Disgraced former New York Times reporter Judith Miller, who played a huge role in promoting fictions about Iraq’s WMD capabilities, has landed at one of the looniest right wing magazines in America: Newsmax.
Miller will be sharing the pages of Newsmax with such luminaries of the right wing as Pamela “Shrieking Harpy” Geller, and a guy who advocated a military coup against the Obama administration.
2 |
makeitstop Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:25:51am |
The Queen Of Iraq makes her return. It was only a matter of time.
| 3 |
Talking Point Detective Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:29:32am |
re: #1 marjoriemoon
Sweet! We can always use new material!
Why wait?
Georgia Bill Would Force State Taxpayers To Pay Only In Gold Or Silver
Georgia state Rep. Bobby Franklin (R) loves to introduce far-right reactionary bills. Among his greatest hits are an assault of Georgia’s authority to vaccinate its citizens, an unconstitutional bill declaring Roe v. Wade a “nullity,” and, of course, a bill eliminating income taxes.
Yet Franklin may have outdone himself with his “Constitutional Tender Act,” which would require all transactions with the state of Georgia — including the payment of taxes — to be paid with U.S. minted gold or silver coins unless the state agrees to grant a special waiver for each transaction:
Pre-1965 silver coins, silver eagles, and gold eagles shall be the exclusive medium which the state shall use to make any payments whatsoever to any person or entity, whether private or governmental. Such coins shall be the exclusive medium which the state shall accept from any person or entity as payment of any obligation to the state including, without limitation, the payment of taxes; provided, however, that such coins and other forms of currency may be used in all other transactions within the state upon mutual consent of the parties of any such transaction.
[Link: thinkprogress.org...]
| 4 |
Dark_Falcon Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:33:29am |
re: #3 Talking Point Detective
Why wait?
[Link: thinkprogress.org...]
Thankfully, that bill will never make it out of committee.
| 5 |
What, me worry? Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:34:20am |
re: #3 Talking Point Detective
Oh dear. We're going in for a very bumpy ride in 2011.
| 6 |
Talking Point Detective Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:38:35am |
re: #4 Dark_Falcon
True - but the level of stupidity it takes to introduce such a bill is just astounding.
| 7 |
Henchman Ghazi-808 Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:38:45am |
re: #5 marjoriemoon
Oh dear. We're going in for a very bumpy ride in 2011.
And 2012, at least until the next election. Charles forget the Bad Craziness tag.
| 9 |
Dark_Falcon Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:41:07am |
re: #6 Talking Point Detective
True - but the level of stupidity it takes to introduce such a bill is just astounding.
Mindless commitment to a principle, heedless on the damage being caused.
| 10 |
Killgore Trout Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:43:06am |
re: #5 marjoriemoon
Oh dear. We're going in for a very bumpy ride in 2011.
Republicans are probably going to defund American science....
U.S. Science-Funding Boost Faces Uncertain Future
....and the Tea Partiers are going to love them for it. I can't say I'm looking forward to the new year.
| 11 |
Stanghazi Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:45:21am |
[Link: www.huffingtonpost.com...]
Behind the scenes photos of the President etc. WH Photog Pete Souza.
Nice!
| 12 |
Dark_Falcon Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:47:40am |
re: #10 Killgore Trout
Republicans are probably going to defund American science...
U.S. Science-Funding Boost Faces Uncertain Future
...and the Tea Partiers are going to love them for it. I can't say I'm looking forward to the new year.
The bill's shift of funding to applications may come in for scrutiny. That sounds like a way to give to favored people. Congress should take a hard look at what they're funding and where the money goes.
| 13 |
wrenchwench Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:48:27am |
re: #11 Stanley Sea
[Link: www.huffingtonpost.com...]
Behind the scenes photos of the President etc. WH Photog Pete Souza.
Nice!
Paged it. He must have a LOT of great photos.
| 14 |
Decatur Deb Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:49:35am |
re: #6 Talking Point Detective
True - but the level of stupidity it takes to introduce such a bill is just astounding.
And tens of thousands of his constituents are Stupid-by-Proxy.
| 15 |
albusteve Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:49:41am |
re: #10 Killgore Trout
Republicans are probably going to defund American science...
U.S. Science-Funding Boost Faces Uncertain Future
...and the Tea Partiers are going to love them for it. I can't say I'm looking forward to the new year.
if they defund research into the sexual behavior of leeches, I'm good with it....even science can be trimmed out sometimes...wait and see
| 16 |
albusteve Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:51:16am |
re: #12 Dark_Falcon
The bill's shift of funding to applications may come in for scrutiny. That sounds like a way to give to favored people. Congress should take a hard look at what they're funding and where the money goes.
it goes to their supporters...ethanol funding for example, completely denying the backlash of growing and using that poison...it's the way it works
| 17 |
Henchman Ghazi-808 Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:52:10am |
re: #10 Killgore Trout
Republicans are probably going to defund American science...
U.S. Science-Funding Boost Faces Uncertain Future
...and the Tea Partiers are going to love them for it. I can't say I'm looking forward to the new year.
Indeed, I'm very concerned about more skirmishes in the War on Science.
I've seen many rail against career politicians making decisions affecting business who themselves have no business acumen. Fair play is in order: members of the Science committee's in the House and Senate should have their expertise and influences questioned with regards to science.... and fuel energy interests. Fair play.
