TheAgitator.com
Sunday Links
Sunday, June 6th, 2010- If you had dreams of going dwile flonking in Britain this summer, well you can just forget it.
- Georgia prosecutor orders a defense lawyer off a death penalty case. Bonus: The state’s supreme court upheld the defendant’s conviction. Double bonus: Same prosecutor is now angling to become a judge.
- Puppycide: Cops shoot man’s medical dog while looking for a burglary suspect.
- Pretty sure this law isn’t going to have the effect its supporters think it will.
- Philly cops under fire for passing around gruesome accident scene photo.
- Nashville mayor thanks city jail inmates for saving the city’s water supply.
- Arizona continues its campaign to become the Mississippi of the West.
With names like Weis and Citronberg, I’d seriously reconsider having Pike County, Georgia as my home. Just saying.
I know it’s juvenile, but I find it delicious that the Director of the nanny diaper-changing union is named Ms. Poo.
Wrong “its”.
#3| Joey Maloney
“I know [it is]…” Ergo, “it’s” is correct, since “its” is the possessive. Just so you know.
Joey Maloney = Epic Fail
From the puppycide item:
Police say that the incident has already been thoroughly investigated and it has been determined that officers did nothing wrong
I’m stunned.
Joey Maloney: Epuc Grammer Fale.
You know an issue has grown ridiculously beyond out-of-whack when Dave’s sarcasm doesn’t have anywhere else to go with it than “I’m stunned”. I’m tired of dead dogs and misbehaving authority figures, I’m going outside and getting some sun.
If I employed a nanny, the strong incentive from this story would be to discontinue the employment as soon as possible, before it became illegal to do so. It is not a stretch to see that this kind of law may well lead to slavery and murder.
Regards, Don
If you had dreams of going dwile flonking in Britain this summer, well you can just forget it.
I’m so disappointed, I’d been drinking hard all year just to get in shape for the championship.
I guess I’ll just have to rest on my laurels as WorldBoat Race Champion.
Hmmmm Regulation will dis-employ people working is a certain fluid industry. Who would have thought?
By the way, who the hell are the “Jews for Racial and Economic Justice”? Jews using the state to impose their beliefs on anyone is simply one of the greatest cases of “Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!” I’ve seen in a while.
So a betting pool on the drop in percentage for nannies that are going to be employed?
*in *In a certain industry dammit! I need more coffee.
From the Philadelphia accident scene photos story:
Let me guess:
Two weeks off with full pay.
Oh, wait! He said the punishment should be “severe”.
Three months off with full pay.
Service Dog shooting:
I find it really hard to believe that a dog trained to be a Service Animal for a bipolar person would be trained if it exhibited aggressive tendencies at all. The entire point of the animal is it’s a steady state focus, that can alert if the owner expresses extreme behavior.
The reactions on the comments for the article mirror that disbelief.
Could this be the start of “Operation: Psycho Pig Rampage” as reported in the Onion?
Thanks everyone for piling on Joey. I was going to write a rebuttal, but I do not yet have my certificate in Special Ed.
As to the nanny business, I wouldn’t worry too much about the new regulations. Only dooshie Manhattanites and aspiring politicos use legal nannies. The rest of us have the decency to hire illegal nannies. This law will just send the business back where it belongs.
I’ve always said I like my nannies like I like my coca: Pure Columbian and just smuggled in.
Puppycide: Cops shoot man’s medical dog while looking for a burglary suspect.
What more do you want Radley? There’s already been a “thorough Investigation”.* The officer obviously did nothing wrong.
* Investigation transcript
It seems to me, if you’re going to use state funds to try criminals (And you pretty much have to, they’re not going to pay for their own trial) than you need to pay for the defense as well. And by equal amounts. That way, the prosecution only brings good cases forward.
Let’s look at Georgia’s budget for 2007!
http://www.opb.state.ga.us/media/2183/bib_afy06-fy07.pdf
Page 80 and 81: Prosecution. 51 million budget. With increases. Sweeeet.
