Title cribbed from here. A sample that I transcribed...let's call the protagonists Alice and Bob:
Bob: You said the "right-wing media" was becoming too powerful. Alice: Yes. We need the Fairness Doctrine to return a balance to talk radio. Bob: How does it work? Alice: The government makes things fair. Bob: How? Alice: I don't know the details, but it ends with Rush Limbaugh being forced off the air. Bob: What don't you like about him? Alice: He uses hate speech. Bob: Like what? Alice: He criticizes liberals. Bob: How is that "hate speech?" Alice: Because I hate it.
Notice the boxes that show up around posts...anybody have any idea what they're supposed to be? Is it just a worse case of/. b0rkenness than usual, or are they supposed to do something useful? I think it's been like this for at least a week or two.
(That I'm using a beta version of Firefox isn't the explanation...it looks the same on Firefox 3.0.x on my other machines, and in Safari on my iPhone.)
A surreal scientific blunder last week raised a huge question mark about the temperature records that underpin the worldwide alarm over global warming. On Monday, Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), which is run by Al Gore's chief scientific ally, Dr James Hansen, and is one of four bodies responsible for monitoring global temperatures, announced that last month was the hottest October on record.
This was startling. Across the world there were reports of unseasonal snow and plummeting temperatures last month, from the American Great Plains to China, and from the Alps to New Zealand. China's official news agency reported that Tibet had suffered its "worst snowstorm ever". In the US, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration registered 63 local snowfall records and 115 lowest-ever temperatures for the month, and ranked it as only the 70th-warmest October in 114 years.
So what explained the anomaly? GISS's computerised temperature maps seemed to show readings across a large part of Russia had been up to 10 degrees higher than normal. But when expert readers of the two leading warming-sceptic blogs, Watts Up With That and Climate Audit, began detailed analysis of the GISS data they made an astonishing discovery. The reason for the freak figures was that scores of temperature records from Russia and elsewhere were not based on October readings at all. Figures from the previous month had simply been carried over and repeated two months running.
If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court. I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order as long as I could pay for it I'd be o.k. But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can't do to you. Says what the Federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn't shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that.
If you guessed "B. Hussein Obama," then you, sir, are correct. It's from an interview he gave WBEZ, the Chicago NPR affiliate, in 2001. Go here for the MP3.
"Redistributive change?" "Economic justice?" That's Communism we can believe in.
Do you suppose this would be the new national anthem under an Obummer regime?
Update: (9:15 AM) Sounds like Rush Limbaugh is kicking off the day with this story. John McCain needs to run with this. America won't vote for a Communist.
Linked by AoSHQ...check out how Obummer and his minions attempted to engineer a favorable outcome in an early caucus state (he still failed it). The following is an excerpt from a letter from the Hillary Clinton campaign (via its lawyers) to the head of the Nevada Democrat Party, asking for it to look into several improprieties. As I recall from local news reports at the time, the Clark County Democrat convention was also quite the fiasco:
Systematic Corruption of the Party's Caucus Procedures
The Committee received substantially similar reports of improprieties of such a number as to leave no conclusion but that the Obama campaign and its allies and supporters engaged in a planned effort to subvert the Party's caucus procedures to its advantage. For example:
Preference cards were premarked for Obama.
Clinton supporters were denied preference cards on the basis that none were left, while Obama supporters at the same caucus sites were given preference cards.
Caucus chairs obviously supporting Obama:
Deliberately miscounted votes to favor Senator Obama.
Deliberately counted unregistered persons as Obama votes.
Deliberately counted young children as Obama votes.
Refused to accept preference cards from Clinton supporters who were at the caucus site by noon on the ground that the cards were not filled out fast enough.
Told Clinton supporters to leave prior to electing delegates.
Clinton supporters who arrived late were turned away from the caucus, while late Obama supporters were admitted to the caucus.
Manipulation of the Voter Registration Process
Numerous reports received by the Committee demonstrate a concerted effort on the part of the Obama campaign and its supporters to prevent eligible voters supporting a candidate other than Senator Obama from caucusing. The Obama supporters complained of were acting in positions of authority at the caucus sites. Some of these reports are as follows:
Obama supporters wrongly informed Clinton supporters that they were not allowed to participate in the caucus if their names were not on the voter rolls. However, Obama supporters whose names did not appear on the voter rolls were permitted to register at the caucus site.
Obama supporters falsely informed Clinton supporters that no registration forms were available for them to register to vote at the caucus site.
Obama supporters wrongly told Clinton supporters who were attempting to caucus at the wrong precinct that they could not caucus at that site, while simultaneously permitting Obama supporters at the wrong precinct to participate.
Obama supporters were allowed to move to the front of the registration and sign-in line.
