There’s going to be a press conference at 1pm at the federal building in Seattle to discuss “Operation Green Reaper.” Can someone from the media please ask them whether the “green” in the operation name is supposed to refer to the pot plants they found or to the taxpayer money that was wasted?
Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?
Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!
Hmmmm,in response to some macho strutting by Mike Fancher, Editor at Large, at The Seattle Times over how they moderate their blog comments, I posted a comment yesterday criticizing the Times for the appearance of censorship in moderating it’s blog comments and maintaining a second rate website and, after eighteen hours, my comment has not appeared ; apparently it has been censored.
http://tinyurl.com/5nl58z
@1
On that note, this is an open thread. Show the Seattle Times what an open forum is all about… :)
If as Mike Fancher writes “The Times doesn’t allow inflammatory or objectionable comments, comments that are off-topic, personal attacks or obscene language.” it isn’t difficult to suspect them of not allowing comments critical of Saint Paul, for instance, or other members of the wealthy elite who run this town or comments criticizing their grand schemes for which we the taxpayers pay and they profit.
The Seattle Times still has a good deal of ability to influence matters here in Seattle, but their best days are behind them.
I wonder how this relates to the story in today’s PI “Seattle tops nation in Green buildings”
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.....137196.asp
Did anyone click on the link to the Slog story and look at the map???
Correct me if I’m wrong, but it appears that THE greatest concentration of pot busts are occuring in the bible-thumpin’, conservative christian RED states.
Hmmmmmm . . . seems like those good ol’ boys like more than just moonshine. Makes ya kinda wonder what other practices they’re engaging in but hiding in the “closet.”
I think they should just legalize the green stuff and tax the hell outta it like alcohol and cigarettes!
“……..Makes ya kinda wonder what other practices they’re engaging in but hiding in the closet.”
Not really, but I’m sure you’ll tell us once you do find out.
Even if does smack of intolerance.
The US has 5% of the worlds population but 25% of the worlds prisoners. We are one of the few countries in the world that locks people up for non-violent crimes. In 1980 there were 40,000 people locked up for drug offenses, today there are over half a million.
Green eggs and ham Sam I am @ 8:
You’re right maybe it doesn’t make us wonder what else they’re doing in those “deep, backwoods.”
It doesn’t smack of intolerance as much as it does
deliveranceI mean hypocricy. You know,public restroom stallsouthouses and all.#9. ewp spews:
From 1981 to 1996, according to Justice Department statistics, the risk of punishment rose in the United States and fell in England. The crime rates predictably moved in the opposite directions, falling in the United States and rising in England.
“These figures,” Mr. Cassell wrote, “should give one pause before too quickly concluding that European sentences are appropriate.”
Other commentators were more definitive. “The simple truth is that imprisonment works,” wrote Kent Scheidegger and Michael Rushford of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation in The Stanford Law and Policy Review. “Locking up criminals for longer periods reduces the level of crime. The benefits of doing so far offset the costs.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04.....oref=login
What’s your point? That you are against incarcerating criminals because it makes the streets safer?
(my link is the same as the one he quoted)
#9. ewp spews:
The US has 5% of the worlds population but 25% of the worlds prisoners. We are one of the few countries in the world that locks people up for non-violent crimes. In 1980 there were 40,000 people locked up for drug offenses, today there are over half a million.
From 1981 to 1996, according to Justice Department statistics, the risk of punishment rose in the United States and fell in England. The crime rates predictably moved in the opposite directions, falling in the United States and rising in England.
“These figures,” Mr. Cassell wrote, “should give one pause before too quickly concluding that European sentences are appropriate.”
Other commentators were more definitive. “The simple truth is that imprisonment works,” wrote Kent Scheidegger and Michael Rushford of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation in The Stanford Law and Policy Review. “Locking up criminals for longer periods reduces the level of crime. The benefits of doing so far offset the costs.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04.....oref=login
What’s your point? That you are against incarcerating criminals because it makes the streets safer?
[my link is the same article ewp quoted)
@11
Marvin,
All you have to do is look at the crime rates from 1996 to now to know that that study has already been thoroughly discredited. We kept imprisoning people, but the crime rate started going up again. In the early 90s, crime rates went way down in this country. Now they’re going up. Our rate of imprisonment was increasing during both of those trends. How many people we put in jail is only a small factor in the overall crime rate (usually an indirect one).
“What’s your point? That you are against incarcerating criminals because it makes the streets safer?”
So, let’s pass a law that makes it a crime to be a member of the Republican Party. We’ll incarcerate all those people, and, by mere virtue of the fact that these people are incarcerated, overall crime rates will drop. Sound like a good idea to you?
The issue isn’t sentencing (which is what Mr. Cassell was addressing), but the nature of the offenses that we choose to regard as crimes.
8:
Not intolerance, but exposure of hypocrisy. Nobody’s perfect, Sam. But ya gotta love the irony.
@10 You libs are the ones who love fags, so
why aren’t you embracing the toe tapping
adventures of the esteemed Senator?
@11 during the period between 1981 and 1995 the average temperature of the earth warmed by 2 degrees F. So it must mean that global warming will reduce crime.
@16
Wow. Why is it that so many stupid people in these comment threads are named Mark? How does that happen?
16th Mark, hardly think of the guy. Other than his hypocracy. As a type.