Not that it even matters to me, but first class mail will be replaced by FedEx and UPS priority deliveries as first class mail will become a two day service.

The guy probably does not hate his job's payout because even a SCM makes over 130K including bonuses so I'm sure this guy is rolling in it. Never ever heard about USPS handling FedEx duties.... I still stand by my statement FedEx fucking sucks a corrupt company; but I guess that doesn't make them much different than most corporations in the America? And people seem to be fine with that.

>> ^longde:

@shagen454 Of course within your post you directly addressed the teleprompter guy: "the way this guy speaks, completely disingenuous, stale, planned is exactly the way that company is all the way to the top." ; that's why I responded acerbically. I really don't know what you expect that guy to do. I'm sure he hates his job too. No need to dump on him in an empty way if your target is really FedEx.
People didn't "fall for" it; I would guess the 3 upvoters (wow, how many power points will that get me?) were simply rubbed the same way I was with your post.
I am a little familiar with the operations of FedEx, UPS and the Post Office. I wouldn't want to be a grunt in any of those places either; having my times constantly checked. Does that mean I would chuck a monitor over a fence? At least they didn't can that guy.
Since Fed Ex is actually contracted by the Postal Service for some mid- and long-haul routes, shutting down the Postal Service would actually hurt some parts of FedEx. Also, I don't think that UPS or FedEx will offer a replacement for 1st class mail.

@shagen454 Of course within your post you directly addressed the teleprompter guy: "the way this guy speaks, completely disingenuous, stale, planned is exactly the way that company is all the way to the top." ; that's why I responded acerbically. I really don't know what you expect that guy to do. I'm sure he hates his job too. No need to dump on him in an empty way if your target is really FedEx.

People didn't "fall for" it; I would guess the 3 upvoters (wow, how many power points will that get me?) were simply rubbed the same way I was with your post.

I am a little familiar with the operations of FedEx, UPS and the Post Office. I wouldn't want to be a grunt in any of those places either; having my times constantly checked. Does that mean I would chuck a monitor over a fence? At least they didn't can that guy.

Since Fed Ex is actually contracted by the Postal Service for some mid- and long-haul routes, shutting down the Postal Service would actually hurt some parts of FedEx. Also, I don't think that UPS or FedEx will offer a replacement for 1st class mail.

Seems the entire hobbit company save one are for comedy relief. Hope I'm wrong. Can't remember one goofball in the book

Well - to be perfectly fair - very few of the 13 dwarves had any kind of role at all in the book. The only major exception was Thorin - who was given a very stubborn/arrogant/long-winded role integral to the end of the story.

Aside from that the dwarves only had VERY minor roles that hardly ever showed up.
Balin was sort of a friend/mentor role as he was the one who was most friendly to Bilbo. He also was sort of a 'background' teller as he was the oldest and had been around a lot. Also he was lookout. Bombur was a comic-relief useless fat load whose incompetence & weight caused problems. Fili and Kili were the 'young' dwarves but didn't do hardly anything. Dori a couple of times ended up carrying Bilbo around on his back or by his legs and whined about it. Ori, Nori, Oin, Gloin, Bifur, Bofur or Dwalin hardly did a thing at all. By and large, the entire company of dwarves were nothing but a bunch of hostages that had to be rescued. They were captured by trolls, captured by goblins, captured by wolves, captured by spiders, captured by elves, and then cringed behind rocks as Bilbo faced Smaug.

I knew this was going to have to happen though. You can't have a group of 13 dwarves on the big-screen for 2+ hours and have only two or three of them with a personality. I knew that PJ was going to give each of the dwarves a 'character' to play which would go WAY beyond what was provided in the book. So I'm not surprised by this at all. Neither should anyone else. It was inevitable that the dwarves (except Thorin) would probably end up having comic roles just so they weren't entirely without purpose. It will be odd, and seem out of step with the book but there really isn't anything else that can be done. The dwarves have to have SOMETHING to do, or they might as well just have Bilbo and Thorin haul around 12 logs.

So awesome. And fearless. Dynos (the jump-type moves) on lead climbs are scary! These ladies appear to have no fear, no end to flexibility and strength, and no extra body weight to haul up. The dudes are okay too =P.