They should get hammered. A key member of the Science committee reciting Genesis as part of the record? Insane.
| 18 |
wrenchwench Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:52:10am |
re: #15 albusteve
if they defund research into the sexual behavior of leeches, I'm good with it...even science can be trimmed out sometimes...wait and see
Some of it is about training new scientists, not solving the most important problems. Gotta train the people who WILL solve the most important problems.
| 19 |
S'latch Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:52:25am |
Is it true that Saddam Hussein had the most significant role in promoting fictions about Iraq’s WMD capabilities?
| 20 |
Stanghazi Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:52:34am |
re: #16 albusteve
Sexual behavior of leeches. My mind is reeling.
| 21 |
What, me worry? Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:58:20am |
re: #10 Killgore Trout
Republicans are probably going to defund American science...
U.S. Science-Funding Boost Faces Uncertain Future
...and the Tea Partiers are going to love them for it. I can't say I'm looking forward to the new year.
I doubt that will get past the president, though.
| 22 |
Killgore Trout Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:00:14am |
re: #15 albusteve
if they defund research into the sexual behavior of leeches, I'm good with it...even science can be trimmed out sometimes...wait and see
I know it's hard to convince people that are scientifically illiterate that studies like that can be important. It doesn't help when ignorant and dishonest politicians use their anti-science for political gain while harming our future. Remember Sarah Palin and the fruit flies?
| 23 |
Gus Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:00:27am |
Meanwhile, Scooter Libby is still disbarred and remains a convicted felon. Karl Rove can't so much as blink when criticizing Sarah Palin in which he invariably has to apologize on Fox News. Judith Miller goes from the New York Times to Newsmax.
| 24 |
What, me worry? Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:01:18am |
| 25 |
albusteve Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:03:02am |
re: #22 Killgore Trout
I know it's hard to convince people that are scientifically illiterate that studies like that can be important. It doesn't help when ignorant and dishonest politicians use their anti-science for political gain while harming our future. Remember Sarah Palin and the fruit flies?
any science is important...but in these times, some is more important than others...as for the politics involved, you can imagine how I feel about that
| 26 |
What, me worry? Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:04:41am |
re: #15 albusteve
if they defund research into the sexual behavior of leeches, I'm good with it...even science can be trimmed out sometimes...wait and see
My dad was a big PBS TV watcher, that and Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom. His nickname for every show was "The Mating of the Tste Fly."
"Dad, can I watch cartoons?"
"I'm watching the mating of the tste fly! Go help your mother."
| 27 |
albusteve Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:04:54am |
re: #18 wrenchwench
Some of it is about training new scientists, not solving the most important problems. Gotta train the people who WILL solve the most important problems.
it takes a lot of scrutiny to spend what we have wisely...but as KT alluded, science is the new whore to be bought and sold, or at least that's the fear
| 28 |
Dark_Falcon Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:05:12am |
re: #21 marjoriemoon
I doubt that will get past the president, though.
The House sets funding levels, though, so Obama will have to compromise. The house would get some cuts, at least.
| 29 |
albusteve Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:07:01am |
re: #26 marjoriemoon
My dad was a big PBS TV watcher, that and Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom. His nickname for every show was "The Mating of the Tste Fly."
"Dad, can I watch cartoons?"
"I'm watching the mating of the tste fly! Go help your mother."
those were the days...dad was probably right
| 30 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:07:19am |
re: #20 Stanley Sea
Sexual behavior of leeches. My mind is reeling.
I want to know who has to sew the little lingerie for the leeches?
| 33 |
What, me worry? Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:10:06am |
re: #31 Gus 802
Why that tsetse fly has a penis! Can't have any federal scientific funding of that.
/
[Video]
If dad was still with us, he'd have this on his facebook wall :)
| 34 |
brookly red Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:10:40am |
| 35 |
albusteve Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:10:54am |
re: #31 Gus 802
Why that tsetse fly has a penis! Can't have any federal scientific funding of that.
/
[Video]
my life is now complete...thanks bro
| 36 |
Decatur Deb Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:11:33am |
re: #31 Gus 802
Why that tsetse fly has a penis! Can't have any federal scientific funding of that.
/
[Video]
Is tsetse fly contraception OK?
| 37 |
Gus Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:12:37am |
re: #36 Decatur Deb
Is tsetse fly contraception OK?
Nope. I propose that we fund a federal program to provide abstinence education for tsetse flies.
/
| 38 |
Henchman Ghazi-808 Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:13:44am |
re: #22 Killgore Trout
I know it's hard to convince people that are scientifically illiterate that studies like that can be important.
Why are scientifically illiterate people making scientific decisions in the first place?
Leeches are actually used to by the medical community so a program to study them may be worth the $. But it sure makes a great sound byte.
| 39 |
(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:15:32am |
The comments to this Politico story are truly depressing. So many propaganda victims…
| 40 |
brookly red Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:15:53am |
re: #38 BigPapa
Why are scientifically illiterate people making scientific decisions in the first place?
Leeches are actually used to by the medical community so a program to study them may be worth the $. But it sure makes a great sound byte.
I guess for the same reason financially illiterate people are making fiscal policy... cause we let them.
| 41 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:15:58am |
re: #37 Gus 802
Nope. I propose that we fund a federal program to provide abstinence education for tsetse flies.
/
I think it's the responsibility of the parental-type tsetse flies. We need (supervised) midnight basketball for the tsetse flies so they have something else to do.
| 42 |
What, me worry? Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:15:58am |
re: #36 Decatur Deb
Is tsetse fly contraception OK?
lol I'm not sure but apparently the last thing I've learned in 2010 is how to spell "tsetse".
| 43 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:16:22am |
re: #40 brookly red
I guess for the same reason financially illiterate people are making fiscal policy... cause we
letelect them.
| 44 |
laZardo Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:16:54am |
re: #42 marjoriemoon
It's 3:16 AM here, so that'd be the first thing I learned in 2011.
| 45 |
Decatur Deb Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:17:32am |
re: #37 Gus 802
Nope. I propose that we fund a federal program to provide abstinence education for tsetse flies.
