Tag Archives: prior

The SAG Awards : Natural Breasts That Deserve a Special Booby Prize !

The second big awards show of the season airs tonight … the Screen Actors Guild (or SAG) Awards forms a pair with the prior Golden Globes…. read more

Read the original:
The SAG Awards : Natural Breasts That Deserve a Special Booby Prize !

SKINcoming on DVD & Blu-ray: 'Girls' Season 4, 'Togetherness' Season 1, and More

With both Girls and Togetherness returning to HBO this weekend, catch up with the prior seasons and two 80s classics making their Blu-ray debut!… read more

Read more from the original source:
SKINcoming on DVD & Blu-ray: 'Girls' Season 4, 'Togetherness' Season 1, and More

Why Are Wars Not Being Reported Honestly?

The public needs to know the truth about wars. So why have journalists colluded with governments to hoodwink us? added by: GLOBALPOLITICAL

‘No Negros Allowed’ Sign Posted to Segregate a Wisconsin Strip Club

Many people lauded the election of Barack Obama as the sign that America was finally post-racial. We had arrived at the completion of Dr. King's dream of a colorblind society where a black man could gawk at a white women's boobs without fear of discrimination at his local strip club. Apparently not: A sign excluding black people from a future [strip club] is enraging some people in a small town. Now, the Wisconsin man who put it up is speaking out. It's a sign generations of people may have never seen. Yet a Clark County business man says it's his right to discriminate. Federal and State law says if the business is open to the public, prohibiting people based on race is illegal. If the man's proposed gentlemen's club was going to be a private club, then an African American historian says he could discriminate. Legalities aside, his is a sign that many say is appalling. “If I've got a problem with you it's going to be on the front of my store,” says Mark Prior. Prior posted his 'No Negros Allowed' sign after he says he had some problems with black people in the past and needed to make a policy against them. “I'm going to stick to my guns because I think I have the right as a business owner to reject service to anyone. It's not all the black people there are just a few bad ones,” Prior says of his problems in the past. Prior wants to open a gentlemen's club in a building next to the Abbotsford city hall and library. He says he moved his sign inside after someone with the city asked him to remove it. People in Abbotsford say it's a sign they don't welcome in their town. But, Prior says it's his right as an American and as a business owner to decide who's welcome; a right he says he'll take all the way to court if he has to. “That's the policy. I'm going to stick to my guns,” Prior says. … He also said it's not just black people he's going to ban from his future establishment. He says he has a problem with certain white people as well, but he couldn't just put a lengthy list of names on his building so he felt 'No Negros Allowed' was the best policy. Never mind the fact that Prior's sign (“No Negro's Allowed”) is grammatically incorrect to comically epic proportions. Never mind the fact that businesses which discriminate against patrons on the basis of color are in direct violation of the Civil Rights Act Of 1964. Never mind how silly it is for Prior to state that he's not racist because he doesn't want unruly whites at his club either, but didn't have enough poster board to write a sign prohibiting them from entry specifically by name. Nope, never mind any of that.You know what really jumped out at me about this sad story? Who in the heck thinks it's a good idea to build a strip club next to the public library?!? That's just bad for business. Stay classy, Wisconsin. Personally, I (as usual) blame the Tea Party. When then-Senate candidate Rand Paul stated his disdain for the federal government forcing the Civil Rights Act on states, I knew we as a country were headed down a steep slope towards utter stupidity. The fact that few in the GOP admonished Paul for such a statement was glaring. The fact that Kentuckians just sent Paul to the U.S. Senate for the next 6 years, by a wide margin over his competitor, is even more glaring. added by: TimALoftis

Fuzzy Movieline Math: How Many People Will Watch the Emmys on Sunday?

