As you know we are three weeks away from having Keith Olbermann back on our TV sets as God intended. But seeing that it took seven bloodhounds and the Hubble telescope to find K.O. previous empolyer, how the f8ck do you get this CURRENT thingy?
A go to http://current.com/shows/countdown
B follow the instructions in the video below.
Cheers.
As Heard on The Stephanie Miller Show
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Friday, May 27, 2011
A challenge to my followers for Memorial Day
This is for all of my followers in Facebook, Twitter, Yahoo, and LinkedIn. You know who you are.
I have often wondered what would happen if we could not check off our charitable contributions off our income taxes.
People would stop giving, you dummy.
Of course. The problem is, we'd reveal how uncharitable we are. As Rainn Wilson's new book, "SoulPancake" reads, "Perhaps real generosity is actually the act of ANONYMOUS giving." So with that, I'd like to do a little experiment that I found in the book.
First, do not make me the target of this. I'd appreciate it, but that is not the point. Also do it only if you can, but if you have at least 10 of these, you can probably spare one.
The experiment is called REVERSE PICKPOCKET:
- Pull out the biggest bill in your wallet (unless it is earmarked for a bill or emergency)
- Stash the cash in an envelope labled "YOU HAVE BEEN TAGGED BY A POLYBI REVERSE PICKPOCKET!"
- Slip the loot into the bag of a stranger. If you are feeling bold, aim for the back pocket.
- Don't get caught. Might get awkward.
Then what I want you to do is report your findings here. I'd like to know how it went. You can do that anytime this Memorial Day weekend.
Of coourse, if I get no response, I guess that means no one reads me (no big whoop), or it tells me how giving you are.
Exactly.
Friday, May 20, 2011
When is an Adult an Adult?
(Reuters) - The Wisconsin Supreme Court on Friday rejected challenges to a life-without-parole sentence for a man who at age 14 chased down, beat and then tossed a teenager to his death off a hospital parking ramp.
Omer Ninham argued his sentence for killing Zong Vang, 13, in 1998 violated U.S. and Wisconsin constitutional prohibitions on cruel and unusual punishment. He called the sentence "unduly harsh and excessive" and sought the possibility of parole.
"There is no question that Ninham's punishment is severe, but it is not disproportionately so," Justice Annette Kingsland Ziegler wrote for the court. "The manner in which Ninham took Vang's life was horrific and senseless."
Ninham and four other teens accosted Vang near dusk in September 1998 while he toted a bag of tomatoes home from a grocery store in Green Bay, the opinion states. They taunted Vang, snatching his bicycle and threw the bag to the ground.
Ninham punched Vang and the group chased him to the top of a five-story hospital parking ramp nearby where he was punched, pinned to a wall and then Ninham and another teen, Richard Crapeau, swung Vang back-and-forth over the ramp's wall before letting go.
Vang landed on his head and trunk on the paved exit lane below and could not be revived.
Crapeau, who was 13 at the time of Vang's murder, was also convicted of murder and sentenced to life with the possibility of parole after 50 years.
Pre-sentence reports found Ninham's family to be extremely dysfunctional with substance abuse and domestic violence and that the teen himself was a "serious substance abuser."
"The terror experienced by the victim and the hurt suffered by his family and friends is, in a word, unimaginable," Ziegler wrote.
(Reporting by David Bailey; Editing by Greg McCune)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/20/us-crime-wisconsin-idUSTRE74J5HY20110520
The question is not whether Mr. Ninham should be punished for his crime. The question is, why do you treat someone as an adult for somethings and not for others. It would be simple is we just said this is the age that you are an adult for ALL things (and make it a realistic age...18 or 21 is not).
Omer Ninham argued his sentence for killing Zong Vang, 13, in 1998 violated U.S. and Wisconsin constitutional prohibitions on cruel and unusual punishment. He called the sentence "unduly harsh and excessive" and sought the possibility of parole.
"There is no question that Ninham's punishment is severe, but it is not disproportionately so," Justice Annette Kingsland Ziegler wrote for the court. "The manner in which Ninham took Vang's life was horrific and senseless."
Ninham and four other teens accosted Vang near dusk in September 1998 while he toted a bag of tomatoes home from a grocery store in Green Bay, the opinion states. They taunted Vang, snatching his bicycle and threw the bag to the ground.
Ninham punched Vang and the group chased him to the top of a five-story hospital parking ramp nearby where he was punched, pinned to a wall and then Ninham and another teen, Richard Crapeau, swung Vang back-and-forth over the ramp's wall before letting go.
Vang landed on his head and trunk on the paved exit lane below and could not be revived.
Crapeau, who was 13 at the time of Vang's murder, was also convicted of murder and sentenced to life with the possibility of parole after 50 years.
Pre-sentence reports found Ninham's family to be extremely dysfunctional with substance abuse and domestic violence and that the teen himself was a "serious substance abuser."
"The terror experienced by the victim and the hurt suffered by his family and friends is, in a word, unimaginable," Ziegler wrote.
(Reporting by David Bailey; Editing by Greg McCune)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/20/us-crime-wisconsin-idUSTRE74J5HY20110520
The question is not whether Mr. Ninham should be punished for his crime. The question is, why do you treat someone as an adult for somethings and not for others. It would be simple is we just said this is the age that you are an adult for ALL things (and make it a realistic age...18 or 21 is not).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