Page 82: Public Defender’s Standards Council: 28 million.
But wait… It WAS going to be 42 million. Look at line item 5:
“5. Provide for a general reduction in operating expenses. (14,246,938)”
Someone gutted their budget. That CANNOT be legal to just gut it like that without citation.
Faces in the mural were drawn from photographs of children enrolled at Miller Valley, a K-5 school with 380 students and the highest ethnic mix of any school in Prescott.
I don’t particularly care about the mural, but little things like this always jump out at me in the press.
To say that this school has the highest ethnic mix in Prescott isn’t saying much, but it conveys the narrative the author was looking for better than an actual percentage of that ethnic ratio.
Prescott is a relatively small town, and of course small towns are by definition less diverse than larger cities. It’s hard to nail down the actual % of hispanics since they always spread the hispanic count out over several races, but the place is has a combined minority population of about 7%. There’s probably no more than a handful of black people in the whole area.
To make a stink about it is petty and seems to me to be inviting controversy as well, but the guy has a point that the mural seems to be creating some “diversity controversy” where none existed before.
God damn it why do they always shoot the dogs. It drives me nuts. My dog sounds vicious as hell when someone walks up to the door but in reality he’s old, arthritic, and has a goofball personality. Every time a puppycide is posted I feel like I’m one trigger happy cop away from having the poor guy blown away and can’t even predict the circumstances under which it might happen. Rant complete.
RE: Nanny law
“You have some employers that are very good and some that are not, and there is nothing mediating that relationship,”
And there are getting ready to be less of both if the Gov signs this bill into law.
And when the defendent petitions for a new trial in federal court for a retrial due to an inadequate defense and wins, the State of Georgian can go back to square one and start the process all over again. Besides being just plain immoral, it will, like all death penalty cases, turn out to be a monumental waste of taxpayer dollars.
The only solution I can think of for these puppycides is to even up the odds. I’m going to get 12 Rotties and train them to go for jugulars if thugs break down my door.
Actually, Joey is correct. The sentence refers to Arizona’s campaign when it reads “its campaign”. So it IS the possessive, and there is no apostrophe.
I think Britain should just go ahead and abolish their legislature and go right back to doing things at the whim of a monarch. They’d be better off that their current situation, IMHO.
Hey look at that! We may have been too hard on Joey if he was referring to Radley’s 7th bullet point and not my comment above his.
Thanks for sharing that phillie story — whoever left that Philie Inquirer at the airport has no idea what they started. =)
And I didn’t even notice the “it’s” in jefferson’s post – where the apostrophe is of course correct. So everyone is correct in fact.
There may be a lesson here.
Do Tasers not work on dogs? Are dogs immune to pepper spray?
I can confidently state that no single 90 lb dog is going to take me in a fight, and I’m a middle age man with no training. That’s engaging the animal straight up, mano a la pata. Gosh, give me a police baton and the dog is done.
#23 “Actually, Joey is correct. The sentence refers to Arizona’s campaign when it reads “its campaign”. So it IS the possessive, and there is no apostrophe.”
QFT. I’m plussing you and Joey for that.
Well it would have helped if he had quoted the sentence he was correcting. But being a grammar arse isn’t cool. And he sure has waste all of our time in this thread.
Minus 1 for Joey and you Andrew
Great.
Radley posts 7 items of note.
And we get a fuss of grammar nannies.
Dwile Flonking: meanwhile, the UK has lowered the DUI level from .08 to .05, meaning adults slightly below average weight could be legall “intoxicated” after less than one pint of beer.
I am confident that I can elicit a response from any and all animals that would “pass” for what shithead cops think is “aggression”. Basically, dress up in a uniform and act like a monkey with a gun yelling, spitting, and grabbing shit (aka: act like a cop).
Coincidentally, acting in this manner also elicits “aggressive” responses from humans…that for some dumbass reason the state has determined is good ‘nough reason for cops to shoot you dead.
