Monday, January 26, 2015
Sunday, January 25, 2015
Posted from Little Rock Arkansas on Craig's List - Stupid colored people - 25 (The Getto)
I hate you stupid apes and your nasty getto lifestyle. I know this might be hard to take but you people are nasty and act like animals.
Your women stink like rotten shit.
I watched the new planet of the apes the other night and man that was eerily similar to furgusion. I have tried to be civil my whole life but fuck it. Believe me there is a movement growing of white people like me that have enough of your ape shit.
We are tired of your attitudes and your constant white bashing. You will never be the superior race cause your all too stupid to do anything but drag you knuckles and knock up your fat "Diva" BBW stinky pussy bitch.
I worked hard to get the things I have and the last crackhead chimp that tried to rob me got two 9 mm bullets in his chest. All I hear now from you people is "race war" well ok let's do it and see how it ends. Go ahead and chimp out.
I have never seen such ignorance in any culture like I have in American chimps. I swear a black man could rob a bank holding his ID to the camera and be caught leaving the bank with the money in his hand and still he would swear it wasn't him.
I watch cops all the time and I swear to god you chimps are so fuckin stupid. you get caught red handed and still swear it wasn't you. You are a pathetic breed of no good lazy animals that leech off the whites.
And your stupid "e bonics" every time I hear you chimps talk I have to Google half your words up and no iam not 80 iam 25. I am pretty sure in about 20 years you will sound just like actual chimps ooh ooh ahh ahh. Good luck living your getto lives.
I am sitting in my living room in my beautiful house behind a closed gate with the rest of my white neighbors while you live in filth. Peace....
WHITE DEVIL
re:whites
Thursday, January 22, 2015
John Boehner's outrageous plan to help a foreign leader undermine Obama
John Boehner's outrageous plan to help a foreign leader undermine Obama
Updated by Max Fisher
House Speaker John Boehner has invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak to a joint session of Congress in February, on the topic of Iran. On the surface, this might seem innocent enough. Israel is a close American ally. Surely he should be welcome in Congress, particularly to discuss an issue that concerns his country.
On the surface, Netanyahu's speech will be about opposing Obama's nuclear talks with Iran and supporting Republican-led sanctions meant to blow up those talks.
But there's more than meets the eye here. Netanyahu is playing a game with US domestic politics to try to undermine and pressure Obama — and thus steer US foreign policy. Boehner wants to help him out. By reaching out to Netanyahu directly and setting up a visit without the knowledge of the White House, he is undermining not just Obama's policies but his very leadership of US foreign policy. The fact that Netanyahu is once again meddling in American politics, and that a US political party is siding with a foreign country over their own president, is extremely unusual, and a major break with the way that foreign relations usually work.
Throughout Obama's tenure, he has clashed with Netanyahu. That is no secret, and it's nothing new for American and Israeli leaders to disagree, sometimes very publicly. But Netanyahu, beginning in May 2011, adopted a new strategy to try to deal with this: using domestic American politics as a way to try to push around Obama.
During a trip that month to Washington, Netanyahu publicly lectured Obama at a press conference and then gave a speech to Congress slamming the president. That speech, also hosted by Republicans, received many standing ovations for Netanyahu's finger-wagging criticism of Obama.
At first it appeared that Netanyahu was merely trying to steer Obama's foreign policy in a direction that he, Netanyahu, preferred. Obama wanted Netanyahu to freeze Israeli settlement growth in the West Bank, for example; Obama has also sought, in his second term, to reach a nuclear deal with Iran that Netanyahu earnestly believes is a bad idea.
Netanyahu's first responsibility is to Israel's national interests, not to Obama, so it makes sense that he would push for policies that he thinks are good for Israel.
But in 2011 Netanyahu started going a step further, and appeared to be working to actively remove Obama from power. During the 2012 election cycle, Netanyahu and his government were increasingly critical of Obama and supportive of Republicans, including presidential candidate Mitt Romney, for whom he at times appeared to be actively campaigning. Netanyahu's criticisms of Obama were so pointed that some of Obama's opponents cut a campaign ad out of them. It became a joke within Israel that Netanyahu saw himself not as the leader of a sovereign country, but as the Republican senator from Israel.
But trying to unseat a foreign leader is not a joke, especially when that foreign leader is funding your military and guaranteeing your nation's security.
