Every now and then, I run into an online ad that serves to remind me why I do not use any sort of ad blockers when I web surf. A Google Ad that appeared on the side of a LA Times article tonight was just one of those Diamonds In The Rough.

Who amongst us can honestly state that (s)he has never felt this urge welling up inside of them?

The Ad is being run by an organisation called: Bold Progressives, and here's the direct link to their Hurt Joe Lieberman campaign.

I've been sick and in the hospital for many weeks now. A few years ago, I sold some land and have been living off of the proceeds since then. I planned to start up my own web development business. I have no health insurance. My care has hit an obstacle, which I have not found a work around for. I am asking for help from TPM members.

Read more »

Was feeling sorry for myself earlier;
am over that shit for a while;
could be a whole lot worse;
but i still hurt

Read more »

all by my lonesome, and i feel fine.

for those who most likely don't understand: Would offering the following be enlightening?

Percutaneous Vertebroplasty

dis am a nice way to set it too. i recently had back surgery for what seems a multitude of cancers in it.

now i have been set up in a back brace by some therapists.
a monkey-boy in a turtle shell, and i feel fine

Here's the links to his IISS Special Report:

PDF:

Video:

Q and A

Just because there seem to be more pressing concerns with other issues, does not mean that torturers get to walk free.

It was an Epict Troll, worthy of noteworthiness, but don't expect any Birthers to change their minds. Facts are useless when dealing with Conspiratards.

This Troll scored very high across the board in the concept, style and effort categories, yet still had only an average aggregate total, because the multiplicative "target difficulty" factor was less than one. Let's be realistic here; suckering a Birther Conspiratard is just a wee bit harder than beating a garden snail in a foot-race.

Read more »

Microsoft has announced a new security hole for users of Internet Explorer on Windows XP. This is a nasty hole that is being exploited presently. Microsoft has provided an automatic workaround until they publish a patch for it.

Link to Workaround

If you are using both Windows XP, and Internet Explorer as your browser, go to that link and click on "Fix This Problem".

A six part video series published at the YouTube Account of The Thomas Jefferson Foundation: Monticello.org. the videos run from 1:33 to 6:33 in length, and are about 4 minutes average.. From the Monticello.org Description:

On June 21, 2005, David Holmes, Professor of Religion at The College of William and Mary, listed out key points of Jefferson's religious beliefs and practices and offered an answer to the oft-asked question of whether the Author of the Declaration of American Independence might have been a Unitarian.

Read more »

Anonymous Iran - any advice from protest vets would probably be appreciated.

And, I a tole a you to proxy this MFs:
Guy Fawkes In Iran

It is proper to consider, as a part of the ongoing discussion regarding indefinite detentions without first securing a conviction at a trial that adhered to due process of law, and its constitutionality; The Geneva Conventions' allowance for detaining POWs for the indeterminate period of a conflict's duration. When viewed within the scope of U.S. Constitution; Article VI; clause 2; legitimises it. There are those who believe that a treaty which violates Constitutional text can never be legitimate, yet a simple reading of Art. VI; clause 2; implies otherwise:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

A treaty enacted "under the Authority of the United States" is "the supreme law of the land...any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding". Clearly, lawfully enacted treaties possess supremacy within their scope over Constitutional text. This has always been a potential threat to liberty.

Read more »

Many have been quick to attack Obama, charging he has broken his campaign promises to restore and defend civil liberties. Some of these charges are utterly unwarranted, and fueled from a misunderstanding of the real issues. A case in point: the claim that Obama's support for continuing renditions is a breach of promise, rests on a shaky foundation that fails to differentiate between renditions and extraordinary renditions. There is a world of difference between these two terms. Many other charges leveled against Obama have been related to DOJ legal briefs filed in preexisting trial cases, which supported the Bush Administration's previously held positions in these cases. All of these either falsely attribute motives for the briefs, or are as yet unproven.

There are sound reasons why an incoming President should not begin the term by completely upsetting the apple cart left by the previous President. It is not the duty of a sitting President to initiate criminal investigations into the acts of the Previous President. That is clearly a Congressional duty. If a President were to do this, it would assure a dark future in America: partisan witch trials whenever the party of the sitting President changed. A new President's DOJ should not get involved with wholesale changes in government arguments previously presented in ongoing Federal Court cases. An important element of justice is stability, and stability requires continuity. A new President sails into dangerous uncharted waters if claiming that past law, previously supported by the DOJ is suddenly unconstitutional, because of an election result. Again, this only will lead to horrible Partisan factionalism in the future. A President's duty is to enforce law, unless it is egregiously offensive to the Constitution. Law, enacted prior to a President's inauguration should be invested with a great sense of its legitimacy. If the President does not like the law, (s)he should petition Congress to change it, and not attempt to legislate from within the Executive Branch.

These are many of the reasons that Obama's DOJ has presented arguments in preexisting trial cases that many have viewed as breaking campaign promises. There has also been a great deal of noise generated by pro-Bush factions in false flag operations, as a means to prove that Bush acted properly when President. The left-side of the political bipolarity has allowed itself to be corrupted with an ailment that once only predominated on the right: CONSPIRACY. Ditto-heads are repugnant be they from the left or the right.

Read more »

Marc Thiessen, who from 2001-2004 was Chief Speechwriter for Donald Rumsfeld, and from 2004-2009 was a speechwriter for the Bush White House, has since Obama's inauguration, been a vociferous defender of human torture, even going so far as to claim that Americans who tortured are American Heros. More recently, while attempting to discredit a Washington Post article about torture's counter-productive effects in an article published at National Review Online, Thiessen rested on a false allegation previously promoted by the Bush Administration which had been thoroughly discredited.

Read more »

Anybody, who desires some help with computer or site related problems they are presently going through, feel free to post in the comments, and I'll try to help you resolve them. Better here than in someone else's blog post, hijacked with off-threaded commentary .