So, we’ve seen cops murder handcuffed peasants lying face down with a gun shot to the back…and we’ve seen dipshit cops lob grenades thru windows into rooms full of children and then follow up with rifle shots to the head of whatever moves. We’re basically at a point where cops will murder anything that fucking moves and NO ONE will lift a finger to stop it.
They’ll get away with it thru the power of their union disciplinary guidelines, blue line, prosecutors scared shitless of challenging them, unquestioning media, and badge-licking citizens who buy into “patriotism = submit”.
Someone wake me up when a LEO actually has to face the same legal system the peasant class deals with.
Many on this site have marked the end of the USA long ago, so this is just commenting on the destruction.
/overly dramatic I know
It doesn’t seem to take much to scare a cop. They’re supposed to be tough but many of them seem to be from the same mold as Barney Fife- afraid of their own shadows.
Ya’ll are being too harsh on New York and this new law. Clearly, libertarians have finally risen to power in NY. Once this law goes into effect, New York will no longer be a nanny state.
Armed, agitated and aggressive police officers come uninvited to the door, and the dog barks at them?
Just once, can’t one of the fucking cops have a bite before the blow the animal away? Is that too much to ask?
“#22 | Jefferson | June 6th, 2010 at 12:46 pm
The only solution I can think of for these puppycides is to even up the odds. I’m going to get 12 Rotties and train them to go for jugulars if thugs break down my door.”
I was thinking of some of these dogs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMwRGVLuq1Y
If, like Barney Fife, these cops had only one bullet, they might be a little more careful about using it.
There is no doubt in my mind that any LEO would bust his own mother for marijuana possession and actually walk away from it thinking “I did the right thing, the system will help her.”
I don’t know WTF happens to these guys during training but they seem to get so immersed in their own bullshit that they can’t even smell it.
RE: MacGregory
They start like that. In the Marines there was always one or two guys that were going to go back home after they got out, and join the local LE (police, sheriff, whatever).
And every single one of them were guys that would bust their mother for having a roach in the ashtray.
“If, like Barney Fife, these cops had only one bullet, they might be a little more careful about using it.”
You mean like this winner? http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/bs-md-police-shooting-club-20100605,0,806075.story
Say what you will, but not only is 6/13 piss poor shooting, summary execution for grabbing your girl’s butt is a tad excessive.
croaker
That is depressing. For one of the peasant class, it would be murder. For one of the Blue Masters it is “under investigation”.
The article says there were numerous on-duty cops in the area. I am willing to bet that half of them testify that the killer “acted in self defense.”
I’m hearing that the preliminary finding will be “shot while resisting arrest” despite the hands in the air.
As a minor point of protocol, when a LEO passes, does one:
a) Tug one’s forelock? or
b) Bow from the waist? or
c) Kneel and knock one’s head nine times upon the ground?
I am having a barbecue this evening and you can bet your ass that a dwile flonking match will take place. I am looking for rules online, but this really seems like the sort of game where the ends are more important than the means. Sticks, beer soaked rags, and drinking as a penalty… what could possibly go wrong.
Yikes Stephen. Those are scary. Also Cane Corsos might do the trick.
I would be very careful of using anything from AZcentral.com. They are the liberal hotbed of Arizona and you’re very likely to get a scewed story from the site.
Thinking of puppycide…
If a K-9 unit’s dog was coming at me, aggressively, and I shot it… would that be justified? Or would I somehow be a cop killer? Seriously. Those dogs are vicious. I’d go apeshit if one came at me and would take no accountability for my actions.
“As to the nanny business, I wouldn’t worry too much about the new regulations. Only dooshie Manhattanites and aspiring politicos use legal nannies. The rest of us have the decency to hire illegal nannies. This law will just send the business back where it belongs.
I’ve always said I like my nannies like I like my coca: Pure Columbian and just smuggled in.”