Netanyahu's government ramped down this strategy after Obama won; he even gave Obama the world's most awkward congratulations speech. But throughout Obama's second term he has once again gradually escalated from trying to influence Obama to actively undermining both the president and his party. The new Israeli ambassador to the US for months would not even bother to meet with National Security Advisor Susan Rice, yet held many meetings with Republican fundraiser Sheldon Adelson. Israel's foreign policy, in other words, was more focused on undermining the American leadership than working with it.
America’s Most Hated Companies
America’s Most Hated Companies
CUSTOMER SERVICE, EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION AND SHARE PRICE PERFORMANCE CONSIDERED
To be truly hated, a company must alienate a large number of people. It may irritate consumers with bad customer service, upset employees by paying low wages, and disappoint Wall Street with underwhelming returns. For a small number of companies, such failures are intertwined. These companies managed to antagonize more than just one group and have become widely disliked.
The most hated companies have millions of customers. With such a large customer base, it is critical to keep employees happy in order to promote high-quality customer service. Poor job satisfaction among employees can lead to unsatisfied customers. McDonald’s and Walmart have risked alienating workers, and therefore also customers, by not adequately addressing protests against their employees’ low wages. While pay may be low enough to put some workers below the poverty line, executives at these companies often make millions. The total compensation of McDonald’s CEO Donald Thompson, for example, was nearly $9.5 million in 2013 and nearly $13.8 million in 2012.
Layoffs, or even the prospect of layoffs, can also contribute to low employee morale. Sprint announced it would cut 2,000 jobs late last year. Workers at Comcast can reasonably expect layoffs should its planned merger with Time Warner Cable receives government approval.
Many of the most hated companies angered the public because of quality issues with their products.. Comcast has long been one of the worst companies in America in terms of customer service and satisfaction. Another example is the General Motors recall scandal. GM announced a recall in early 2014 due to faulty ignition switches in a number of its cars, now believed to have cost 42 people their lives. The company’s problems were compounded by the realization that it had known about the defect for over a decade.
Nothing harms the long-term reputation of a company in the eyes of investors more than a steep drop in its share price. In the past 12 months, shares of Sprint have fallen by more than 50%, as hopes for a tie-up with rival T-Mobile were dashed while the company had little success in retaining customers.
It is worth noting that some of the companies on the list may have performed very poorly by some measures but relatively well by others. A few of the most hated companies have had good stock performances. Others have relatively satisfied customers. All of these factors were taken into account in compiling the final list.
Several companies from last year list have improved their public perceptions enough to be removed from this year’s list. For example, J.C. Penney is in the midst of a modest turnaround. Abercrombie & Fitch’s controversial long-time CEO Michael Jeffries resigned last December. However, the retailer still has problems attracting teenage customers.
To identify the most hated companies in America, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed a variety of metrics on customer service, employee satisfaction, and share price performance. We considered consumer surveys from a number of sources, including the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) and Zogby Analytics. We also included employee satisfaction based on worker opinion scores recorded by Glassdoor.com. Finally, we reviewed management decisions and company policies that hurt a company’s public perception.
Click ahead for America’s five most hated companies, and then visit 24/7 Wall St. for the complete list.
Tuesday, January 20, 2015
Sunday, January 18, 2015
Welcome to Mitt 3.0: The Mitt who cares
REINVENTION
01.17.15
Mitt Flips On The Very Poor
Nearly three years after he famously said he was “not concerned about the very poor,” former presidential nominee Mitt Romney told Republicans in a speech Friday night the party must focus on helping “lift people out of poverty.”
Welcome to Mitt 3.0: The Mitt who cares.
His comments on the very poor—not to mention the 47 percent—may have played a major role in his 2012 loss, but don’t tell that to Romney. The issue is now among the hottest debates in politics—and he seems determined to be part of that conversation.
Of the three topics the Romney stressed in his brief address to the Republican National Committee's winter meeting—during which he also confirmed he was thinking about a third campaign for president—two had to do with the less fortunate.
“First, we have to make the world safer,” Romney said. “Second, we have to make sure and provide opportunity for all Americans regardless of the neighborhood they live in. And finally, we have to lift people out of poverty. If we communicate those three things effectively, the American people are going to be with us—be with our nominee and with our candidates across the country.”
But why the change of tone?