Voter Suppression and Intimidation
The Committee received a substantial number of disturbing reports from voters that they had been subject to harassment, intimidation or efforts to prevent them from voting. Some of the most egregious of these complaints are described below:
Voters at at-large caucus sites were informed that those sites were for Obama supporters only.
Clinton supporters at at-large caucus sites were told that their managers would be watching them while they caucused.
Workers were informed that their supervisors kept lists of Clinton and Obama supporters, and were told that they could not caucus unless their name was on the list of Obama supporters.
Many Clinton supporters were threatened with employment termination or other discipline if they caucused for Senator Clinton.
Workers were required to sign a pledge card to support Obama if they wanted time off to participate in the caucus.
Workers at one casino were offered a lavish lunch and permitted to attend and register to vote only if they agree to support Obama.
The complaints summarized above represent only a small sample of the complaints received by the Committee. With respect to each of these complaints and many more, the Committee has the names and phone numbers of those reporting these incidents and the specific precinct numbers where the incidents occurred. Upon request the Committee will share these with the Party with appropriate safeguards to protect these individuals from reprisal. On the whole, these reports show a troubling effort by the Obama campaign and its allies and supporters to advance their own campaign at the expense of the right of all Nevada Democrats to participate in the democratic process in a free, fair and open manner.
Chicago machine politics you can believe in. If he's willing to treat other Democrats like this, the rest of us don't stand a chance under an Obummer presidency.
ncc74656 writes | more than 6 years ago
In a post to comp.sys.apple2, Simon Williams announced that he has a website running on an Apple IIe. It's a 64K machine with a floppy drive, running a Contiki-based webserver. Instead of a serial card and a terminal server, it's directly connected to the network with an Uthernet card (basically, an Apple II slot adapter for an off-the-shelf embeddable Ethernet module). He says it's a bit fussy as to what will connect to it, but Firefox on both Windows and Linux works for me.
Exhibit #29674 in why Democrats are lying shitweasels
ncc74656 writes | more than 6 years ago
(Cross-posted to/. and *...I should probably do that more often.)
They've been making plenty of noise lately about the "torture" (really just coerced interrogation) methods that the CIA has used in recent years. They've been whining that use of these methods makes us no better than the Bad Guys, that we're supposed to be better than that, yada yada yada...
Turns out that they were briefed in on it way back in 2002. Said briefing even included the San Francisco Liberal Treat herself, Nancy Pelosi. I suspect that even the 11%ers won't like this:
In September 2002, four members of Congress met in secret for a first look at a unique CIA program designed to wring vital information from reticent terrorism suspects in U.S. custody. For more than an hour, the bipartisan group, which included current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was given a virtual tour of the CIA's overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk.
Among the techniques described, said two officials present, was waterboarding, a practice that years later would be condemned as torture by Democrats and some Republicans on Capitol Hill. But on that day, no objections were raised. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push harder, two U.S. officials said.
"The briefer was specifically asked if the methods were tough enough," said a U.S. official who witnessed the exchange.
Congressional leaders from both parties would later seize on waterboarding as a symbol of the worst excesses of the Bush administration's counterterrorism effort. The CIA last week admitted that videotape of an interrogation of one of the waterboarded detainees was destroyed in 2005 against the advice of Justice Department and White House officials, provoking allegations that its actions were illegal and the destruction was a coverup.
Yet long before "waterboarding" entered the public discourse, the CIA gave key legislative overseers about 30 private briefings, some of which included descriptions of that technique and other harsh interrogation methods, according to interviews with multiple U.S. officials with firsthand knowledge.
If these techniques are as heinous as you say they are, why didn't you do something about it five years ago? On the contrary, it appears the opposite happened. Once again, the Democrats have been exposed as the lying, opportunistic shitweasels that they are. They're willing to do anything—even endanger national security—that'll help them get and maintain political power.
They bleat that "dissent is the highest form of patriotism." They need to STFU...they are the last people to tell anyone what is or isn't patriotic or good for the country. I for one am sick and tired of their disingenous sanctimony. That the Republicans lately have been nearly as incompetent as the Democrats have been treacherous is the only reason Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and the rest of that misbegotten bunch haven't yet ended up downrange of a firing squad.
It wasn't enough that she straddled that AAA gun...
ncc74656 writes | more than 7 years ago
...in North Vietnam like it was her latest one-night stand. Now, it looks like the original American Traitor Bitch, Jane Fonda, is about to round up her seditionist moonbat buddies for some of their usual activities...only this time, they'll be at the Wall. Considering their antics at the Capitol earlier this month, it's highly doubtful that their intention is to pay their respects.