I get that you’re attempting to make a point using humor but.. .these are people we’re talking about here. And that’s just a disgusting way to talk about them. Shame on you.
You’d be on your way to the morgue, not jail.
Whenever I see those ugly stupid intentionally over-the-top “multicultural “murals that they always put up in schools and other government buildings I cannot help but think of that South Park episode where the kids are sent to Tolerance Camp.
“You vill make a painting that shows zee people of different races and sexual orientations getting along!”
http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/153744/
While it is admittedly stupid of that district to go back and “lighten” the faces on the mural, I find it no less stupid than the decision to paint the damn mural in the first place, and neither holds a candle to what really offends me about the mural: that it was likely funded by tens of thousands of dollars in tax money.
Just as suspected…
“The public art, funded by a $5,000 state grant through the Prescott Alternative Transportation Center, was selected by school students and faculty.”
I have NO sympathy for the whiny artist in this story. He makes his livelihood painting ugly politically charged murals (this one promoted an environmentalist message) that no sane private sector consumer would ever purchase on their own. We the taxpayers are forced to subsidize and look at his shit though. And then he has the nerve to pass it off as if it were some sort of “community service” where children “volunteers” came together for an afternoon of fun and finger paint.
Whether the faces are light or dark skinned, it doesn’t matter. That mural is a piece of shit. And so is the “artist” who bilked the taxpayers for it. The only real tragedy here is that they didn’t just take a can of cement gray and a couple paint rollers and get rid of the whole damn thing.
Re Prescott Go Green Mural
We already know that Mexicans like to walk and carpool.
Re Davidson County Jail
For the most part the deputies are real shitty tippers. I’m glad the inmates could do some real community service.
#48 #50
In most areas, K-9 are considered the equivalent of sworn officers. Shooting one is bad, killing one will get you the same as killing a cop: Shot to save the citizens the cost of a trial.
Feelings about publicly financed art and “multiculturalism” aside, the issue with the Arizona mural was that the reason for lightening came from a racist agenda. A talk radio host who moonlights as a local politician led a campaign demanding that only whites be represented in the mural, despite the fact that the mural was intended to represent the school, which was one of the most racially/ethnically diverse in the area. If the mural was intended to represent the students of that school, it absolutely should have had black and brown faces. And it did. But that got some white racists’ panties in a bunch because, goddamnit, this is THEIR country and they want it back. Or whatever.
#55 – According to the census, the small town of Prescott, Arizona is 92.9% white. The population of people of hispanic origin from any race is only 8%. The black population is practically nonexistent – only half of a percentage point.
That suggests your “most racially/ethnically diverse school in the area” nonsense really means it is attended by a single black family and maybe a couple of hispanic families.
If that is the case, then to portray it as some sort of multicultural diversitopia is indeed factually misleading. And the radio host’s charges, regardless of their silly motive, are indeed probably accurate: the artist was trying to insert a politically charged message of “diversity” (on top of his existing politically charged message of radical environmentalism). It is equally stupid to go back now and reapportion the skin colors to reflect the 90%+ white population of the town (which is why I think the whole mural should simply be painted over), but it cannot be denied that this stupid reaction was instigated by an equally stupid decision in the first place to manufacture “diversity” where it simply did not exist.
PW-
The stats I saw, which I can’t find right now, indicate the make-up of the school is not the same as the make-up of the town. Regardless, as a teacher, I can tell you of the value of having different races, ethnicities, gender, etc represented in your school community, not just in terms of the people there, but in the visual displays.
The fact is, this school does have students of color. If all of your murals, your displays, your artwork features only white people, the message sent to these students is, “This place is not for you.” Which is PRECISELY the message the opponents of the original mural intended. So, maybe there were other agendas of those who designed, planned, and painted the mural. But the impact it has in terms of promoting an inclusive environment in which all members are welcome… there is nothing political about that. Assuring that all students feel welcome is not political; it is good practice for a school. And the attempt to spread a message indicating that the school and community are the exclusive domain of white residents… that is political, that is wrong, that is racist.
