Hillary Clinton (R) poses with Natalie Portman, who is most famous for not wearing a bra in the Star Wars movies and--apparently--other places. This is actually an older photo, taken (as I recall) when Clinton was running for Senate on the Democrat slate in 2000, but given the fact that Portman has a history of playing characters who stay true to their friends despite them being prepubescent or evil overlords, I am willing to bet that she's still a Hillary supporter.
What?? I am only using a convention that no less a news service than Reuters uses, as referenced in this post. A Reuters spokesman was later quoted as saying that the "(R)" was meant to indicate which person in the photograph was Eliot Spitzer, Democrat. (Hint: it was not the woman.)
Yes, I've wanted to do this for some time.
Major layoffs at CBS stations. A decade or so ago such a massive layoff would have been headlined as a "bloodbath", but they can't do that any more.
Fortunately, journalists now have a place they can vent their frustrations.
Apparently the journalism industry treats its workers very poorly. No other industry does th--
Oh, fuck the sarcasm. I'm sick and tired of these whining fucking maggots. The guy who started the site is 23 years old and says "It's kind of depressing to see an industry treat its workers so badly." You want "bad" treatment? Why don't you try working as a nurse's aide in a nursing home? Why don't you try a career schlepping asshats like yourself around in a taxi? Why don't you try some real fucking work instead of "journalism" before you start whining about how poorly reporters are treated?
Stupid fucking kid.
Good news for Zimbabwe--maybe as Mugabe loses the election. Mugabe himself refuses to concede even though he appears to have lost by a 7% margin. Of course, not conceding until all the votes are in gives him a chance to steal the election.
No I don't trust Mugabe any farther than I could piss Hillary Clinton. Did I ever indicate anywhere that I did?
Besides, I have trouble believing that the "opposition" would do any better than Mugabe has. I expect that the only thing that will change is whose cronies get rich while everyone else starves.
He wouldn't need to sue if he were a Muslim. But he's a Christian, and in the United States, where "there shall be no law respecting the establishment of religion", Christians are persona non grata. So he gets a "0" for a Christian-themed drawing and has to sue for his constitutionally-guaranteed freedom of expression.
"[Art teacher] Millin told the boy he had signed away his constitutional rights when he signed the policy at the beginning of the semester." There's a bunch wrong with that.
The kid's a minor; his signature on a document being legally binding is questionable. I'm not sure that the teacher can protect herself that way, not in a real court of law. Besides, there is legal theory to the effect that one cannot sign away his constitional rights except in very limited circumstances (such as joining the military) either accidentally or on purpose.
A Buddha and Hindu figurines are on display in a social studies classroom, the lawsuit claims, adding the teacher passionately teaches Hindu principles to students.And if that is true--or even partly so--the teacher and school are discriminating against the kid.
In addition, a replica of Michaelangelo's "The Creation of Man" is displayed at the school's entrance, a picture of a six-limbed Hindu deity is in the school's hallway and a drawing of a robed sorcerer hangs on a hallway bulletin board.
Drawings of Medusa, the Grim Reaper with a scythe and a being with a horned head and protruding tongue hang in the art room and demonic masks are displayed in the metals room.
General Petraeus is prepared to report on Iraq next week. Demokrats are preparing to declare the war lost and pull our troops out. And so, history repeats itself: Democrats lost Vietnam when a Republican was in the White House by pulling the funding; and now they're preparing to lose Iraq and embolden a whole new cohort of terrorists by doing the exact same thing.
Thanks, guys. You shot us in the foot during the closing years of Vietnam, leading to things like 9/11; and now you're going to shoot us in the foot again solely because you want personal power. Certainly you do not have the best interests of the United States at heart.
Speaking of the Vietnam era, Boortz recounts Hillary Clinton's (R) fraudulent behavior in the Watergate fiasco. She would have been disbarred for her actions? I doubt it. If the politics of the Bar Association in the 1970s were anything like they are now, she would have gotten a prize for being so inventive.
...and the rest of today's page at that link is also worth reading. (& yeah, this is where I got the pic of Hillary and Natalie; only I flipped it to make my satire work.)
Here's another priceless anecdote. Librarians are concerned that an increase in audio books will create a "digital divide" between those that can afford the technology to listen and those that cannot. So to prove this theory wrong, an audio book company decided to go to a school in New Jersey where 90% of students receive free or reduced lunches ... I guess this is their way of calculating "poor students" in government schools. In their research on this school filled with 90% poor students, more than half of third graders already had their own MP3 players. In other words ... their parents can't afford to make them a lunch, but they are more than willing to go and buy their kids an MP3 player. That, my friends, is the "poor" in this country.And that's good enough for me.