/
Tsetse flies were a big part of kid folklore in the 50s. Flies=sleeping sickness, one of those thing like leprosy and army ants that figured in our retellings.
| 46 |
A Man for all Seasons Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:17:39am |
re: #38 BigPapa
Why are scientifically illiterate people making scientific decisions in the first place?
Leeches are actually used to by the medical community so a program to study them may be worth the $. But it sure makes a great sound byte.
Leeches make great Bait to catch Walleye also
| 47 |
laZardo Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:17:57am |
re: #44 laZardo
I guess you could say this virgin year just got deflowered.
| 48 |
lostlakehiker Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:18:26am |
re: #31 Gus 802
Why that tsetse fly has a penis! Can't have any federal scientific funding of that.
/
[Video]
Tsetse flies are dangerous, nasty critters. They transmit awful, difficult to treat or outright incurable diseases. Some parts of Africa are effectively off limits for human habitation because of them.
Cold weather provides "eco-services" we don't even realize we're getting.
I'm generally in favor of protecting all species. Even mosquitoes, rats, and cockroaches. But I'll make an exception for the tsetse fly. If we have to know about their mating ways, go for it.
| 50 |
What, me worry? Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:18:48am |
re: #44 laZardo
It's 3:16 AM here, so that'd be the first thing I learned in 2011.
Happy New Year, dude :)
| 51 |
Stanghazi Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:19:48am |
re: #39 000G
The comments to this Politico story are truly depressing. So many propaganda victims…
All Politico comments are depressing. (and crazy and hateful) That's their standard.
| 52 |
brookly red Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:21:09am |
re: #48 lostlakehiker
Tsetse flies are dangerous, nasty critters. They transmit awful, difficult to treat or outright incurable diseases. Some parts of Africa are effectively off limits for human habitation because of them.
Cold weather provides "eco-services" we don't even realize we're getting.
I'm generally in favor of protecting all species. Even mosquitoes, rats, and cockroaches. But I'll make an exception for the tsetse fly. If we have to know about their mating ways, go for it.
I read somewhere that DDT kills their mood...
| 53 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:21:54am |
re: #52 brookly red
I read somewhere that DDT kills their mood...
They wouldn't be in the mood for anything after that.
| 55 |
brookly red Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:26:12am |
The critter that grosses me out the most would have to be guinea worms...
| 56 |
Tumulus11 Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:26:32am |
'While this reporter could not interview the scientist, she was permitted to see him from a distance at the sites where he said that material from the arms program was buried.Clad in nondescript clothes and a baseball cap, he pointed to several spots in the sand where he said chemical precursors and other weapons material were buried. This reporter also accompanied MET Alpha on the search for him and was permitted to examine a letter written in Arabic that he slipped to American soldiers offering them information about the program and seeking their protection.'
- Judith Miller, The New York Times April 21, 2003
....
'For months, the secret talks unfolding between Taliban and Afghan leaders to end the war appeared to be showing promise, if only because of the appearance of a certain insurgent leader at one end of the table: Mullah Akhtar Muhammad Mansour, one of the most senior commanders in the Taliban movement.But now, it turns out, Mr. Mansour was apparently not Mr. Mansour at all.'
- Dexter Filkins and Carlotta Gall, The New York Times November 22, 2010
. A person whose name you would recognize immediately has given me a letter written in Arabic which he says contains proof that the scientist in the baseball cap and the 'Taliban' imposter are the one and the same - but to identify that person I would have to reveal my sources. /
| 57 |
Decatur Deb Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:26:54am |
re: #55 brookly red
The critter that grosses me out the most would have to be guinea worms...
Little version of the "Alien" larva.
| 58 |
(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:28:20am |
re: #39 000G
The comments to this Politico story are truly depressing. So many propaganda victims…
To expand on that:
Climate Change was JOURNALISM'S Iraq War of lies.
Climate change did to journalism what abusive priests did to religion.
We will never trust mainscream media ever again.
Back to basics? Does this mean Manns bogus hockey stick graph?
Global Cooling in the 70s, Global Warming up to now...well Climate Change has always been about progressives redistribution of wealth.
The arrogance of thinking that humans can control the climate aside, this is nothing but a huge, thoroughly dishonest PR campaign by control freaks obsessed with the idea of dictating to others how they can live their lives.
Global warming is a progressive scam. Progressies have been trying to get their hands on energy and health care for a 100 years because it is an off-balance sheet transaction. They can shift wealth around without directly appropriating it. That makes it hard for the public to see and resist.
The "crisis" is always evolving becaue the public figures out there is no crisis. Look, it's global cooling. No, wait! It's global warming! No, no, it's ACCELERATED CLIMATE CHANGE!!! Yeah, that's it - no matter what the weather it is an "extreme weather event" that we can regulate with smarty-pants scientists from Harvard.
Oh, and it means wonderful subsidies for special interests like Wind and Solar that we can hand out every election cycle.
If the science was real, the PR effort wouldn't be necessary. If global warming proponents were solid in their conclusions, the vilification of competent critics would not be required - answers would be sufficient. What is being conclusively demonstrated is that climate and weather are extremely complex and influenced to a great extent by forces we do not understand.
Maybe these global warming morons can explain why Britain is having one of its coldest winters in 1000 years? Or better yet, maybe one you smart trolls masquerading as a liberals can? And global warming is causing global cooling does not count, unless you are a mental midget.