Only a shade more than 13 million people tuned in to watch the Emmy Awards on CBS last year… and it was considered a moderate success because of its competition (a Giants/Cowboys NFL game), calendar placement (September 20) and the prior year’s record low numbers. On Sunday, the battle for eyeballs will be slightly less uphill, but Jimmy Fallon and Co. still have their work cut out for them . Just how many of the Nielsen estimated 294-plus million American TV watchers will tune in though? Click ahead as Movieline attempts to sort it all out.

Read more from the original source:
Fuzzy Movieline Math: How Many People Will Watch the Emmys on Sunday?

MSNBC Looks to Lefty Ed Schultz for Reaction on Obama’s ‘Brilliant’ Firing of McChrystal

Only 70 minutes after President Obama explained his decision to fire General Stanley McChrystal, Wednesday, MSNBC turned to leftist host Ed Schultz for analysis. Schultz gushed that the decision proved Obama is “brilliant on the basics.” He enthused, ” Well, as commander in chief, I think it’s probably President Obama’s finest hour ,” because it displayed toughness. Host Tamron Hall knocked McChrystal, referencing his role in the investigation of Army Ranger Pat Tillman. She derided, ” So, we know that McChrystal has a lot of, if you will, Xs on his report card. ” Hall and Schultz continued to frame the discussion from how it impacted the left. She worried, “For those on the left and progressives who are not happy with this war this Afghanistan who were disappointed when the President decided to commit more troops, what does that say that he’s emphasizing that this is not about policy, that he’s committed to the direction he’s chosen with this unpopular war?” Later in the hour, Hall brought on Ryan Grimm of the liberal Huffington Post to discuss McChrystal. MSNBC apparently spans the spectrum of the left and the far left. A transcript of the June 23 segment, which aired at 2:22pm EDT, follows: TAMRON HALL: We’re getting more reaction to the breaking news that top U.S. Commander in Afghanistan General Stanley McChrystal has been relieved of his command. He’s said to be replaced by General David Petraeus. Let’s bring in MSNBC’s Ed Schultz, the host of the Ed Show to react to it. Ed, I know you’re listening to a lot of callers on your radio show. You’ve got thoughts on this. What do you make of the President’s decision and what are the callers saying? ED SCHULTZ: Well, as commander in chief, I think it’s probably President Obama’s finest hour, because he’s answering a lot of critics with about how you wasn’t tough enough or couldn’t make a decision. Didn’t have any experience. This man went back to the basics. The President showed us that he’s brilliant on the basics. It’s about team. It’s about the civilian control, it’s about the democracy and how we work. And we’re not going to have anybody in a position of leadership and authority to go off and do what President- do what General McChrystal did. So I think the President was very clear and I personally got a sense in watching the President today that, you know, it just wasn’t the Rolling Stone article. It’s like there was other stuff there. That there’s a lot of stuff- HALL: Well, we know what happened last fall in London with the remarks made there. Also, the Pat Tillman investigation and what it has revealed, as well. So, we know that McChrystal has a lot of, if you will, Xs on his report card. SCHULTZ: True. And- But even beyond those as we know publicly there’s somewhat of a pattern there, I just got a sense that there was a little bit more and the President had somewhat of an angst about him. You know, I’ve had enough of this. He actually went back and paralleled a quote of President Truman about, you know, it’s not one person, not one war, something like that. But the President went to the basics: Trust, loyalty, the conduct code, deep rooted with the privates. All the way through, the discipline. You lose the discipline, you lose the break down of completing the mission and you compromise the mission. And now of course the story is General Petraeus, who I think, ironically, is probably going to get more bipartisan support than anything else in Washington. HALL: [Laughs] And you very well may be right on that as he’s been praised by Republicans many times over and some Democrats. But, let me ask you this: People talked about and have talked about the President’s response to the oil disaster. The critics say he’s shown weakness. His numbers show that most Americans are not confidence in the way he’s handled this. Where does this position him now? I know there are two very different issue, but it is about leadership with both. SCHULTZ: Well, I think the President personally did show leadership in the gulf from day one. He’s dealing with a multinational. There were contracts in it place that had to be adhered to when there is an oil spill and certain mechanisms had to kick in. No one predicted early on what this was going to evolve to. HALL: right. SCHULTZ: The administration was lied to by BP. First they said there wasn’t that much coming out and it grew as the days went on. And I thought the proper reaction was there by the President. So, I think he’s being wrongly criticized for it. The President goes out and gets $20 billion from a company that’s butchering our environment and the Republicans are criticizing him for it. I find it absolutely amazing. It just goes to show how divided we are in this country. HALL: And let me bring up something the President said regarding the transition from McChrystal to Petraeus. He said, “This has nothing to do with policy, nothing to do with personal insult.” For those on the left and progressives who are not happy with this war this Afghanistan who were disappointed when the President decided to commit more troops, what does that say that he’s emphasizing that this is not about policy, that he’s committed to the direction he’s chosen with this unpopular war? SCHULTZ: The President wants a successful mission. He’s going to get the right people in the right place to finish the job. And I’m sure that he probably turned to General Petraeus and said this is what the mission is, can you get it done. Petraeus went along with it, obviously. It’s about team, it’s about working together. The President was very clear that he encourages debate, but he does not want division. And you certainly don’t go out and air dirty laundry. Now, your question about the left. There are a lot of Americans out there who believe that this mission is a fool’s errand in Afghanistan. We’ve got a lot of issues at home, we’re gutting our infrastructure. But the President, to me, seemed very committed today to knowing that this is the strategy that we have to follow in his best judgment to make sure that we fight the terrorists on their turf. And so I thought the President was very clear on where he’s going on this.

