by rounding up the undesirables ... Part of me is also outraged because of what would be done with these people, not what would be best for them and for society as a whole, (the long run) but just what is most cost-efficient in the short run. They'll probably be exported, locked up and forgotten by those who put them there. Oh, and don't forget - don't trust anyone!

Or am I getting too close to the edge?

Tuesday, August 23, 2005; A02

Terrorists May Pose as Vagrants, Memo Warns

Asking for increased vigilance since the London bombings, the U.S. government has warned that terrorists may pose as vagrants to conduct surveillance of buildings and mass transit stations to plot attacks.

"It is crucial that police, fire and emergency medical personnel take notice of their surroundings, and be aware of 'vagrants' who seem out of place or unfamiliar," said the message, distributed via e-mail to some federal employees by the U.S. attorney's office.

It is based on a State Department report issued last week. The warning is similar to one issued by the FBI before July 4, 2004; it said terrorists may attempt surveillance disguised as homeless people, shoe shiners, street vendors or street sweepers.

The e-mail emphasizes that there is no threat of an attack and that it is intended to be "informative, not alarming."
semiotic_pirate: (pirate grrrrrl pencil drawing)
NEW YORK Now that Time Inc. has turned over documents to federal court, revealing who its reporter, Matt Cooper, identified as his source in the Valerie Plame/CIA case, speculation runs rampant on the name of that source. Lawrence O'Donnell, senior MSNBC political analyst, now claims that at least two sources have confirmed that the name is--top White House mastermind Karl Rove.

O'Donnell first offered this report Friday night on the syndicated McLaughlin Group political talk show. Today, he went beyond that, writing a brief entry at the Huffington Post blog:

"I revealed in yesterday's taping of the McLaughlin Group that Time magazine's e-mails will reveal that Karl Rove was Matt Cooper's source. I have known this for months but didn't want to say it at a time that would risk me getting dragged into the grand jury.


"Since I revealed the big scoop, I have had it reconfirmed by yet another highly authoritative source. Too many people know this. It should break wide open this week. I know Newsweek is working on an 'It's Rove!' story and will probably break it tomorrow."

semiotic_pirate: (Default)
the following announcement is no longer valid. I was sent an email refusing my choice of dates, which might not be working out for me anyhow... There was an insistence to hold the event on next weekend (7/8-710) so that they could get another ACTION organized in the near future after that. Ah well. Better luck next time. Maybe I'll just start up a Progressive Movie Night of my own, on my own, thank you very much! )

Funny thing is, we already own most of the films mentioned. Whatever we don't have we can get from NetFlix right quick. There will be snacks and drinks, some of them maybe provided by you. There will be music, background, when the film isn't playing. I'm assuming there will be discussion afterwards, I'm not sure if there is any "guided questions" of any sort sponsored by MoveOn. I'm still waiting for the full information package to arrive in my email. Okay, that's all set, I'll check it all out tomorrow.

Let's do this people! MYAH!
semiotic_pirate: (Angelina eye)
Shock. Denial. Anger. Depression. Acceptance.

What is this?! I go out to walkabout nature, and what happens??? (Yes I know a lot of you have already posted about this, but I didn't see anyone with the NPR article coverage yet.) And just yesterday I bought a T-shirt on Cafe Press put together by someone that had a quote of her dissent on the KELO case. ::sigh::

Is it the end of the world as we know it?!

A Letter of Resignation

The text of Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement letter to President Bush:

Dear President Bush:

This is to inform you of my decision to retire from my position as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States
effective upon the nomination and confirmation of my successor. It has been a great privilege, indeed, to have served as a member of the court for 24 terms. I will leave it with enormous respect for the integrity of the court and its role under our constitutional structure.


Sandra Day O'Connor

Click here for MUCH more about SDOC, articles, pictures, links to listen to interviews, etc... )
semiotic_pirate: (Hand on Flintlock)
Okay, I had been curious about this, I knew that the Pledge of Allegiance originally did NOT have any mention of god in it... I had also heard that there was no "In God We Trust" on our money... before we had the real beginning of neocons in power. I found the proof. On the article about the pledge you will find a bunch of links for further information scattered throughout the article. For the most part, the three sites occasionally overlap (when reporting dates at least) but each one brings a bit of information that the other does not. Thoughts? Comments? Ideas on how to disseminate this to keep the neocons from continuing to claim that all this god crap was the idea of our founding fathers??

Found at:

The Pledge of Allegiance
Why we're not one nation "under God."

