'Murica

This is our lounge area. Feel free to come in and get acquainted!
User avatar
Witness
Posts: 27608
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: 'Murica

Post by Witness »

Eight of 10 most-banned books challenged for LGBTQ content

Nearly 600 books spanning a variety of genres and reading levels were the target of censorship attempts at libraries, schools and universities last year, and 8 out of the 10 that made the American Library Association’s “Most Challenged Books” of 2019 list shared a common denominator: LGBTQ content.

This latest ranking marks the fourth consecutive year that books with lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer storylines composed at least half of the list, which is included in the association's annual “State of America’s Libraries” report.
https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out ... t-n1188041

Mat-Su school board pulls five books from English courses, including ‘Invisible Man’ and ‘Catch-22’

PALMER — The Matanuska-Susitna School Board has banned the teaching of five “controversial” books used for high school English courses.

The books, considered literary classics, are: “Invisible Man” by Ralph Ellison; “Catch-22” by Joseph Heller; “The Things They Carried” by Tim O’Brien; “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings” by Maya Angelou; and “The Great Gatsby” by F. Scott Fitzgerald.

All five books are used by high school classes in the Anchorage School District, some as required reading.

The Mat-Su School Board voted 5-2 at a Wednesday meeting to remove the books from the list of materials for English elective courses. Most members participated remotely. There was no public comment.
https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/educati ... -catch-22/

User avatar
Witness
Posts: 27608
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: 'Murica

Post by Witness »

Marine Corps Bans Public Display of Confederate Flag

In a letter, Gen. David H. Berger, the Marine commandant, said the symbol had “the power to inflame division.”

The commandant of the Marine Corps has banned the public display of the Confederate battle flag, a symbol that he said had the “power to inflame” division.

“I am mindful that many people believe that flag to be a symbol of heritage and regional pride,” Gen. David H. Berger said in a letter dated Monday and addressed to his fellow Marines. “But I am also mindful of the feelings of pain and rejection of those who inherited the cultural memory and present effects of the scourge of slavery in our country.”

The intent behind the ban was not to judge the meaning that individual Marines ascribe to the symbol, he said, but rather to help build “a uniquely capable warfighting team whose members come from all walks of life.”

The flag has the “power to inflame feelings of division,” he said, adding, “I cannot have that division inside our Corps.”

All Marine Corps installations have regulations prohibiting the display of symbols related to hate speech, guidelines that General Berger said were intended to foster an environment that promotes unity and security.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/us/m ... -flag.html

User avatar
Giz
Posts: 2881
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: USA!

Re: 'Murica

Post by Giz »

I wonder when the US marines first started allowing public displays of the confederate flag? How many years after the civil war was it?

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 82506
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago

Re: 'Murica

Post by Abdul Alhazred »

I may be totally wrong, but by guess is that this wasn't just arbitrary PC, but a response to an actual problem in the ranks.

And it's not as if active duty Marines have a reasonable expectation of freedom of expression.
Image "If I turn in a sicko, will I get a reward?"

"Yes! A BIG REWARD!" ====> Click here to turn in a sicko
The arc of the moral universe bends towards chaos.
People who believe God or History are on their side provide the chaos.

User avatar
Hotarubi
Posts: 894
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:12 am
Title: Enchantress
Location: This septic Isle.

Re: 'Murica

Post by Hotarubi »

"Political Correctness" is acceptable when I agree with it.
Yep, you totally outsmarted me ~ Wildcat.

:ball2:

User avatar
Doctor X
Posts: 72270
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
Location: Your Mom

Re: 'Murica

Post by Doctor X »

Yes, every is free to listen to my speech.