I guess they'd better improve their message since there is precious little evidence that global warming, due to man-made causes, is a imminent threat to civilization. However, there is a threat we face - socialists who are using "climate change" as an excuse to pursue an extremist environmental agenda.
And it just goes on and on and on like that… a tirade of willful ignorance.
| 59 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:29:09am |
| 60 |
brookly red Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:31:23am |
| 61 |
Gus Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:31:45am |
Note to self. Do not post image of the multiple guinea worm abscess.
/
| 62 |
Dark_Falcon Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:35:45am |
re: #38 BigPapa
Why are scientifically illiterate people making scientific decisions in the first place?
Leeches are actually used to by the medical community so a program to study them may be worth the $. But it sure makes a great sound byte.
Because per the Constitution, Congress decides which programs to fund. So if Congress decides not to fund a study, then that study does not happen. That's how it works.
| 63 |
Fozzie Bear Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:36:45am |
Just 21% of Americans support net neutrality. Wtf is wrong with the other 79%?
| 64 |
brookly red Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:37:22am |
re: #63 Fozzie Bear
Just 21% of Americans support net neutrality. Wtf is wrong with the other 79%?
fear of gubermint...
| 65 |
(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:37:37am |
re: #63 Fozzie Bear
Just 21% of Americans support net neutrality. Wtf is wrong with the other 79%?
They watch Fox News.
| 66 |
albusteve Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:38:20am |
re: #63 Fozzie Bear
Just 21% of Americans support net neutrality. Wtf is wrong with the other 79%?
too complicated...people expect the experts to do the right thing and net neutrality is low on the interest pole
| 67 |
Decatur Deb Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:38:29am |
re: #63 Fozzie Bear
Just 21% of Americans support net neutrality. Wtf is wrong with the other 79%?
They think it has something to do with commie soccer.
| 68 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:38:39am |
re: #63 Fozzie Bear
Just 21% of Americans support net neutrality. Wtf is wrong with the other 79%?
They have no earthly idea what you are talking about. Some of them still think a mouse is a foot pedal and a CD-rom is a cup holder.
| 69 |
Henchman Ghazi-808 Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:39:05am |
re: #58 000G
I have little doubt that there is $ being paid for people to comment in online forums/new blogs, a nitrous injection to the gasoline of the willfully ignorant if you will.
| 70 |
Dark_Falcon Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:39:39am |
re: #64 brookly red
fear of gubermint...
And a desire to avoid another regulatory regime. I'd rather let the corporate assholes make the decisions on this one, rather than the government regulators.
| 71 |
albusteve Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:39:58am |
yes, once again Fox is the culprit....hahaha!
| 72 |
What, me worry? Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:40:15am |
re: #63 Fozzie Bear
Just 21% of Americans support net neutrality. Wtf is wrong with the other 79%?
I'm not totally sure myself, but I tend to lean this way...
| 73 |
recusancy Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:40:43am |
re: #63 Fozzie Bear
Just 21% of Americans support net neutrality. Wtf is wrong with the other 79%?
I'd like to see the cross tabs. It is Rasmussen, remember.
| 75 |
brookly red Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:42:28am |
re: #70 Dark_Falcon
And a desire to avoid another regulatory regime. I'd rather let the corporate assholes make the decisions on this one, rather than the government regulators.
/well not to worry... anything that almost 80 percent of the people are against congress is sure to pass.
| 76 |
recusancy Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:42:29am |
re: #73 recusancy
I'd like to see the cross tabs. It is Rasmussen, remember.
And the questions are rediculous:
3* What is the best way to protect those who use the Internet—more government regulation or more free market competition?4* If the Federal Communications Commission is given the authority to regulate the Internet, will they use that power in an unbiased manner or will they use it to promote a political agenda?
| 77 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:42:37am |
re: #73 recusancy
I'd like to see the cross tabs. It is Rasmussen, remember.
21% support
10% work for comcast
15% Bristol Palin was robbed
38% Beef stroganoff, but without the house salad
16% COWBOYS!!! COWBOYS!!!
| 78 |
What, me worry? Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:43:49am |
re: #77 EmmmieG
21% support
10% work for comcast
15% Bristol Palin was robbed
38% Beef stroganoff, but without the house salad
16% COWBOYS!!! COWBOYS!!!
Girl, you are on fire today!
| 79 |
Henchman Ghazi-808 Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:44:12am |
re: #62 Dark_Falcon
Because per the Constitution, Congress decides which programs to fund. So if Congress decides not to fund a study, then that study does not happen. That's how it works.
I don't disagree with that or reject it. The problem is that Congressmen/women with no knowledge of science are on science committees, many of them ladled with fuel industry contributions. It's ironic that I've heard many conservopundits hammer Congress or politicians for not having business experience but making decisions affecting business: fair play on science issues.
And Bachmann on the Intelligence Committee? Ludicrous. Irony Meter busted.
| 80 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:49:30am |
re: #78 marjoriemoon
Girl, you are on fire today!
Why thanks.
Something about having other, necessary, boring things to do helps me to want to be here.
| 81 |
Fozzie Bear Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:49:40am |
re: #70 Dark_Falcon
And a desire to avoid another regulatory regime. I'd rather let the corporate assholes make the decisions on this one, rather than the government regulators.
/facepalm
| 82 |
Dark_Falcon Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:50:27am |
re: #79 BigPapa
I don't disagree with that or reject it. The problem is that Congressmen/women with no knowledge of science are on science committees, many of them ladled with fuel industry contributions. It's ironic that I've heard many conservopundits hammer Congress or politicians for not having business experience but making decisions affecting business: fair play on science issues.