Over the past three years, the issue has changed in ways that favor a more progressive approach. The poverty rate has actually gone down since Mitt 2.0—the economy fixer—lost the race in 2012.
According to U.S. Census Bureau data, the official poverty rate went from 15 percent in 2012 to 14.5 percent in 2013. The last time the poverty rate dipped below 15 percent was in 2006. That’s not to say things have gotten markedly better, the number of people in poverty—45.3 million—has remained statistically the same.
This problem is hardly a new issue. The poverty rate was on the rise in 2007, when Romney first ran for president as Mitt 1.0—the Conservative. But even though it spiked from 12.5 percent in 2007 to 13.2 percent in 2008, only then-Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) chose to make the issue a centerpiece of his campaign.
“First, we have to make the world safer. Second, we have to make sure and provide opportunity for all Americans regardless of the neighborhood they live in. And finally, we have to lift people out of poverty.”
But one thing that has changed is public opinion on the issue. Recent polling shows a more compassionate country when it comes to the poor. A June 2014 NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showed fewer people blamed the poor for their financial situation. When asked “which is the bigger cause of poverty today?”, 46 percent of those polled attributed poverty to “circumstances beyond people’s control” as opposed to 44 percent who blamed “people not doing enough.” In 1995, 60 percent blamed “people not doing enough” for their poverty, while 30 percent blamed “circumstances beyond people’s control.”
Back in 2012, it wasn’t as if the Romney campaign completely ignored the poor—poverty was a key issue for his then-running mate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.). Romney, himself, routinely talked of the rising number of people on food stamps and other government programs as evidence President Obama’s economic policies weren’t working.
But it was what he said behind closed-doors that caused any poverty message he tried to ring hollow. His campaign was never able to shake his comments about the 47 percent of Americans who don’t pay income tax made during a Florida fundraiser.
“There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them,” Romney told a group of donors during a closed door meeting. “These are people who pay no income tax. ... My job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."
When a recording of his remarks leaked, it became a public relations disaster for Romney, solidifying the image of him as an out of touch millionaire in the minds of voters. Even after he lost the 2012 race, Romney doubled down during a call with donors, blaming the Obama administration for giving special interest groups—like African Americans, Hispanics and young people—“gifts” to get their vote,according to the New York Times.
“In each case, they were very generous in what they gave to those groups,” Romney said, according to the Times.
He blamed the so-called gifts for overshadowing his campaign about “big issues for the whole country: military strategy, foreign policy, a strong economy, creating jobs and so forth.”
With wages stuck in neutral for many, poverty and income inequality will likely be a major issue of the 2016 campaign. But Republicans have to think—is Mitt the guy they want talking about it?
Thursday, January 15, 2015
The Daily Digg Thursday, January 15, 2015
Tuesday, January 13, 2015
The Power To Kill - When Police Records are not kept in America
MEMPHIS TN (IFS) --
Congressman Cohen Bill Would Prevent Police Abuses from Being Swept Under the Rug
Jan 13, 2015
Congressman will also introduce legislation requiring police shootings to be prosecuted by independent agency
[WASHINGTON, DC] – Congressman Steve Cohen (TN-09) today reintroduced his National Statistics on Deadly Force Transparency Act, which would close a loophole in federal law that prevents adequate collection of comprehensive national data regarding justified and unjustified fatal interactions with police. Without accurate and comprehensive data, racial disparities, abuses, and instances of excessive use of force are difficult to identify and unlikely to be fixed.
“Before we can truly address the problem of excessive force used by law enforcement we have to understand the nature of the problem and that begins with accurate data,”said Congressman Cohen. “I am introducing this bill so that our country can do a better job of honestly assessing racial disparities and other problems in our justice system and begin to fix them. It is a step in the right direction and a critical component of the healing process.”
The 1994 Crime Bill requires the Attorney General to collect statistics on the use of excessive force, but the law does not provide any enforcement mechanism nor does it adequately define what “excessive force” is. As a result, the federal government has been unable to gather data from many local police departments and there are no reliable statistics on how often law enforcement uses deadly force. Congressman Cohen’s legislation would incentivize states to require local law enforcement agencies to provide data to the Attorney General on:
- The date of each instance when deadly force was used;
- The identifying characteristics of the victim and officer involved, including the race, gender, ethnicity, religion and approximate age of the victim;
- Any alleged criminal behavior by the victim;
- An explanation, if any, by the relevant law enforcement agency of why deadly force was used;
- A copy of any use of deadly force guidelines in effect at the time at the law enforcement agency;
- The nature of the deadly force used, including whether it involved a firearm; and
- A description of any non-lethal efforts that were taken before deadly force was used.