I’m not saying the mural should have been made in the first place. I’m saying nothing regarding the environmental statement or other agendas of those involved. However, once the decision was made to create a mural with images of students, best practice dictates that it should be done in such a way as to include, welcome, and value all those in the community. Attempts to avoid this, to make the community exclusive to whites, are racist and should be opposed as such.
“The central figure in the mural is a black child, and a Hispanic child is included on the right. “To depict the biggest picture on the building as a black person,” Blair said, “I would have to ask the question: ‘Why?’” Motorists objecting to the mural, meanwhile, began hurling racial slurs at the artists working on the mural.”
Let’s not pretend that much of the objections were rooted in opposition to the environmental message, the public funding of the art, or the accuracy of representing the population. It was racism, plain and simple.
And what’s wrong with a billboard featuring a black child in a primarily white neighborhood? No one objects to movies or tv shows or magazines or newspaper that feature 99% white folks, even though our population is not as such. Yet when it goes the other way, suddenly it’s a problem? I get this is somewhat complicated because it was public money going to the art, so theoretically, the public should have a say. But what would have been the response if the original mural was entirely white and people of color objected? They’d be vilified by many, cast as playing the “race card” or being “hate mongers”. Yet, when white folks do it, it’s not the “race card”… it’s just demanding accuracy. Bullshit.
BSK – It’s a rancher town in the middle of rural Arizona. It is surrounded by national parks and is a good 100 miles in either direction from the two nearest cities of any substantial size (Flagstaff and Phoenix). The chances of the school composition being substantially different from the town are somewhere between zero and zero. Nor are Prescott’s demographics the result of some silly attempt to make it a “whites only” community – it is simply a fact that the overwhelming majority of people who live there happen to be white.
You ask what is wrong with the mural. I’ve already told you: it uses taxpayer dollars and it is clearly intended to promote a two-part political agenda: environmentalism and a VERY artificial line about “look at how diverse and multicultural we are!” I don’t care whether you, as a teacher, think there is “value” in that (or in promoting environmentalism for that matter). Those are your rights as a private citizen. It is COMPLETELY INAPPROPRIATE, however, for you to support the expenditure of public funds in promoting those politically charged messages, because that means you are forcing me to subsidize those messages whether I agree with them or not.
And yes, as a private citizen I do object to my tax dollars being used to promote both environmentalism and wishy-washy politically correct bullshit about “peace, love, multiculturalism, and diversity” especially when the diversity stuff is completely contrived, as is the case here. Also notice that I do NOT support lightening the skin colors on the mural either. That’s just as stupid as painting the damn thing to begin with. I personally think it should be painted over or sandblasted off the wall, and the artist be forced to give back the $5 grand he bilked from us for the ugly, politically charged piece of shit he painted.
I realize you like to play devil’s advocate on these things, but you are also displaying a habit of pushing it to a level of absurdity. This is one such example.
And while we’re on the subject, I also think it is not by coincidence that these “diversity and environmentalism” murals that get painted with public funding have a very strong resemblance to those old Soviet propaganda posters that showed little communist children playing in peace, love, and complete happiness.
When the government paints a mural like this it is inescapably projecting an image and therefore attempting to define what it considers to be a social “ideal” of the school. At present that “ideal” is a silly mural with one child representing each race, class, color, or creed holding hands and singing “we are the world” in support of an anti-individual communistic society based on “getting along” and “sharing everything” and the worship of Mother Earth. In the past it’s been “ein volk, ein reich, ein fuhrer.”
They are flip sides of the exact same coin and both are completely insidious.
Re: the Puppycide. Just more proof positive that cops are all fucking cowards. Any cops reading this, yes, that includes you.