And Bachmann on the Intelligence Committee? Ludicrous. Irony Meter busted.
It is what it is. Nominations to Committees are about party politics and seniority, not real expertise.
| 83 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:51:53am |
We could try electing scientists, but most scientists have something to do, and also don't want their literal or figurative garbage picked through.
| 84 |
zora Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:52:05am |
re: #63 Fozzie Bear
i don't believe that most people know what net neutrality is.
| 85 |
Fozzie Bear Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:53:49am |
re: #84 zora
i don't believe that most people know what net neutrality is.
Apparently. It's sad many people want the government to do things that reduce their freedoms, and want the government to stay uninvolved when companies want to do the same.
| 86 |
What, me worry? Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:56:06am |
re: #62 Dark_Falcon
re: #79 BigPapa
From KT's article about Rep. Hall, the incoming Science and Technology Committee chair (???) is this link.
[Link: tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com...]
In an example of Republican obstructionism rendered beautiful by its simplicity, the GOP yesterday killed a House bill that would increase funding for scientific research and math and science education by forcing Democrats to vote in favor of federal employees viewing pornography.Rep. Ralph Hall (R-TX), the ranking member of the House science committee, introduced a motion to recommit, a last-ditch effort to change a bill by sending it back to the committee with mandatory instructions.
In this case, Republicans included a provision that would bar the federal government from paying the salaries of employees who've been disciplined for viewing pornography at work.
To proceed with the bill and bring it to a final vote, Democrats would have had to vote against the motion to recommit, and against the porn ban.
But they didn't have the stomach for it, and 121 Democrats jumped ship and voted with Republicans to kill the bill.
How can we hope to engage the average citizen with this kind of thing?
| 87 |
recusancy Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:57:02am |
re: #70 Dark_Falcon
And a desire to avoid another regulatory regime. I'd rather let the corporate assholes make the decisions on this one, rather than the government regulators.
So you're not one for civil liberties.
| 88 |
prairiefire Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:57:07am |
re: #11 Stanley Sea
[Link: www.huffingtonpost.com...]
Behind the scenes photos of the President etc. WH Photog Pete Souza.
Nice!
Those are great.
| 89 |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:57:08am |
re: #86 marjoriemoon
re: #79 BigPapa
From KT's article about Rep. Hall, the incoming Science and Technology Committee chair (???) is this link.
[Link: tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com...]
How can we hope to engage the average citizen with this kind of thing?
Well, yes, but was it leech or tsetse fly porn?
| 90 |
albusteve Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:57:40am |
re: #85 Fozzie Bear
Apparently. It's sad many people want the government to do things that reduce their freedoms, and want the government to stay uninvolved when companies want to do the same.
you don't seem to get it that most people have no clue about net neutrality...your forlorn sadness is misplaced...it's an interesting topic to only a few
| 91 |
What, me worry? Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:58:18am |
re: #80 EmmmieG
Why thanks.
Something about having other, necessary, boring things to do helps me to want to be here.
I hear ya. Hubby manages a liquor store so I won't see him tonight. I think I may wander the neighborhood in search of a party. I'll grab some booze and maybe some avocados from the tree...
| 92 |
What, me worry? Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:00:15pm |
re: #83 EmmmieG
We could try electing scientists, but most scientists have something to do, and also don't want their literal or figurative garbage picked through.
And they're political leanings. I think I read that most are liberals, but it's not supposed to matter in fact finding.
| 93 |
makeitstop Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:02:52pm |
In case I'm not around later, let me wish all you Lizards a very Happy New Year.
| 94 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:02:56pm |
re: #90 albusteve
you don't seem to get it that most people have no clue about net neutrality...your forlorn sadness is misplaced...it's an interesting topic to only a few
oh I think he's pretty aware that most people are unaware ;-)
| 95 |
recusancy Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:04:11pm |
re: #92 marjoriemoon
And they're political leanings. I think I read that most are liberals, but it's not supposed to matter in fact finding.
| 96 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:04:23pm |
re: #64 brookly red
fear of gubermint...
then why are they on the internet at all? The internet was a government initiative
I wonder if they fear roads, street signs, the fire department, and air traffic coltrollers
lol stupid people are great
| 97 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:05:17pm |
re: #70 Dark_Falcon
And a desire to avoid another regulatory regime. I'd rather let the corporate assholes make the decisions on this one, rather than the government regulators.
sorry dude you have no idea what you're talking about
| 98 |
albusteve Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:07:08pm |
re: #96 WindUpBird
then why are they on the internet at all? The internet was a government initiative
I wonder if they fear roads, street signs, the fire department, and air traffic coltrollers
lol stupid people are great
I think people are ignorant of the subject, not stupid
| 99 |
gamark Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:08:53pm |
re: #87 recusancy
Which civil liberty is at stake in the net neutrality issue?
| 100 |
recusancy Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:11:47pm |
re: #99 gamark
Which civil liberty is at stake in the net neutrality issue?
My ability to be treated equally on the internet super highway regardless of my views or business associations.
| 101 |
Fozzie Bear Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:14:37pm |
re: #99 gamark
Which civil liberty is at stake in the net neutrality issue?
[Link: arstechnica.com...]
[Link: news.cnet.com...]
Do you want to be able to choose the services you use as a consumer? Do you want private entities to be able to block your access to resources on the internet in order to stifle competition, or do you think that when you pay x dollars for y bandwidth, you should be able to use that bandwidth to access whatever sites on the internet you wish to access?
| 102 |
gamark Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:15:02pm |
re: #100 recusancy
I don't think any ISPs are talking about restricting your access to the internet based on your views or business associations. Could you point me to some evidence of this?
| 103 |
Dark_Falcon Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:16:35pm |
| 104 |
recusancy Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:18:46pm |
re: #102 gamark
I don't think any ISPs are talking about restricting your access to the internet based on your views or business associations. Could you point me to some evidence of this?