>> ^Yogi:

What in the living fuck are you babbling about tough guy? I'm sick of this "Salt of the earth hard working" Bullshit to describe Assholes who don't now how else to deal with their problems other than HIT THEM. I come from a family of Hicks with simple minds and hard working backgrounds...they don't go around beating the shit outa people they don't like just cause "That'll learn them."
Honest, good people...they're all a bunch of cunts.


I think you had a reasonable point in there somewhere - people who resort to violence aren't necessarily good, salt of the earth people. However, the "big man" doesn't hit this entitled little shit. He is physical, but he's not violent.

The little shit was holding everyone up and knew exactly what he was doing. The big man hauls him off the train and keeps him off and that's not really cool, however, there's a hundred people who probably just wanted to go home. He didn't use excessive force in throwing the little shit off the train or hurt the little shit. The big man shouldn't have been throwing the little shit off the train at all but under the circumstances, I don't have any sympathy for said little shit and if the cops are called and the little shit does suffer consequences, that won't give a hundred people back their wasted time.

I am assuming the kid knew what he was doing. I am assuming no excessive force was used - at one point they fall over but that's inevitable in a struggle.

this was brilliant and totally worth the time.
complex issues take some time and dr wolff lays it out nicely the history to how we got here.

the ending is almost chilling when he speaks about board directors pushing the working man even further because there have been no reprisals of anger and rage.
seems this was done before the occupy movement started.
seems americans are not just angry...but pissed off.

ah..to watch occupy oakland and how those thousands of people shut down the highway.
or the new occupyyourhome movement.
or how they are going to occupy k street.
now that really warms my cockles (having no idea what a cockle is..but its warm i tell ya).

and i really hope our political and financial elite ignore frank luntz's suggestions to tone down the aggression.
please please please ignore that man.
that is the only thing i want for christmas.

ah fuck it.
here is my christmas list:
1.i want those who have corrupted our democracy to keep pushing back and with authoritarian vigor.to use the police force as their own gestopo to crush those people who dare question their dominance and right to fleece an entire country.i want them to totally overstep their power and in doing so enrage an entire people out of apathy.

2.i wish for the CEO of <fill in corporate thief> to wake up from his home and look outside his window to be greeted by an ocean of angry faces and to have somebody filming him as he pisses himself.

3.i wish for every politician be forced to choose between getting ass-fucked with a razor blade dildo OR confess to every back door deal that fucked over,not only our democracy,but every citizen in this country.
both to be televised of course.
im betting there will be a shortage of dildos and proctologists.

4.i wish to see more people on the streets.i want to see so many that even the GODS will notice.i want so many people on the street that traffic comes to a halt and businesses shut down.

and i want to see the people who KNEW they were fucking us in the ass to be hauled out by their testicles and put on public display,their family stripped of all ill-gotten wealth and influence and for them to know the true meaning of SHAME.

so../claps
when we doin this thing?
christmas is only a few weeks away.
ill bring the weed!

>> ^wormwood:

I have started to wonder a lot more about where all that money is going TO. People have started counting these dollars as though they are equal to votes, with the actual votes seeming to matter less and less. When do we just dispense with this troublesome voting and just weight candidates money piles in November? But seriously, where does all the money go? TV commercials, lavish banquets and ?????. Can you really spend a billion dollars on that? What happened to one man one vote? It's like we don't even get one anymore--the slot in the box doesn't accept ballots, just $1000 bills.
>> ^ghark:
Dammnit, Marbles fooled me, I upvoted his comment then I realised he was blaming most of that stuff on the Government. The root of the problem is lobbyists influencing the Government. I hear Obama wants to raise one billion dollars for the next election cycle, I wonder where that money is going to come from, and what it will mean for the decisions he makes after he is likely re-elected?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/04/barack-obama-re-election-r
un



In terms of what the money gets used for, it's a very good question and something that certainly needs more attention. As far as who's getting it, I was kind of surprised to recently see that the money is allowed to go to some very unexpected places - the so called super congress had raised over $300,000 in donations by the end of September alone, with most of that going to 2 Republicans and 3 Democrats on the committee.

http://www.iwatchnews.org/2011/10/18/7138/super-congress-hauls-super-donations-special-interests-try-influence-budget-cuts

I don't know if that's just the tip of the iceberg though, with the Citizen's United ruling, there may be other PAC's donating far more.