By David Greenberg
Updated Friday, June 28, 2002, at 1:39 PM PT
Read more... )

I found this:

I recently sat down with my wallet and began ritualistically crossing out the "In God We Trust" off the back of all my bills. I do this regularly to support the idea of separation of church and state. This particular time I came across a ten dollar bill that lacked the offending mark. Closer examination indicated that it was a 1950 series ten dollar bill. In addition to the lack of a "In God We Trust" mark this bill also promised to pay me ten dollars in legal currency upon presentation to the department of the treasury, an interesting element for another writer and another article.
Read more... )
And I will conclude with this:

The original national motto: "E Pluribus Unum"
Read more... )
The replacement motto: "In God We Trust:"
Read more... )
semiotic_pirate: (Default)
I am appalled by what I found on a community I belong to... The following is a (long) excerpt of what was posted. Not only are the bushites slowly chipping away at our constitutional rights... ARRRRGGHH! What are we turning into?! I really feel like looking into moving the hell out of this country right now, this is SCARY shit here.

VA Legislative Sentry: Have a Miscarriage, Go to JAIL?
Thu Jan 6th, 2005 at 16:44:34 PST

Imagine the following scenario. You are at home alone at 8:00 on a Friday night. You are 8 weeks pregnant. All of a sudden, you begin to experience heavy cramping and bleeding. You realize with shock and sadness that you are probably experiencing a miscarriage. You are overwhelmed with grief and surprised by the intensity of physical pain involved. When your partner comes home, you break the sad news to him. Over the next few hours, you suffer pain, cramping, and intermittent bleeding. Exhausted, you finally fall asleep in your partner's arms around 4 AM. You sleep until noon.

Guess what? You just earned yourself up to 12 months in jail and a $2,500 fine. Why? Because you failed to call the cops and report your miscarriage within 12 hours.

True? Not yet. But if Delegate John Cosgrove (R-78) has his way, HB1677 will become law in a few short months, and this scenario will be reality for many women in Virginia. Incredulous? Outraged? Read on below the jump for more information on this odious bill.

Overview of HB1677, "Report of Fetal Death by mother, penalty"
Read more... )
semiotic_pirate: (Default)
So here we have it folks. How long are we going to have to deal with this? Another four years, that's what. Probably more, because we will have to pay off that mounting deficit after he's finally gone. To top it off I'm currently reading this great short book called The Two-Income Trap and damn it all if it isn't depressing. We are in such deep shit economically speaking. And then there is the story over at COB's blog - which I showed to him in the first place and was going to post on my blog but... damn you! Heh. It's alright, I'll just link to it here. I want you to pay special attention to Rove's mumbled comments (to his tour guide) and to Bush's actions during the whole episode. Enjoy! And now... On with the show! (Man am I glad I already was able to take advantage of the un-cut Pell grant while an undergraduate.)

Sunday News Quiz

My wife constantly regales me about her favorite National Public Radio show, "Wait Wait ...Don't Tell Me." The show features three journalists who have to answer questions about the week's news. Some of the news stories they are quizzed about seem totally unbelievable, while others are straightforward. Well, this is my last column for 2004, so let's play a little "Wait Wait ... Don't Tell Me." I'll give you 10 news stories from the past few weeks and you tell me what they all have in common.
Read more... )
semiotic_pirate: (Default)
Watch the movie that this links to... laugh your heiney off... be assured, you too can survive.
"This too shall pass." -Eeyore
semiotic_pirate: (Default)
That's right folks, our beloved Dubya is preparing to utilize that "mandate" of the people to sink us into an even DEEPER hole. And wouldn't ya know it, he snuck it in on a Friday evening... AGAIN! Way to go. ::rolls eyes::

Bush signs bill to raise US government's debt ceiling 2004-11-20 04:56:33

    WASHINGTON, Nov. 19 (Xinhuanet) -- US President George W. Bush on Friday signed a legislation raising the US debt ceiling by 800 billion dollars, allowing the US government to borrow more money to cover the soaring spending.

    On his way to a economic summit meetings in Chile, Bush signed the legislation raising the government's debt limit to nearly 8.2 trillion dollars, according to local news report.

    The decision on raising the government's debt ceiling was approved with a vote of 52 to 44 in the Senate on Wednesday and passed the US House of Representative on Thursday.

    The US Treasury Department had told the US congress that it needed the approval by Thursday to avoid a government default.

    It was the third increase of US government's debt ceiling sincePresident Bush took office nearly four years ago and there was a federal surplus of 237 billion dollar in 2000 before Bush became the US president.

    The federal deficit of the US government continued to rise in the past three years and surged to a record high of 413 billion dollars in fiscal year of 2004 which ended on September 30. Enditem


semiotic_pirate: (Default)

April 2017

2 345 6 7 8


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 23rd, 2017 11:03 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios