The Daily Breakdown - 11.22.08

Interesting read, checking out Kerry Picket's post on NewsBusters.org on President-elect Obama's attorney general pick, Eric Holder. Holder, a former deputy AG during the Clinton administration, made the following remark after learning the Columbine High School shooters had learned bomb-making skills online: "The court has really struck down every government effort to try to regulate it. We tried with regard to pornography. It is gonna be a difficult thing, but it seems to me that if we can come up with reasonable restrictions, reasonable regulations in how people interact on the Internet, that is something that the Supreme Court and the courts ought to favorably look at."

Intriguing and a little unsettling. For a President-elect who used the Internet more effectively than any other political candidate since its integration into the mainstream, and more to the point supports net neutrality, this seems a little contradictory. Additionally, Holder has advocated for a federal hate crimes law, nothing wrong at all with that, but throw in an unfortunate "Sarah Palin" like moment, when asked in 1998 to name specific cases where states had not prosecuted hate crimes while testifying before Congress, he couldn't do it. Couldn't name one. Later, Holder did send written answers to Sen. Arlen Specter, listing three such cases, but the only problem was the defendants had all been acquitted in federal prosecutions.

I have sat back, waiting to see what the Obama administration accomplishes first before making any real comments about the fact it is shaping up to be a new administration with the entire Clinton White House staff on board, but I can't say I'm now overly impressed with this pick for Attorney General. I think the public is due an answer as to whether or not Eric Holder is going to tackle more pressing matters of law, or simply pick up an illogical crusade against the Internet. Time will tell, I guess...

You just have to love a country where a person can pretty much file a lawsuit for any damn reason, no matter how absolutely fucking asinine the reason. The case, set to be heard in a Collier County, Florida court, centers around a woman who was unsatisfied with the remedies to her, ahem, "problems" provided by Doris Palm & Card Reading. Eumanthe Dufrene, of Naples, Florida, said she was promised a money-back guarantee if she wasn't happy, but thus far has not received satisfaction, psychic or otherwise. The $13,200 paid out was to battle the forces of "evil," as well as "grave calamities," which were around Dufrene's family members. Yeah, while it would be more than fair to call me a skeptic, going beyond that, who the hell believes they are going to get a money-back guarantee from a freakin' palm reader. What lawyer, outside of those who practice from strip malls, takes cases like this? Theft? I don't think so, lady. You paid for these services. Deceptive trade practices? Maybe if you got something in writing on the money-back guarantee. Fraud? Lady, you went to a fucking psychic. Makes me wonder if the palm reader can countersue for legal costs in defending herself from someone that utterly fucking stupid to begin with. While I'm no master of predictions, or any of that other crystal ball bullshit, allow me to predict one of two things: either this is going to get tossed out for the waste of the court's time and taxpayer's money that it is, or Dufrene's lawsuit will ultimately be the fail it is at face value. And no, ladies and gentlemen, I do NOT offer a money-back guarantee on my prognostications of future-type events, so leave the shysters alone...

Taking out ad space on tests and exams? I can dig it. California teacher Tom Farber came up with the idea after seeing the usual ads on public buses and at Qualcomm Stadium in San Diego, and figured this would be an ideal way to bolster his budget for printing materials for his class, which had been recently cut by the Poway Unified School District. That has turned out to be the typical response from coast to coast, rather than cutting staff, the school districts have been putting the axe to materials and supplies. Sounds more like no faculty member left behind. The ads, which run $10 for a quiz, $20 for a chapter test, and $30 for a semester final, have allowed Farber to more than pay for the gap in his printing costs the budget cut left him, with the remainder going to the math department at his school, to help out the other teachers. The ads, which are usually local businesses or personal quotes, only appear on the front page of the quizzes and tests, and must be appropriate, so don't go thinking you can promote your hot amateur porn site through Farber's calculus tests. The damnedest thing of all about this idea? The students are actually checking out and paying attention to the ads. If you can get behind this idea, and you want to contact Farber regarding ad space, hit him up with an email at tfarber@powayusd.com

But on the other side of the country, there is the usual controversy brewing, this time over a cafeteria/playground aide at D'Ippolito Elementary. Louisa Tuck, the aide under fire, was once known as Crystal Gunns, an adult film star. In typical overreaction style, parents demanded the school district take some kind of measure against Tuck, and when the district looked into their options, their lawyers advised against doing anything, as Tuck had not done anything illegal. While some parents do not see this as a big issue, the school superintendent and the district are taking a closer look to see what their options are. What a load of shit. With all the yelling and screaming that was done over the last few months about our President-elect's past associations, such as they were, with William Ayers, the fact of the matter remains that Ayers is a teacher, and apparently a very good one at that. So how then, is a retired porn star that big a deal? For all their worries over a former adult movie actress, maybe the offended parents and district muckety mucks need to remove their heads from their asses. Bottom line, she has done nothing wrong, and to try and remove her from her job based on previous careers, sends the wrong message all the way around.