Also, after watching all this video, my one gripe is that he seems to put too much focus on political ideology, he talks a lot about how Communism, Socialism etc can work, and is working in some parts of the world, but I would say that of greater importance is how accountable those in charge of the system are. I mean, Democracy is turning out to be worse than any other system in the history of the world but it's not because the principle of letting people have a vote is bad, it's because those in charge are abusing the system.

The environment is getting destroyed on unprecedented scales that were impossible previously
Millions have been, and are being, slaughtered because of kleptocratic regimes installed by the US
In the EU, bankers are being installed to lead countries, while political parties get merged - in so called 'democratic' countries
Austerity measures are being imposed on the middle class in many countries, while the rich are doing as well, or better than ever

I think it's human nature to want to vote for a person that you think will stand up for the principles you believe in, but in reality I think you are right wormwood - one man one vote is quite a meaningless term these days, especially so because we are in the age of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission and Speechnow v. FEC decisions.

He must get horrible gas mileage from having to haul around those balls...

@quantumushroom, I'm not old enough to remember things before FDR, much less the time of Jefferson.

I'm not old enough to remember Nixon either, but while I agree that he did found the EPA, I should point out he was a Republican, not a Democrat.

I guess the real difference between us is that I see America's progress over the period from the Civil War through to about 1968 or so as being mostly in the right direction. Increased individual rights, increased equality, increased prosperity, and a largely shared prosperity.

Sometime in the 1968-1980 period that started to break down. In the Reagan-era, I mostly just saw the pieces of what was the American Dream being hauled off and sold, with the rich keeping the proceeds.

My goal is not to see government controlling everything -- that's the mirror-image assumption again.

I would like to see us have a more generous set of welfare programs, like many European countries have. But that's not socialism, it's still capitalism, just like we've had since the country was founded. Socialism would be the government literally running everything, with private ownership of capital being illegal. The only place that still runs that way is North Korea, and I'm no more eager to emulate them than you are.

I don't like corporations using government to stamp out competition, or to line their pockets with subsidies and tax cuts, either. I just think the solution to that problem is to get corporations out of government, rather than government out of corporations.

I want to see everyone get richer, I just don't think that cutting taxes on the rich and abolishing environmental regulations helps anyone, not even the rich.

And I've definitely not "won" with millions of people unemployed, millions without health care, millions of children needing food stamps, and seeing our roads, bridges, and schools crumbling away, while the military budget keeps on going up and up and up.

You're winning! The public sector is shrinking! Corporate profits are at all-time highs! Union participation is at historic lows! Taxes collected are at historic lows! The Pentagon budget is bigger than ever, and we're at war with two countries!

The world outside your window is the result of your triumph! Aren't you happy?

I drive a Prius, but I don't agree with what this woman did.

People have the right to drive what they want. Everyone has different priorities in their lives. Perhaps he has to haul shit every day and he needs a truck. I don't need to do that and I dislike paying for gas and I like to decrease my carbon footprint as much as possible (a bike / public transport is impractical in my living situation).

Respect other people's decisions. Is that so hard?

There will come a time, and I believe it will be soon, when the cops realise they're protecting the wrong side.

Oh - well that must mean that the OWS guys are going to stop conducting illegal activities soon then, right? Get a grip folks. The only times OWS people are getting arrested are when OWS people are doing illegal things like clogging up streets, blocking activity, and so-on. No sympathy for these dummies. They got what they deserved, and the only bad thing about this story is that the protesters didn't get hauled to Rykers for a month or two to teach them a lesson so they will hold a peaceful, proper protest next time around.