I run websites. They have views and business associations. I want to get to websites that have views and associations that may not agree with my ISP or the hosts ISP or any provider in between.
| 105 |
Fozzie Bear Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:20:15pm |
re: #102 gamark
I don't think any ISPs are talking about restricting your access to the internet based on your views or business associations. Could you point me to some evidence of this?
Mostly they just want to restrict your access to websites that compete with services they offer for profit. For instance, AT&T wants to block access to google voice, because they charge money for phone service. Comcast wants to be able to block skype for the same reason.
Both of these companies already charge a given amount for leasing a given bandwidth for a given period of time. Do you think they should be able to force you to only use their for-pay services on that connection, in addition to paying for the connection, or do you think you should be able to use whatever services you care to use with that connection? Do you think ISP's should be able to block the IP's of competitors, or no?
| 106 |
gamark Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:20:18pm |
re: #101 Fozzie Bear
I've stated before (in another thread) that I'm all for prohibiting ISPs from blocking access based on protocols or content. But many net neutrality supporters seem to have other issues in mind. I just don't get the civil liberty angle some people espouse.
| 107 |
Fozzie Bear Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:21:41pm |
re: #106 gamark
If you don't consider the freedom to be able to choose from whom you purchase services to be important, by all means, oppose net neutrality.
| 108 |
recusancy Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:21:57pm |
re: #106 gamark
I've stated before (in another thread) that I'm all for prohibiting ISPs from blocking access based on protocols or content. But many net neutrality supporters seem to have other issues in mind. I just don't get the civil liberty angle some people espouse.
What other issues do we have in mind?
| 109 |
What, me worry? Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:22:28pm |
re: #95 recusancy
The heading to that article is, "Most scientists in this country are Democrats. That's a problem."
Why is it a problem? I briefly read over the article and I think it's hogwash (I'm trying to be nice on the last day of the year).
How would a more politically diverse scientific community improve this situation? First, it could foster greater confidence among Republican politicians about the legitimacy of mainstream science. Second, it would cultivate more informed, creative, and challenging debates about the policy implications of scientific knowledge. This could help keep difficult problems like climate change from getting prematurely straitjacketed by ideology. A more politically diverse scientific community would, overall, support a healthier relationship between science and politics.
"Keep your politics off my science!" is going to be my new buzzword/sentence for 2011, I just decided.
Republicans doubt the legitimacy of mainstream science. REALLY? Are they morons? Did they graduate from high school? Does mainstream science include the *evils* of Darwinism (queue eerie organ music)?
Could this be the reason there aren't more Republicans in the science field? It's hard to process this level of stupidity.
| 110 |
recusancy Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:25:13pm |
| 111 |
Fozzie Bear Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:25:31pm |
re: #106 gamark
I've stated before (in another thread) that I'm all for prohibiting ISPs from blocking access based on protocols or content. But many net neutrality supporters seem to have other issues in mind. I just don't get the civil liberty angle some people espouse.
What other issies do you think net neutrality supporters have in mind?
| 112 |
gamark Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:28:50pm |
| 113 |
Amory Blaine Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:30:40pm |
The trend of legitimizing the propaganda is progressing quite nicely.
| 114 |
Fozzie Bear Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:30:51pm |
re: #112 gamark
Civil liberties.
Do you consider the freedom to purchase products and services from whomever you choose to purchase them to be a basic liberty? (And the corollary, the freedom to offer products and services to anyone who wishes to purchase them)
| 115 |
Fozzie Bear Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:32:43pm |
The irony of this is, net neutrality is about free markets, and the people opposing it seem to always be the same people who so loudly crow about free markets.
Either you are free to pay for and offer whatever products and services you want, or you aren't.
| 116 |
What, me worry? Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:35:14pm |
re: #113 Amory Blaine
The trend of legitimizing the propaganda is progressing quite nicely.
We've always been at war with Eastasia.
| 117 |
Amory Blaine Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:36:45pm |
re: #115 Fozzie Bear
The irony of this is, net neutrality is about free markets, and the people opposing it seem to always be the same people who so loudly crow about free markets.
Either you are free to pay for and offer whatever products and services you want, or you aren't.
The trends of traffic shaping and packet priority is the emerging business model. Providers, at least in areas I've been, have done little to upgrade their systems for a more robust and faster internet. Their goals have been to squeeze profits out of an aging infrastructure that they have irresponsibly neglected.
| 118 |
Fozzie Bear Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:44:51pm |
re: #117 Amory Blaine
The trends of traffic shaping and packet priority is the emerging business model. Providers, at least in areas I've been, have done little to upgrade their systems for a more robust and faster internet. Their goals have been to squeeze profits out of an aging infrastructure that they have irresponsibly neglected.
I think they should be able to charge whatever monetary rate per bandwidth used per time period that they choose. They just shouldn't be allowed to filter the packets, that's all.
Net neutraility boils down to whether you consider the internet to be a single thing which you can access through many different ISP's, or something that can be freely repackaged, sliced up, and branded as a"premium" service.
ISP's are utility providers, much like your phone company, or your electric company. They should be able to charge whatever rate that they choose for a given bandwidth. They should not be able to charge extra for access to services that they don't provide themselves, or block competing services outright.
| 119 |
gamark Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:48:29pm |
re: #114 Fozzie Bear
Do you consider the freedom to purchase products and services from whomever you choose to purchase them to be a basic liberty?