This data would be made publicly available, but would not disclose any personally identifying information. Congressman Cohen also plans to introduce legislation this year that would require incidents of deadly force used by police to be investigated and, if need be, prosecuted, by an independent actor. Currently, these cases are rarely prosecuted effectively due to an obvious conflict of interest between local police and the prosecuting District Attorney, who relies on a close working relationship with those same police officers to carry out other prosecutorial duties.
Thursday, January 08, 2015
The most wanted men in France
2 brothers now the most wanted men in France, sought in lethal attack on Paris newspaper
- Article by: JOHN-THOR DAHLBURG , Associated Press
- Updated: January 8, 2015 - 2:26 PM
resize text
- buy reprints
PARIS — A lover of rap music turned aspiring Muslim holy warrior and his older brother are suddenly the most wanted men in France, suspected of the armed onslaught on a newspaper office that claimed a dozen lives and horrified most of the world.
Cherif Kouachi, 32, and Said Kouachi, 34, were the targets of a mammoth manhunt following Wednesday's slayings at the Paris offices of the satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo.
The younger Kouachi, a former pizza deliveryman, had been sentenced to 18 months of prison in 2008 after trying to leave France to join Islamist fighters battling in Iraq.
After he was released he worked in the fish market of a supermarket in the Paris suburbs for six months beginning in October 2009, but supervisors said he gave no cause for concern.
Two years after the conviction, police again detained him, but later released him without charge, in a probe of an alleged plot to free from prison a man who was convicted of bombing a Paris train line in 1995, a French judicial official said.
Associated Press reporters who covered the 2008 trial, which exposed a recruiting pipeline for Muslim holy war in a rough multiethnic and working-class neighborhood of northeastern Paris, recalled a skinny young defendant who appeared very nervous in court.
Cherif Kouachi's lawyer said at the time his client had gotten in over his head with the wrong crowd.
During the trial, Kouachi was said to have undergone only minimal training for combat — going jogging in a Paris park to shape up and learning how a Kalashnikov automatic rifle works by studying a sketch. He was described at the time as a reluctant holy warrior, relieved to have been stopped by French counterespionage officials from taking a Syria-bound flight that was ultimately supposed to lead him into the battlefields of Iraq.
But imprisonment changed his former client, attorney Vincent Ollivier told Le Parisien newspaper in a story published Thursday. Cherif Kouachi became closed-off and unresponsive and started growing a beard, the lawyer said, adding that he wondered whether time in prison may have turned his client into a ticking time bomb.
However, a French television documentary that portrayed Kouachi's abortive attempt to fight in Iraq suggested his radicalization may have occurred well before he was locked up behind bars. Many French Muslims were infuriated by the 2003 U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq, the program said, and by the negative consequences for Iraqis, ranging from the death of civilians to the abuse of detainees by American captors.
Footage included in the 2005 documentary, part of a prestigious French public television series titled "Evidence for the Prosecution," showed Kouachi in 2004, when, according to the narrator, the young man in a black T-shirt with extremely close-cropped hair and a chunky wristwatch was more interested in pretty girls than going to the mosque. He appears relaxed and smiling as he pals around with friends.
At one point, with a baseball cap turned backward on his head, Kouachi belts out some rap music and breaks into a joyful dance.
It was the teachings of a radical Muslim preacher in his Paris neighborhood, Kouachi is quoted as saying in the documentary, that put him on the path to jihad.
The cleric "told me that (holy) texts prove the benefits of suicide attacks," Kouachi is quoted as saying. "It's written in the texts that it's good to die as a martyr."
Less is known publicly about Said Kouachi, the older brother, but French Prime Minister Manuel Valls told French radio Thursday that both were known to intelligence services and were likely being followed before the Charlie Hebdo attack.
A third suspect identified by French authorities in the Paris newspaper attack that killed 12 people and wounded 11 others has turned himself in. Mourad Hamyd, 18, surrendered at a police station after learning his name was linked to the attacks in the news, Paris prosecutor spokeswoman Agnes Thibault-Lecuivre said, but she did not specify his relationship to the Kouachi brothers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)