Continued here:
MSNBC Looks to Lefty Ed Schultz for Reaction on Obama’s ‘Brilliant’ Firing of McChrystal

Silent on Obama Judicial Nominee’s Wild Legal Theories, Will Media Report Professional Misconduct?

Did you know that President Obama has nominated for a federal judgeship someone who believes a serial killer and rapist’s “sexual sadism” should be a cause to give him a less serious punishment? Probably not, since the media have given it almost no coverage . Robert Chatigny, nominated for the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, believes that sexual sadism should be what’s known as a “mitigating factor” in determining guilt and punishment for murder and rape. Counterintuitive as it may be, he thinks sexual sadism should be cause for a lighter sentence. On top of all this, today NewsBusters sister site CNS News reported that 13 years before Chatigny delayed the execution of one Michael Ross, a serial killer and rapist, he had served as Ross’s private defense attorney. Apparently he forgot to recuse himself. Will the media report this tidbit? CNS News reporter Fred Lucas wrote today , President Barack Obama’s nominee to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, Robert N. Chatigny, did legal work as a private defense attorney in 1992 for convicted serial killer Michael Ross and then, in 2005, as a federal district judge, led a proceeding that resulted in a delay in Ross’ execution. Chatigny says he forgot about the earlier work and should have recused himself from the matter. “Had I recalled it, I would have recused myself,” Chatigny wrote in a questionnaire last month for the Senate Judiciary Committee… In a written response to questions from Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Chatigny wrote, “I recalled my prior involvement only after one of the complainants amended his initial complaint to include a claim based on my prior involvement. Until then, I had no recollection of it.” Regardless of whether Chatigny is telling the truth about his poor memory span, isn’t this massive conflict of interest worth a report or two from major media outlets? The Senate will vote on his nomination soon. His record seems relevant. But apparently few in legacy media agree. Chatigny’s beliefs regarding sexual sadism have no grounding in any legal standard or precedent; he said so when asked by Sen. Jeff Sessions. He, Chatigny, just sort of thought it up and decided to implement the standard on his own. He is the product of the activist philosophy liberals strive to create in the judiciary. The media’s continued refusal to call Chatigny out on his reporting just demonstrates that they are, by and large, on board with this philosophy. Telling, though hardly surprising.

Visit link:
Silent on Obama Judicial Nominee’s Wild Legal Theories, Will Media Report Professional Misconduct?