In general, the sellers have the freedom to refuse to sell to someone they don't want to. There are good and valid reasons to intervene in this freedom. Utilities operating as monopolies cannot be allowed to refuse to provide those utilities for arbitrary reasons. etc. etc.
I view ISPs somewhat like a common carrier. They can charge for and limit the bandwidth I use, but I don't want them to limit which protocol or content I send/receive over their pipe. In some markets where there are multiple choices for consumers, I don't see the need for net neutrality laws. But there are many places where the ISP is a de facto monopoly and fair and equal access most likely requires the force of law to achieve.
| 120 |
Dark_Falcon Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:48:55pm |
re: #117 Amory Blaine
The trends of traffic shaping and packet priority is the emerging business model. Providers, at least in areas I've been, have done little to upgrade their systems for a more robust and faster internet. Their goals have been to squeeze profits out of an aging infrastructure that they have irresponsibly neglected.
Upgrades are expensive and don't show profit results for years. Executives need to show profits next quarter or they get in trouble.
| 121 |
Fozzie Bear Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:50:11pm |
re: #120 Dark_Falcon
Upgrades are expensive and don't show profit results for years. Executives need to show profits next quarter or they get in trouble.
Which is exactly why they should operate in a well-regulated environment, so they are free to compete on an even playing field while engaging in productive and ethical practices.
| 122 |
Fozzie Bear Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:51:42pm |
re: #119 gamark
There is one choice for an ISP where I live, unless I want to go with satellite, or dial up. One choice.
If that company is allowed to filter content, then they are literally capable of cutting me off from areas of the internet completely.
| 123 |
Dark_Falcon Fri, Dec 31, 2010 12:55:48pm |
re: #121 Fozzie Bear
Which is exactly why they should operate in a well-regulated environment, so they are free to compete on an even playing field while engaging in productive and ethical practices.
Sorry, but I'm not fond of the idea of the government mandating upgrades and trying to direct which way companies go. So thanks but no thanks.
| 124 |
Fozzie Bear Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:01:28pm |
re: #123 Dark_Falcon
Sorry, but I'm not fond of the idea of the government mandating upgrades and trying to direct which way companies go. So thanks but no thanks.
Nobody who is crafting these policies is suggesting that upgrades be mandated. Not a single person. That has absolutely nothing to do with the concept of net neutrality. Where are you getting this stuff from, because this isn't something I have seen mentioned as any part of any proposed net neutrality regulations. Would you care to provide a link?
Nobody is suggesting that ISP's be required to increase the bandwidth they offer. People, like myself, just want to be able to access the entirety of the internet from any access point, at whatever speed that access point provides. I just want the bandwidth I pay for.
| 125 |
Fozzie Bear Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:03:36pm |
re: #123 Dark_Falcon
Sorry, but I'm not fond of the idea of the government mandating upgrades and trying to direct which way companies go. So thanks but no thanks.
Do you like the idea of companies mandating what websites you can and cannot use?
| 126 |
SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:05:05pm |
re: #3 Talking Point Detective
Why wait?
[Link: thinkprogress.org...]
I recall something about that last year. It's not entirely apropos, but every time this comes up, the "Cross of Gold" speech starts thundering through my head.
| 127 |
SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:06:46pm |
re: #15 albusteve
if they defund research into the sexual behavior of leeches, I'm good with it...even science can be trimmed out sometimes...wait and see
I'd just like the cuts to be made by people who know what the research implications are, rather than pointing and saying "That sounds stupid to me, defund it."
| 128 |
SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:10:15pm |
re: #19 Lawrence Schmerel
Is it true that Saddam Hussein had the most significant role in promoting fictions about Iraq’s WMD capabilities?
Probably. Dude psyched us out so bad we invaded the damn country.
| 129 |
SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:10:45pm |
re: #20 Stanley Sea
Sexual behavior of leeches. My mind is reeling.
They still use leeches in medicine, don't they?
| 130 |
SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:11:15pm |
re: #22 Killgore Trout
I know it's hard to convince people that are scientifically illiterate that studies like that can be important. It doesn't help when ignorant and dishonest politicians use their anti-science for political gain while harming our future. Remember Sarah Palin and the fruit flies?
Or Jindal vs. The Volcano Scientists.
| 131 |
SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:13:14pm |
re: #24 marjoriemoon
re: #13 wrenchwench
With all those "family values" voters, you would think they would at least praise him for obvious love he has for his family, but I guess that's asking too much.
The aggressively partisan simply don't like giving their opponent credit for much of anything.
Now, McCain, who's never been aggressively 'family values', called Obama a 'good family man'.
| 132 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:15:01pm |
re: #125 Fozzie Bear
Do you like the idea of companies mandating what websites you can and cannot use?
dude doesn't know what he's talking about *shrug*
| 133 |
SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:15:36pm |
re: #41 EmmmieG
I think it's the responsibility of the parental-type tsetse flies. We need (supervised) midnight basketball for the tsetse flies so they have something else to do.
Since tsetse flies can fly, maybe they could play Quidditch instead.
| 134 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:15:54pm |
re: #121 Fozzie Bear
Which is exactly why they should operate in a well-regulated environment, so they are free to compete on an even playing field while engaging in productive and ethical practices.
Level playing field? Why that's COM-MEW-NIZZM
man, next you'll tell me the gubment breaks up monopolies
what kinda pinko crap is that
| 135 |
SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:15:57pm |
| 136 |
SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:16:47pm |
re: #45 Decatur Deb
Tsetse flies were a big part of kid folklore in the 50s. Flies=sleeping sickness, one of those thing like leprosy and army ants that figured in our retellings.