A counterdemonstration to defend the Wall is being organized. If you're anywhere near DC on St. Paddy's Day, I can't think of a better way to spend the day than to defend the memory of our war dead against the predations of the un-American Left.
ncc74656 writes | more than 7 years ago
Have a look at what the execrable William Arkin considers the "obscene amenities" (google it if you've been hiding in a cave the past two weeks) that our GIs get:
The Bush administration has agreed to provide House Speaker Nancy Pelosi with regular access to an Air Force passenger jet, but the two sides are negotiating whether she will get the big aircraft she wants and who she may take as passengers, according to congressional and administration sources.
A congressional source said that Rep. John P. Murtha, chairman of House Appropriations subcommittee on defense, which controls the Pentagon's spending, has telephoned administration officials to urge them to give the speaker what she wants.
The congressional source said Pentagon officials complained that Mr. Murtha, Pennsylvania Democrat, is accusing them of sexism for not immediately heeding her request.
Meanwhile, Republican Conference Chairman Adam Putnam of Florida said Mrs. Pelosi's request represents "an arrogance of office that just defies common sense" and called it "a major deviation from the previous speaker."
Minority Whip Roy Blunt of Missouri called it a "flying Lincoln Bedroom," and Rep. Patrick T. McHenry, North Carolina Republican, labeled the speaker's plane "Pelosi One."
"This is a bullet point to a larger value -- Pelosi's abuse of power continues," Mr. McHenry said yesterday. "It began when the speaker denied minority rights to Republicans, continued with her 'TunaGate' scandal, and now she's exploiting America's armed forces and taxpayers for her own personal convenience."
"TunaGate" was a reference to Democrats exempting American Samoa from legislation to increase the minimum wage. Star-Kist Tuna, whose parent company Del Monte Corp. is based in Mrs. Pelosi's district, had lobbied against the wage increase.
The congressional source said government lawyers are trying to reconcile Mrs. Pelosi's request with Defense Department policy and congressional travel rules.
The Washington Times first reported last week that Mrs. Pelosi's staff was pressing the administration for access to Air Force aircraft. Sources said the request went beyond what was offered to former House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, Illinois Republican.
Mr. Hastert used an Air Force commuter-type jet to travel to and from his district. Mr. Hastert gained the access for security reasons after the September 11, 2001, attacks. Previously, the House speaker, who is second in the line of succession to the presidency, used commercial flights for such trips.
The defense source, who asked not to be named, termed her request "carte blanche," saying she wanted a plane that could carry an entourage just like President Bush, who flies on Air Force One, and Vice President Dick Cheney, who also always flies on military planes.
(Vintage footage of women helping each other get on train; train door closing with people in boxcar)
KROFT: (Voiceover) And you watched lots of people get shipped off to the death camps.
Mr. SOROS: Right. I was 14 years old. And I would say that that's when my character was made.
KROFT: My understanding is that you went out with this protector of yours who swore that you were his adopted godson.
Mr. SOROS: Yes. Yes.
KROFT: Went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from the Jews.
Mr. SOROS: Yes. That's right. Yes.
KROFT: I mean, that's-that sounds like an experience that would send lots of people to the psychiatric couch for many, many years. Was it difficult?
Mr. SOROS: Not-not at all. Not at all. Maybe as a child you don't-you don't see the connection. But it was-it created no-no problem at all.
KROFT: No feeling of guilt?
Mr. SOROS: No.
This is the kind of individual with which the Democrat Party associates itself. They've taken millions from him. Given his recent remarks about "de-Nazification" and who needs it, he might want to consider looking in the mirror before he casts aspersions against others.
This is why you don't leech other people's bandwidth
ncc74656 writes | more than 7 years ago
When you include an image from another website in your website (instead of making your own copy of it), you never know when that image might be changed to something potentially embarrassing:
I always love discovering that some leftist or jihadist site has "hotlinked" to one of my graphics (i.e., linked directly to the image on the LGF server instead of making their own copy), because the possibilities for mischief are endless. Today Brian at Snapped Shot found AlJazeera.com (not affiliated with JihadTV in any way except ideologically) hotlinking to a photo at his site, and arranged a most excellent surprise for the mujahideen: Glorious Jihadi Linkage.
As of this writing, if you go here and scroll down, you'll find Mohammed (piss be upon him) with a bomb in his turban. Hope the webmaster's life insurance is paid up...not!
(I think this would've been a better choice. This (which is loaded by the previous link; you may need to refresh after it loads) is a demonstration of one way you can block image leechers.)
ncc74656 writes | more than 7 years ago
...the more they stay the same:
Senator Stone knows very well that the President is not going "to plunge this nation into the vortex of this 'world war.'" The Democrats in Congress who are hostile to the President have raised that cry for their own purposes. It may be said with all confidence that Germany has no desire to add the United States to her already formidable array of enemies. We are not likely to have any more serious trouble with Germany than that which has been brought upon us through the influence of her propagandists and her sympathizers in the American Congress.