If you have something on your mind and aren't busy preparing to celebrate Independence Day (please folks, cherry bombs and M-60's [revolting video warning] are not toys -- be safe!), here's the place to express it.
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!
http://submedia.tv/stimulator/2009/07/03/twiran/
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!Happy Friday and welcome to the 10th in the Dog's First Amendment Friday series. This series is following the syllabus for the class called The First Amendment and taught at Yale Law School by Professor Jack M. Balkin. As with the Friday Constitutional[...]
Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Docudharma/~3/H7IZQD48IKw/first-amendment-friday-1
0-hustler-v-falwell
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!This isn't how Republicans are supposed to act.
Gov. Charlie Crist ran afoul of the state Constitution when he refused to fill an appeals court seat because all of the picks submitted to him were white, the Florida Supreme Court unanimously ruled.
The high court also ruled Thursday that Crist must make a judicial selection from the all-white list of six names for the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Daytona Beach.
Crist, complaining Dec. 1 that none of ''three well-qualified African-Americans'' made the cut, asked the nominating commission to send him more names. But the commission refused.
In a written statement Thursday, Crist said he was ''disappointed'' with the ruling, but he will comply with it. ''I remain committed to ensuring that the diversity of the people of Florida is represented in our judiciary,'' Crist said.
This would be great politics in a Democratic primary. In a Republican one? Give his primary opponent Marco Rubio another arrow in his quiver.
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!Check out this sad story in the New York Times: apparently Morgan Stanley has been doing the right[...]
Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/OpenLeft-FrontPage/~3/GGsTW35pBLY/restructure-dont
-revive-the-broken-system
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!These posts about the prosecution of Lori Drew sparked considerable controversy among our commenters. Drew participated in creating the bogus MySpace profile of a 16-year-old boy so she could learn whether a 13-year-old girl who lived nearby was spreading rumors about Drew's daughter. The fictitious boy expressed interest in the girl before later sending her a message -- "the world would be a better place without you" -- that triggered the girl's suicide.
The posts criticized Thomas O'Brien, the grandstanding U.S. Attorney in Los Angeles, who made it his mission to prosecute Drew (a resident of Missouri) for computer fraud. Apart from his dubious attempt to stretch the concept of fraud to include lies told on a MySpace profile, and his unseemly eagerness to charge a crime that allegedly occurred far from Los Angeles (and that wasn't being charged by the U.S. Attorney in Drew's district), O'Brien failed to persuade the jury that Drew created the fake profile to inflict emotional distress on the girl -- and was apparently surprised when his star witness contradicted that claim. To save face after failing to secure felony convictions, O'Brien bragged about the misdemeanor convictions the jury returned for Drew's alleged "unauthorized access" to MySpace.
Drew was scheduled to be sentenced yesterday. She wasn't. Instead, the judge threw out the misdemeanor convictions after correctly concluding that violating MySpace's terms of service agreement didn't constitute unauthorized access. So much for O'Brien's proud victory. [more ...]
The question raised by this prosecution (and in the TalkLeft posts) isn't whether Lori Drew acted appropriately. Her immature desire to spy on a neighboring child on behalf of her daughter apparently evolved into a malicious desire to wound the girl with a venomous message. Some of our readers considered her behavior monstrous; none held her faultless. According to her lawyer, Drew had to leave Missouri because she became “an internet punching bag for almost three years” having been “tried, convicted and lynched by bloggers.” While some commenters to my previous writings about Drew's case would have been happy with a blog lynching, Drew's character and the morality of her conduct were not the subject of my posts. Feel free to attend lynchings at other blogs.
Nor was the question whether the vague notion of "cyber-bullying" should be a federal or state crime. The difficulty of drafting a "cyber-bullying" law that punishes speech raises significant First Amendment questions. While that issue is worthy of extended discussion, it is beyond the scope of my posts.
The posts instead focused on O'Brien's willingness to punish "cyber-bullying" by charging Drew with computer crimes that have nothing to do with bullying. "Unauthorized access" to a computer generally refers to hacking, password theft, or other means of accessing data on a computer without the permission of the computer's owner. As Judge George Wu ruled, it doesn't mean telling a lie on a MySpace profile.
“It basically leaves it up to a website owner to determine what is a crime,” said Wu on Thursday, echoing what critics of the case have been saying for months. “And therefore it criminalizes what would be a breach of contract.”
Judge Wu's ruling generated this startling response from O'Brien:
"We call it cyber-bullying and we don't have a law to address it," he said at a news conference.
That's exactly the point. O'Brien charged Drew with a crime she didn't commit by giving a "novel" interpretation to a statute that just didn't apply to Drew's conduct -- all because he wanted to punish her for bad acts that "we don't have a law to address." It's up to legislatures, not prosecutors, to create new laws to address novel situations.
O'Brien still refuses to acknowledge how reprehensible his conduct was.
“I’m proud of this case …. and this team [of prosecutors],” he said, even though using the CFAA to prosecute Drew “was a risk.” He added that his office “will always take risks on behalf of children.”
The "risk" was that Drew would be convicted of a crime she didn't commit. However important might be the need to protect children from "cyber-bullying," O'Brien risked offending the Constitution by seeking punishment for a nonexistent crime.