In the 80s we had acid rain, and spider eggs in Bubble Yum, also crazy people who poisoned Halloween candy.
| 137 |
SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:18:29pm |
re: #70 Dark_Falcon
And a desire to avoid another regulatory regime. I'd rather let the corporate assholes make the decisions on this one, rather than the government regulators.
Not sure I agree, but doesn't need three down-dings.
| 138 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:18:30pm |
re: #124 Fozzie Bear
Nobody who is crafting these policies is suggesting that upgrades be mandated. Not a single person. That has absolutely nothing to do with the concept of net neutrality. Where are you getting this stuff from, because this isn't something I have seen mentioned as any part of any proposed net neutrality regulations. Would you care to provide a link?
Nobody is suggesting that ISP's be required to increase the bandwidth they offer. People, like myself, just want to be able to access the entirety of the internet from any access point, at whatever speed that access point provides. I just want the bandwidth I pay for.
It's times like this where...aw fuck it :D
| 139 |
SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:19:02pm |
re: #77 EmmmieG
21% support
10% work for comcast
15% Bristol Palin was robbed
38% Beef stroganoff, but without the house salad
16% COWBOYS!!! COWBOYS!!!
What about Ron Paul?
| 140 |
SanFranciscoZionist Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:20:46pm |
re: #109 marjoriemoon
The heading to that article is, "Most scientists in this country are Democrats. That's a problem."
Why is it a problem? I briefly read over the article and I think it's hogwash (I'm trying to be nice on the last day of the year).
"Keep your politics off my science!" is going to be my new buzzword/sentence for 2011, I just decided.Republicans doubt the legitimacy of mainstream science. REALLY? Are they morons? Did they graduate from high school? Does mainstream science include the *evils* of Darwinism (queue eerie organ music)?
Could this be the reason there aren't more Republicans in the science field? It's hard to process this level of stupidity.
So, why aren't more scientists Republicans, or more Republicans scientists? Does this have to do with who goes into the sciences, or do the sciences form the voting tendencies?
| 141 |
Fozzie Bear Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:22:00pm |
Only in America could the principle of being able to use bandwidth you pay for in any legal way you choose to do so be successfully framed in the public eye as a loss of freedom.
| 142 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:24:48pm |
re: #137 SanFranciscoZionist
Not sure I agree, but doesn't need three down-dings.
I feel very very strongly about net neutrality, it's sort of important to my continued ability to pay rent, and that of my employers, clients, and friends
A free and neutral internet= creativity, innovation, advancement, culture
closed internet run by comcast and phone gatekeepers = eventually, just another cable TV channel with more surface interactivity. More bad entertainment for the masses. Stifling innovation and evolution. If we don't have a neutral internet, and the gatekeepers decree that their privileged internet must be ten or 100 times faster than the schmoes, where will people go? There'll be digital haves and have nots. Highways for comcast, back roads riddled with sinkholes for anyone who's not part of the club. LIke distributing books and music in terrestrial stores. You pay a fortune to get the prime shelfspace.
Also, the laugable idea that we don't already regulate the hell out of all communications. cellular signals, radio bands used for bluetooth, for AM radio, FM radio, 900mhz wireless, all of it. We regulate it all.
basically, I downding wanton kneejerk ignorance on subjects that I care a lot about.
| 143 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:25:52pm |
re: #141 Fozzie Bear
Only in America could the principle of being able to use bandwidth you pay for in any legal way you choose to do so be successfully framed in the public eye as a loss of freedom.
Sometimes you just have to shrug and have another drink!
Man, I sure hope I have the freedom to have my information chosen for me by Comcast! Thanks guys!
| 144 |
WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:27:24pm |
For those who , like, want to learn about this subject, the Electronic Frontier Foundation is a good start
| 145 |
(I Stand By What I Said Whatever It Was) Fri, Dec 31, 2010 1:28:31pm |
re: #140 SanFranciscoZionist
So, why aren't more scientists Republicans, or more Republicans scientists? Does this have to do with who goes into the sciences, or do the sciences form the voting tendencies?
Could have to do with the religious angle.
Gateway Pundit, Sued by Election Workers, Declares BankruptcyA onetime favorite, now just pathetic figure around these parts, Jim Hoft aka SMOTI ("Stupidest Man On The Internet"), has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in response to the defamation lawsuits filed against him to the same election workers that ...
Khal Wimpo (free internal organs upon request!)
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ...
Cheechako
Once Praised, the Settlement to Help Sickened BP Oil Spill Workers Leaves Most With Nearly Nothing When a deadly explosion destroyed BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, 134 million gallons of crude erupted into the sea over the next three months — and tens of thousands of ordinary people were hired ... Cheechako
Alone in a Bathroom: The Fear and Uncertainty of a Post-Roe Medication Abortion Angel tucked two white pills into each side of her mouth, bracing herself as they began to dissolve. Her deepest fears and anxieties took over. Angel had wanted to talk to a doctor before she took the pills to ... Cheechako
They Were Desperate to Get Pregnant. Then IVF Gave Them Extra Embryos. One morning last spring, Ashley Harrolle put her 1-year-old daughter down for a nap and went to the kitchen. She pulled up her fertility clinic’s contact information. It was time to make the call. In a freezer several hundred ... CheechakoJoe Bacon ✅
Best of April 2024 Nothing new here but these are a look back at the a few good images from the past month. Despite the weather, I was quite pleased with several of them. These were taken with older lenses (made from the ...
William Lewis
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ... Cheechako
