Random Thoughts (Political Edition)

Is the program specific to females? I don't see why it should be, a man can have children to care for too, though probably less common....
I don't know how the california prisions are (and it doesn't seem to say in the article) but it could be because of lack of prisions to house females in comparison to males. In this state for example, if you are awaiting trial for a drunk driving offense and locked up and are female you get sent to the one woman's prison in the state, that is also housing people who are serial killers. There is no minimum security prison for women here. I know this because last winter my aunt's lawyer specifically said, never ever for any reason sit in a car and turn the key, even to do something like warm it up. You will get sent directly to the huge prison for the murders until the courts finish with your case. Since it says:
The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation said offenders whose crimes were nonviolent, nonserious and not sexual, with less than two years remaining on their sentences, are eligible for the Alternative Custody Program, which was signed into law in 2010 by then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
That makes me wonder if they do things in a similar way in CA and those are all petty crooks being kept in serial killer and rapist prison.
 
Gawker said:
Prankster Congressman Swipes ?American Jobs Act? Name from Obama

Congressman Louie Gohmert of Texas,whom some might call a "character," is working hard for the American people today, by pulling a middle-school-level prank on the president! You know how Obama keeps demanding that Congress pass his American Jobs Act right now? Well, Louie Gohmert filed his own bill under that very name this afternoon. What a funnyman! This is a game-changer.
The Hill reports:
Calling the president's plan a "disaster," Gohmert said that he checked to see "who filed the 'American Jobs Act' for the president, here in the House, since we had to do it 'now, right away," but discovered that the plan had not been officially introduced in the House.
So, at 1:20pm Gohmert filed his own version of a jobs bill, under the title included on the president's legislation distributed to members of Congress two-days prior.
Gohmert's two-page jobs bill would cut the corporate income tax rate from 35% to 0%, an action which, in insider-speak, is known as "eliminating the corporate income tax."

He sure got that Obama good! Hehe what a hero.

http://gawker.com/5840403/prankster-congressman-swipes-american-jobs-act-name-from-obama

Wow, a politician being petty...there's really nothing better he could do with his time...wait..don't answer that. :/
 
That's stupid.
 
Political thread.
 
Well, in our case, we do make a lot of oil. And while there's certainly a debate to have over how they're killed, there's certainly a lot more whales in the sea than we thought.
 
Mmmm tasty whale. Anyhow, in the UK it's still 1984 and the hostile attitude towards the internet continues. Common law, such nonsense, when any judge can give sentence after what they themselves think. Is the behaviour in this case in poor taste? Yes. Illegal? Absolutely not. Please seceede from the union kthxbye.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/sep/13/internet-troll-jailed-mocking-teenagers
 
Last edited:
Mmmm tasty whale. Anyhow, in the UK it's still 1984 and the hostile attitude towards the internet continues. Common law, such nonsense, when any judge can give sentence after what they themselves think. Is the behaviour in this case in poor taste? Yes. Illegal? Absolutely not. Please seceede from the union kthxbye.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/sep/13/internet-troll-jailed-mocking-teenagers
Heard about that on the radio the other day, there was a segment on Radio 2.

Given that you can sue against people for causing emotional distress etc I can't see that this really means anything out of the ordinary.
You wouldn't consider it wrong for somebody to call the police if somebody stood outside their house and yelled insults at them all day long. What this cheerful fellow was doing has the same principal, tbh I don't consider it a bad thing that people who are assholes on the internet can be held responsible for their actions.
 
Aaargh, how I hate the Finnish byrocracy. Now they have banned the selling of the Simpsons Duff-beer because it might be advertising alchohol to children. Of coarse they issued a statement where they innocently advised the company to alter the packaging and label of the beer so that it doesnt resemble the Simpsons Duff-beer. D`oh!
 
Fair enough, Duff is a dull beer.
 
Heard about that on the radio the other day, there was a segment on Radio 2.

Given that you can sue against people for causing emotional distress etc I can't see that this really means anything out of the ordinary.
You wouldn't consider it wrong for somebody to call the police if somebody stood outside their house and yelled insults at them all day long. What this cheerful fellow was doing has the same principal, tbh I don't consider it a bad thing that people who are assholes on the internet can be held responsible for their actions.
Because this man isn't yelling insults at you all day long, or following you around. He is posting videos, which YOU are then actively seeking out, YOU are then watching them. If you do not like them, do not watch them. It's satire, like to all the jokes made about darwin awards people. You can't have those either if we go by this verdict.
 
Last edited:
Because this man isn't yelling insults at you all day long, or following you around. He is posting videos, which YOU are then actively seeking out, YOU are then watching them. If you do not like them, do not watch them. It's satire, like to all the jokes made about darwin awards people. You can't have those either if we go by this verdict.

It is not satire to post that shit all over facebook memorial pages, where people go to pay their respects.

I honestly cannot believe that you are trying to defend this cretin, just because he did it on the internet does not allow him to avoid the laws of the country in which he lives.
 
It is one thing to post a rude comment somewhere and go about your business, than there is this guy, who clearly spent lots of time and effort creating facebook pages and youtube videos for the sole purpose of mocking kids who died in accidents. That wouldn't be acceptable if he was some bully at their school, never mind a 25 year old man who didn't know any of the people he was targeting.

Also
The court heard that Duffy has Asperger's syndrome and lived a "miserable existence" drinking alcohol alone at his home in Reading.

I fucking hate that EVERY internet troll says "I can't help it I have Asperger's". No. That is not how Asperger's works. You are purposely being an asshole and this is why no one takes Asperger's seriously.
 
I fucking hate that EVERY internet troll says "I can't help it I have Asperger's". No. That is not how Asperger's works. You are purposely being an asshole and this is why no one takes Asperger's seriously.

As far as I know, Asperger's is limited to non-verbal communication. Which is strange, because forum discussions or even chats are 100 % verbal -- only letters on a screen, as I'd like to say.

How can anyone justify their bad behavior on the internet with being autistic?

Psychological malfunction is definitely an explanation for some troll behavior but I doubt it has something to do with Asperger's Sandrome or any other kind ot autism.

I suspect brain damage :D
 
Last edited:
I have no idea. Usually the ability to not understand internet communication has everyone pretty equally matched excluding reading specific impairment because things like tone is so much harder to convey and no one can recognize sarcasm most of the time.
 
Recognizing sarcasm, irony or even cynicism requires the ability to laugh about one's self -- which of course isn't too far spread on the internet.
 
I wanna see that happen in political chat shows here, too :lol:
 
Top