god...you SO love me!
http://www.videosift.com/video/LINDA-PERRY-fly-away-not-official-video
say it..SAY IT!
/flex

My ass its not about race. The guy was shot in the back. Clearly, the police officer who shot him was thinking (consciously or subconsciously) gun plus black person = dead black person. How can anyone seriously assert the police officer was "merely following procedures" when the guy was shot in the back? What procedures allow that? The guy they interviewed said he heard "police! police!" and "started" to turn. Yeah, but he was still shot in the back. Was he about to drop the weapon? Well if he was I doubt he was given the chance.

I'm not saying the police officer was a card carrying member of the KKK. But racism can become institutionalized and accepted even among fundamentally good people. It can become standard policy to "shoot first, ask questions later" when dealing with a black person with a gun - not officially of course, but in practice. People have all sorts of ways to justify things like that in their minds. And I think this incident (along with other similiar incididents) suggests there is a problem. That's why we need an independent investigation.

Also, we need to not take the police's word at face value when it comes to issues like this. If you've seen other examples of police abuse, haven't you noticed a pattern? Deny, deny, deny, deny. The police want to protect their own. Its our responsibility to make sure they're doing their job right - we can't always defer to their judgement.

Al Jihad doesn't overtly mention who is urging these soldiers to share their faith. It's not official government policy, so no story.

Not shown: mighty atheist outrage over Muslim schools using public funds in Detroit.

*commercial (thought not officially one,... it is)

>> ^imstellar28:
yeah, and theres no structural/legal reason why we can't allow multiple contracts or more than two people anymore than there is a reason we can't allow complimentary genitals. this is about who you can make a contract with, and what the contract can state.

While I have no issue with the idea of creating institutions which can handle that, we have no such institutions, saying we could, in no way addresses the fact that we don't. It would require a major restructuring to allow group or parallel marriages, and while I have no ethical problem with them I don't want the marriages subsidies we have, so I can't fathom creating a whole new institution which will provide more.

To say that the institution we have should be applied equally is not inconsistent with wanting these institutions changed or abolished in the ideal case.

the government's proper role is to enforce contracts, not dictate their terms. that is why gay marriage should be legal, and it is also why polygamy should be legal.

They are not illegal, they are just not officially recognized, that's the point you don't seem to get. Sleep with whomever you want, under whatever conditions you desire, and call it whatever you desire. You just don't get a gov license or subsidy unless you can fit into the existing institution.

I'd be curious how many atheists/agnostics or believers of non-Abrahamic religions would refuse to add "So help me God." It's not officially part of the oath, anyway.

I've almost never seen this, more often than not it's a lack of an apostrophe I notice, which I chalk up to being lazy. On occasion I find my self adding 's to the ends of words they don't belong to, neither expressing possession, or incorrect usage of plural, but as a contraction that is only part of my vernacular and not official English. Of course at this moment can't think of what I use it with, when or why. Just one of those things that happens.

*viral? Even if it's not official, it's like unofficial marketing for them. dw1117, I have an awful memory, could you please pm remind me to promote this in time for the 17th? Cheers.

I call *art on the pouring.

Now the Theocrats Want 'American Religious History Week'
http://alternet.org/story/73778/

With House Resolution 888, the religious right seeks to rewrite American history, turning the founding fathers into Christian fundamentalists.

Here is an event I have no intention of honoring: American Religious History Week. OK, it's not official yet. But it is spelled out as Resolution 888 in the bowels of a House committee, sponsored by Republican Congressman Randy Forbes and backed by thirty-one other Representatives. This is an insidious attempt by the radical Christian right to rewrite American history, to turn the founding fathers from deists into Christian fundamentalists, to proclaim us officially to be a Christian nation. If you want to know why Mike Huckabee is dangerous, why his brand of right-wing Christian populism is so frightening, you should read this resolution.

http://alternet.org/story/73778/

Okay. Your title maybe gives a different impression, as-in a law that allows parents not to be informed that their kid is getting birth control from a school physician would only be enacted by douchebags...

Three options, 1)parent's permission required, 2)parents must be informed, or 3)parents not officially informed. Which option do you think would prevent the most unintended pregnancies? Why should it be incumbent upon the physician to phone up the girl's parents and tell them they're daughter may or may not be sexually active? It seems like that would only deter interest, when the goal is to prevent unintended pregnancy (not drag parents kicking and screaming into the 21st century).

Mxhanna, technically that is true, though they're leaving details out on purpose I'm sure. IRR soldiers are rarely called back after they have processed out of the military. However, being extended to finish a tour if your ETS date falls somewhere inside its deployment window is very common. My recruiter was actually very honest with me when I enlisted. He told me about extensions, deployments, and even that the unit I chose was going to most likely deploy as soon as I arrived. Also, it's always good practice to actually read something they hand you in MEPS (Military Entrance Processing Station) before signing it. You're not officially enlisted until you sign the contract, raise your right hand, and pledge to defend this country. I took my time, read through the contract, and was given a book of all Army MOS's to make sure I was choosing the job I wanted. The whole process took nearly 48 hours, but I never felt cheated or lied to. Enlisting is a serious commitment. Calling the IRR a backdoor draft is a bit much in my opinion. Once you sign the contract, it's on you to know exactly what you've commited yourself to.

I just tried to submit a video from a host not officially supported, testing my new diamond powers, and it was rejected. Here is the embed code...:



Am I missing something?

edited to add: Yes, I am missing something, like a knack for paying attention to the rules. I was gently reminded that one must have 250 published posts to earn the shiny bauble privileges. Sigh, that's a long way off. Some diamond member may find it interesting enough to post. It's about the Nat'l Musuem & HP printing masterpieces and posting them on the street...cool!

even though it's not official, the firefox plugin adds to the stats?

This vid features a series of tag clouds... i.e. 1:15

Heh.

Interesting that they talk about the hacking of the formula to calculculate UK unemployment. Given that the statistical definition of unemployment is an arbitrary construct, does it really matter?

The message the vid delivers is that we're being tricked into thinking unemployment is lower than it "really" is - but then, if people *are* unemployed, would there drag on the economy be noted whether or not official statistics track it? Hmm... I could go into more detail but feel sleepy and wonder if anyone else cares.