Most embarrassing of all was what MSNBC did. You just have to watch this report from its “intelligence and national security correspondent” Ken Dilanian to believe it. Like CBS, Dilanian also claimed that he independently “confirmed” the false CNN report from “two sources with direct knowledge of this.” Dilanian, whose career in the U.S. media continues to flourish the more he is exposed as someone who faithfully parrots what the CIA tells him to say (since that is one of the most coveted and valued attributes in US journalism), spent three minutes mixing evidence-free CIA claims as fact with totally false assertions about what his multiple “sources with direct knowledge” told him about all this.
Via Zero Hedge
And yes, they do admit it, but what are you gonna do? Leave?
You can’t. Because in most places, Comcast is your only option.
Why? Because government regulates who can be an ISP.
So as every dummy rushes to “break the internet” tomorrow in support of the lie that is Net Neutrality, understand the real problem is government-caused in the first place.
Former President Barack Obama has come under criticism after a series of videos showing men and women being sold in a renewed slave trade have gone viral in recent weeks.
Some critics have begun questioning how much the Obama administration contributed to the problem with its 2011 intervention in Libya. Obama has acknowledged the issue before, calling it the “worst mistake” of his presidency.
But as videos showing humans being sold into slavery shocks people around the world, the scrutiny has been renewed.
Well, in fairness, it wasn’t all Barack Obama’s idea. President-in-Waiting Hillary Clinton wanted it also and probably talked him into it.
Because, you know, you only get freedom by bombing, destabilizing, and enabling slavery.
Thus, by applying that principle, the wedding-cake controversy disintegrates. Bakers have the right to bake a cake for whomever they want and for whatever reason they want. It might well be that they hate blacks, Jews, immigrants, and poor people. Motive doesn’t matter. What matters is that under principles of liberty and private property, private business owners have as much right to discriminate as private homeowners.
By the same token, consumers have the right to boycott the business that is discriminating against others and to advocate that other people boycott it as well. That’s how the free market deals with businesses that people perceive are wrongfully discriminating against others. It nudges them to change their position through loss of sales revenues rather than force them to do so with the power of a government gun.
The problem, however, is that long ago the U.S. Supreme Court held that when people open their businesses to the public, everything changes. The Court held that when business owners do that, they subject themselves to governmental control, including state anti-discrimination laws.
But that’s ridiculous. Why should the fact that a person is selling privately owned things to others cause the principles of liberty and private property to be compromised or abandoned? Why shouldn’t the business owner still be free to discriminate in determining who enters his privately owned business and to whom he sells his private property?
By abandoning those principles of liberty and private property, it has naturally left lawyers vexed on how to resolve the wedding-cake dispute. It has left them relying on the First Amendment to come up with entirely subjective and arbitrary conclusions that have no consistent underlying legal principle undergirding them.
However, my main advice to the young men at the conference was more personal—live your life in a way that women know you are one of the good guys. Be respectful. Be professional. We discussed concrete ideas for ways to be supporters, such as being aware of what is going on around you, especially at events where alcohol is served, and we discussed scenarios they might encounter in a work situation, such as a female co-worker being pestered at a conference. (This particular one happened to me often back in the day.) We talked about ways to intervene without being overbearing—mingle your way into the conversation so she can easily brush the guy off if she wants to—and after reading many of the #MeToo accounts, I would also add—help her watch her drink. We need to have more conversations like these. Men want to help us, and we need to start talking about ways they can do that.
Ending the tacit categorization of all men as potential predators probably wouldn’t do a lot of harm either.
This is fascinating stuff; you can’t get a more closely comparable genetic makeup than identical twins. If sexual orientation is, in fact, genetic, then this might be the key to figuring out how it manifests itself in DNA.
A lesbian twin and her straight sister have been studied by scientists who are searching for answers about human sexuality.
Researchers hoping to identify genetic and environmental factors associated with sexuality hit the jackpot when they discovered identical twins Sarah Nunn, who is attracted to men, and Rosie Albewhite, who is attracted to women.
The 29-year-old sisters were investigated by scientists as part of a study aiming to learn more about how sexuality develops in childhood.
Of course I’ve always said this might end badly, as well, because once parents can determine a genetic predisposition toward homosexuality they might just decide to not have the child at all.