– J.D.
Mob of the Mean: Free beanie, cattle-prod and Charley Fan Club!
"Doctor X is just treating you the way he treats everyone--as subhuman crap too dumb to breathe in after you breathe out." – Don
DocX: FTW. – sparks
"Doctor X wins again." – Pyrrho
"Never sorry to make a racist Fucktard cry." – His Humble MagNIfIcence
"It was the criticisms of Doc X, actually, that let me see more clearly how far the hypocrisy had gone." – clarsct
"I'd leave it up to Doctor X who has been a benevolent tyrant so far." – Grammatron
"Indeed you are a river to your people.
Shit. That's going to end up in your sig." – Pyrrho
"Try a twelve step program and accept Doctor X as your High Power." – asthmatic camel
"just like Doc X said." – gnome

ImageWS CHAMPIONS X4!!!! ImageNBA CHAMPIONS!! Stanley Cup!Image SB CHAMPIONS X6!!!!!! Image

User avatar
Witness
Posts: 27608
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: 'Murica

Post by Witness »

Supreme Court rules Georgia can’t put the law behind a paywall

The state of Georgia licensed the official copy of state law to LexisNexis.

A narrowly divided US Supreme Court on Monday upheld the right to freely share the official law code of Georgia. The state claimed to own the copyright for the Official Code of Georgia Annotated and sued a nonprofit called Public.Resource.Org for publishing it online. Monday's ruling is not only a victory for the open-government group, it's an important precedent that will help secure the right to publish other legally significant public documents.

"Officials empowered to speak with the force of law cannot be the authors of—and therefore cannot copyright—the works they create in the course of their official duties," wrote Chief Justice John Roberts in an opinion that was joined by four other justices on the nine-member court.

Everyone involved in the case agreed that the text of state statutes could not be copyrighted. But the state of Georgia argued that it could copyright annotations that are distributed with the official code. These annotations provide supplemental information about the law, including summaries of judicial opinions, information about legislative history, and citations to relevant law review articles. The annotations are produced by a division of legal publishing giant LexisNexis under a work-for-hire contract with the state.

The copyright status of the annotated code matters because the state doesn't publish any other official version. You can get an unofficial version of state law for free from LexisNexis' website, but LexisNexis' terms of service explicitly warned users that it might be inaccurate. The company also prohibits users from scraping the site's content or using it commercially. If you need the official, up-to-date version of Georgia state law, you have to pay LexisNexis hundreds of dollars for a copy of the official version—which includes annotations.

Public.Resource.Org defied Georgia's rules and published the entire code, including annotations, on its website. The group argued that as an official document of the state legislature, it couldn't be protected by copyright. The state sued and won at the trial court level. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that ruling and sided with the non-profit. In an unorthodox move, the people at PRO urged the Supreme Court to review the case, even though doing so could reverse their appellate win, because they wanted to set a nationwide precedent.

The group's gamble paid off—but just barely. Five justices bought PRO's argument that Georgia's official code was in the public domain. Four justices dissented and would have allowed the Peach State to copyright portions of its official legal code.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/202 ... a-paywall/ for the rest.

User avatar
WildCat
Posts: 17022
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 2:53 am
Location: The 33rd Ward, Chicago

Re: 'Murica

Post by WildCat »

Witness wrote:
Thu Apr 30, 2020 1:12 am
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/202 ... a-paywall/ for the rest.
I remember Darat giving me a warning and editing my post when I quoted a law once. He claimed I violated the copyright... I protested but he refused to change it back. He actually thought the law was copyrighted!
Do you have questions about God?

you sniveling little right-wing nutter - jj

User avatar
Doctor X
Posts: 72270
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
Location: Your Mom

Re: 'Murica

Post by Doctor X »

You Irritated Him.

Reported.

jdReport
Mob of the Mean: Free beanie, cattle-prod and Charley Fan Club!
"Doctor X is just treating you the way he treats everyone--as subhuman crap too dumb to breathe in after you breathe out." – Don
DocX: FTW. – sparks
"Doctor X wins again." – Pyrrho
"Never sorry to make a racist Fucktard cry." – His Humble MagNIfIcence
"It was the criticisms of Doc X, actually, that let me see more clearly how far the hypocrisy had gone." – clarsct
"I'd leave it up to Doctor X who has been a benevolent tyrant so far." – Grammatron
"Indeed you are a river to your people.
Shit. That's going to end up in your sig." – Pyrrho
"Try a twelve step program and accept Doctor X as your High Power." – asthmatic camel
"just like Doc X said." – gnome

ImageWS CHAMPIONS X4!!!! ImageNBA CHAMPIONS!! Stanley Cup!Image SB CHAMPIONS X6!!!!!! Image

User avatar
Witness
Posts: 27608
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: 'Murica

Post by Witness »

HuffPost:
Tribes Were Supposed To Get $8 Billion In COVID-19 Aid. They’ve Gotten $0.