PW-
I took no issue on your stance regarding the mural with regards to its funding nor its environmental message. But you went beyond that. You attacked a legitimate effort to recognize and celebrate the diversity that DOES exist at the school. The images on the mural are ACTUAL students. There are black and Hispanic students there. As such, IF such a mural is going to be created, they should be in it. If the motivation is to make the school look more diverse than it is, that is wrong. If the motivation is to be inclusive to the community that does exist within the school, that is entirely right.
You said, “but it cannot be denied that this stupid reaction was instigated by an equally stupid decision in the first place to manufacture “diversity” where it simply did not exist.”
I can in fact deny that quite clearly. As I said, this mural can be just as much about recognizing the diversity that exists there as manufacturing. They included paintings of REAL students. Now, absent painting EVERY student in the school, it is likely it wasn’t going to be 100% accurate with regards to the proportional representation. Would all white have been better? Maybe closer to 100% accurate, but still wrong. And because of the costs of being wrong in THAT way, to marginalizing students of color to the point of essentially saying they don’t exist, I agree with the original decision to err on the side of making sure to include students representing all the races and ethnicities in the school. That is not manufacturing anything. If people are so bothered by that, by the fact that whites weren’t the dominant group portrayed… well, tough shit, frankly. That is privilege at its worst. So, yes, I’m denying that the mural was intended to manufacture non-existent diversity. Or, rather, I’m offering a potential explanation different from your own, which you seem to think is the only one that exists. Do I know for sure? Obviously not. I’m not in the head of the creators.
But as a teacher, I would want to make sure that ANY images being put up in schools were inclusive of the community. Everyone should be represented. I don’t care about the other issues. They are important, no doubt, but they are not all that matters. Once the decision was made to make the mural and fund it publicly, it was right to include the students of color. If you really object to that on the lines you are offering, that an over-representation of the students of colors is “manufacturing”, then your privilege is evident. Some group had to be over-represented… why is it any more wrong that it be the kids of color than the white kids?
“When the government paints a mural like this it is inescapably projecting an image and therefore attempting to define what it considers to be a social “ideal” of the school. At present that “ideal” is a silly mural with one child representing each race, class, color, or creed holding hands and singing “we are the world” in support of an anti-individual communistic society based on “getting along” and “sharing everything” and the worship of Mother Earth. In the past it’s been “ein volk, ein reich, ein fuhrer.””
Or maybe it’s just a shitty painting trying to show the kids in the school…?
It’s NOT a “legitimate effort” to recognize diversity, BSK, because (1) it is completely contrived and more importantly (2) it is using taxpayer dollars to promote it through a politically charged message.
If you want to build a mural with all the children of every different race and religion and sexual orientation holding hands and singing kumbaya, fine. I don’t really give a damn…as long as you do so with PRIVATE money on PRIVATE property.
I will privately say that your art is ugly. And I’ll probably conclude upon seeing it that the people who painted it are of limited intelligence as evidenced by their subscribing to a largely superficial and contrived celebration of “diversity” for diversity’s sake, though with no real meaningful value beyond that. But since it is your private land and your private money that paid for it, I am content to allowing it to stand there as a public monument to your stupidity for wasting your money on such an utterly foolish piece of garbage.
But the second you force me to pay for it, and the second you place it on a public building you are violating my rights. You are violating them by forcing me to subsidize a politically charged message against my will. And yes – it is politically charged (and morally repugnant) for an artist to go to a school and INTENTIONALLY seek out the only 4 minority kids at that school for inclusion in his painting for no other reason than their skin color, just as it would be to tell the principal he only wanted white kids for his models. That is not a message our government should be endorsing and it is certainly not something that you have the right to demand I pay for in any way, shape, or form.
Your act of doing so is no different than if you were to adorn the same wall at my expense with pictures of Jesus on the cross, a list of quotes from the Koran, or kids doing a fertility dance in a circle around a giant Obama “O.” There really is no middle ground or “alternate explanation” for it beyond that – it’s a taxpayer subsidized piece of political advocacy, and is therefore completely inappropriate to place on the wall of a public school building.