Hmph...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/29/occupy-wall-street_n_987439.html
http://www.laborunionreport.com/portal/2011/09/wall-st-protest-day-three-a-call-for-the-deprivatization-of-everything/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/29/occupy-wall-street_n_987439.html
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/09/labor_unions_and_leftist_group.html

The more I see about these yahoos, the less sympathy I feel. The protestors were clogging up the streets and sidewalks and bringing the area to a standstill. People couldn't drive or get to work. They were creating a disturbance, disrupting citizens, and otherwise being a bunch of jerks. That sort of mess can be dangerous in a big city. It stops ambulances. It stops fire trucks. It stops emergency services. It causes accidents.

So the police got called in to clear a way so normal traffic could keep going. The protestors refused to disperse or cooperate. Therefore in order to accomplish their jobs, the police had to start hauling people away and using crowd control. That means they break out the pepper spray, nightsticks, nets, plastic cuffs, and start arresting people. Duh.

So when that happens the protestors start whining they are 'peaceful'? And the police are 'violent'? Nope. Doesn't wash. If you'd wanted a peaceful solution then you'd have dispersed when the police asked - or better yet you wouldn't have created a problem to start with. But that didn't happen, so the cops had to force it.

You don't get to cry foul when that happens. When you illegally block traffic and create a danger to others then the cops have every right to force you to clear out - and they have every right to use force if you are not cooperative. MLK and Ghandi accomplished their goals with peaceful protests against real oppression. These Wall Street yahoos are just a bunch of leftist cretins who are trying to stir up trouble. I think this opinion about sums it up...

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/09/26/life-on-occupied-wall-street/

"It’s become impossible to tell where a deluded leftism stops and a respectable liberalism starts. For all the liberal complaining about conservative extremism becoming the norm, today’s liberal media culture earns its daily bread by flattering (or employing) everyone from Al Sharpton to Michael Moore to 9/11 Truthers like rapper Mos Def. And so liberalism continues its steady transformation into a self-righteous, incoherent, solution-free blur. Take a long, hard look at the fur-capped, begoggled, and topless misfits on Wall Street. They’re funhouse mirror images of our more respected liberal elites."

I fully support what they did. Disrupting a speech is a perfectly legitimate form of protest and given Israel's continued policies in the Gaza strip it is certainly warranted, in my opinion.

I do not support them trying to get the charges dropped, though. The whole point of civil disobedience is to break the law peacefully and to go to jail for what you believe. If they feel that strongly about the issue they should do whatever jail-time they're given with pride--and be willing to do it again if necessary.

Honestly, I don't see how they even have a case. As this article clearly explains, the Supreme Court has routinely ruled in favor of governments' (both local and federal) right to limit the time, manner, and place of speech so long as there is no infringement on content. Given that the speech-place will probably not be considered a "traditional public forum" (see the article) I don't think they have much of a legal chance of winning.

Related article: Woman tackled and arrested for disrupting Netanyahu's speech in front of U.S. Congress

Food for thought (from the article above):

And after I spoke out, Netanyahu said, you know, “This is what’s possible in a democracy. And you wouldn’t be able to get away with this in other countries like Tunisia.” And I think that is ridiculous and absurd. If this is what democracy looks like, that when you speak out for freedom and justice, you get tackled to the ground, you get physically violated and assaulted, and then you get hauled off to jail, that’s not the kind of democracy that I think I want to live in.

So during the current armed robbery you're supposed to consider the possible consequences upon the next armed robbery? Try this logic. The current armed robbery is your supposed next robbery.>> ^Yogi:

>> ^MarineGunrock:
Anti-escalation policies can get people killed. Some robbers will just as easily shoot someone complying with their demands ans someone who tried to resist. I'd take the shot in a heartbeat.

Try this logic. Walgreens guy defends Walgreens with a hand gun...at the next Walgreens robbery a few towns over after this has made national news the robbers come in hyper aggressive with AK-47s. They don't fuck around they just shoot if they think anyone can possibly be reaching for a gun.
I remember when I used to work at Gamestop I helped out at another one...and they told me someone was just fired for leaving too many envelopes of the days earnings in the safe. I thought "That's stupid whats the big F'n deal?" They explained to me that if a robbery had happened and the thieves got away with a large haul...it could potentially put more people in danger because it would get the message out that there's a large haul to be had from Gamestop...people could die over something like that.
Also your "some robbers will just as easily shoot someone complying with their demands..." comment. Is it based on fact or a study?