The prosecution was nonetheless applauded by many of our commenters. They shared the belief that Drew's bad behavior deserves punishment and brushed aside the inconvenient fact that Drew didn't actually commit a crime. We can't sacrifice the Constitution to protect children any more than we can sacrifice the Constitution to protect the nation from terrorism. Our pride in being a nation of laws depends upon our willingness to respect the law, not to pervert the law to satisfy our immediate desire for safety or punishment.
Whatever you think of Drew, Judge Wu did the right thing.
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!I'll never forget my Independence Day at war. On July 4, 2003, I was in Baghdad, preparing to return home with my infantry platoon after six months fighting Saddam's Army and an insurgency that was just beginning to exact its toll on coalition forces. On that day, however, my expectations were thwarted, as my men and I were notified that our combat tour would be extended indefinitely. So instead of enjoying fireworks stateside, my unit watched AK tracer trails zip across the sky, walked patrols instead of parades, and ate MREs instead of hot dogs.
Many Americans will never see the inside of a Humvee on the Fourth of July. Instead, they will enjoy three-day weekends capped by barbecues, block parties, and Roman candles. I'm extremely proud to be an American, but real patriotism is more than just picnics. And anyone who has served in any war will tell you that.
Ironically, for veterans, the Fourth of July can be a difficult holiday to celebrate. With every uniform that marches by in parades, we remember our friends that did not make it home. The sounds of fireworks remind us of incoming mortar rounds. And as large crowds gather to celebrate America's birthday, we sometimes find ourselves scanning the masses for potential danger.
But the impact of war isn't limited to July 4th.
In case you haven't been tracking the figures, our military is in crisis-mode, trying to fend off a silent killer among its ranks. Almost 20 percent of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans are suffering from mental health injuries like Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and less than half are receiving the help they need. Left untreated, the ramifications are clear: divorce, substance abuse, unemployment, and suicide.
Already, we've lost as many soldiers to suicide this year as to combat in Iraq and Afghanistan combined. This frightening trend has triggered military stand-downs, and finally gotten the attention of the media. The alarm has been sounded. But our troops are still waiting on real action from Washington. And families of servicemembers like Specialist Joshua Omvig from Gillette, Wyoming--who suffered in silence until combat stress led him to take his own life--are left wondering what could have been.
The military must take immediate steps to reduce unnecessary stress on the force, and our nation's lawmakers must also take an active role. For months, Iraq and Afghanistan veterans have been petitioning lawmakers on Capitol Hill to include a provision in the Pentagon's annual defense bill that would provide mandatory mental health screenings by licensed mental health professionals to all servicemembers. These screenings would go a long way towards reducing the stigma associated with mental health injuries, and identifying those that need care the most.
In just a few weeks, Congress will recess for the summer, and before they do, they must have ensured that every returning veteran gets the care they deserve.
Six years ago today, my men and I held the hand of a fledgling democracy as it struggled for its own independence. This week, I watched as U.S. troops pulled back from towns and cities in Iraq as Iraqis celebrated their own "National Sovereignty Day." For Americans, this means that more troops will be coming home, and for that, we should be thankful. But we must be ready to welcome them. Parades and applause are nice, but real support comes in the form of robust mental health care for our returning troops.
As we celebrate the birth of our great nation, it's time to appropriately honor those who have stood on the front lines of freedom and sacrificed in the name of liberty. Every second Congress wastes, more lives are on the line.
**
Paul Rieckhoff is the Founder and Executive Director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA), and the author of Chasing Ghosts.
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!With the further suppression of the CIA IG Report, now seeming to move its release in a meaningful and timely fashion into the mythical realm of the return of Pterosaurs to Capistrano....Combined with....The Justice Department is declining to release[...]
Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Docudharma/~3/iJ0qZgXU1aQ/a-bit-of-help-if-you-can
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!In trying to gin up claims that President Obama fired an inspector general for political reasons, Republicans look to have backed the wrong horse.[...]
Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/Zk9J9h0bMO4/back_to_the_dra
wing_board.php
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!...before the FEC gives him a friendly reminder that attempting to incite a coup against the United States government is, um, kinda illegal?
And just for kicks, lets remember - this is the same coward, the same draft dodger - who impugned the patriotism of actual serving military personnel and called them "phony soldiers" - because they had the temerity to speak out against Bush's folly in Iraq.
And let us not forget that he sat out his chance at military glory because he had a pimple on his fat ass that allowed him to dodge the draft and get out of going to Vietnam.
And no soldier ever earned enough rank to avoid Limbaugh's charges of unAmericanism and specious patriotism. If you are a liberal, you are a coward and a traitor in the opinion of the cowardly draft-dodging gasbag with the pimply ass. Have you forgotten his diatribes against Wesley Clark? Make that GENERAL Wesley Clark. I sent people I love to war with Wesley, and every last one of them came home whole in every sense of the word. So fuck that sexually inadequate pedophile freak and his criticism of Clark.
The only person worse than Rush Limbaugh is the weak-willed mental slaves who march lockstep with this...this...this...Hindenberg* of a man.
Hindenberg = 'flaming nazi gasbag'
Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheyGaveUsARepublic-FrontPage/~3/sRJS_nP1SbY/how-f
ar-can-this-fat-fuck-go
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!
Powered by blogdig.net