The delay in disbursing the money “is unnecessary and works against the federal government’s trust responsibility,” House Democrats told Treasury.

Tribal governments were supposed to get $8 billion in direct emergency relief from the CARES Act, the $2 trillion COVID-19 stimulus bill that became law on March 27.

More than a month later, they haven’t gotten any of it.

Part of the reason is that the Treasury Department, which is charged with distributing that money, has been flailing in its dealings with tribes.

Another reason stems from a lawsuit over whether Alaska Native Corporations are entitled to the money. A federal court on Monday agreed to stop funds from going to those corporations for now, which means Treasury has no reason to not funnel money immediately to the 574 federally recognized tribal governments struggling with the public health and economic fallout from the coronavirus pandemic.

In a Wednesday letter, House Democrats pressed Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Interior Secretary David Bernhardt to distribute the money now because lives are at stake.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/tribes-c ... a8544487d9 with copy of the letter.

User avatar
Hotarubi
Posts: 894
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:12 am
Title: Enchantress
Location: This septic Isle.

Re: 'Murica

Post by Hotarubi »

Wow. They're not even getting blankets now.

(Maybe I should compare this to the Albigensian Crusade to try and excuse it. Especially when someone satirizes it.)
Yep, you totally outsmarted me ~ Wildcat.

:ball2:

User avatar
Witness
Posts: 27608
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: 'Murica

Post by Witness »

Michigan (Governor's office door?):

Image

Also Michigan:
Judge rules Michigan stay-at-home order doesn’t infringe on constitutional rights

A Michigan judge on Wednesday found that while Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s stay-at-home order does “temporary harm” to the constitutional rights of Michigan residents, the harm doesn’t outweigh the public health risk posed by the coronavirus outbreak.

Steve Martinko, owner of an Oakland County landscaping business, and four other Michigan residents filed a lawsuit against the governor and other state officials claiming the stay-at-home order infringes on their constitutional rights and should be declared invalid. The “mandatory quarantine” and in-state travel restrictions violate due process rights, the plaintiffs argued.

Michigan Court of Claims Judge Christopher Murray ruled in favor of Whitmer, Attorney General Dana Nessel and Department of Natural Resources Director Daniel Eichinger on Wednesday, April 29.

“Our fellow residents have an interest to remain unharmed by a highly communicable and deadly virus,” Murray wrote in his opinion. “And since the state entered the Union in 1837, it has had the broad power to act for the public health of the entire state when faced with a public crisis.”
https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2 ... ights.html

User avatar
Giz
Posts: 2881
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: USA!

Re: 'Murica

Post by Giz »

Witness wrote:
Thu Apr 30, 2020 1:12 am
Supreme Court rules Georgia can’t put the law behind a paywall

The state of Georgia licensed the official copy of state law to LexisNexis.

A narrowly divided US Supreme Court on Monday upheld the right to freely share the official law code of Georgia. The state claimed to own the copyright for the Official Code of Georgia Annotated and sued a nonprofit called Public.Resource.Org for publishing it online. Monday's ruling is not only a victory for the open-government group, it's an important precedent that will help secure the right to publish other legally significant public documents.

"Officials empowered to speak with the force of law cannot be the authors of—and therefore cannot copyright—the works they create in the course of their official duties," wrote Chief Justice John Roberts in an opinion that was joined by four other justices on the nine-member court.

Everyone involved in the case agreed that the text of state statutes could not be copyrighted. But the state of Georgia argued that it could copyright annotations that are distributed with the official code. These annotations provide supplemental information about the law, including summaries of judicial opinions, information about legislative history, and citations to relevant law review articles. The annotations are produced by a division of legal publishing giant LexisNexis under a work-for-hire contract with the state.

The copyright status of the annotated code matters because the state doesn't publish any other official version. You can get an unofficial version of state law for free from LexisNexis' website, but LexisNexis' terms of service explicitly warned users that it might be inaccurate. The company also prohibits users from scraping the site's content or using it commercially. If you need the official, up-to-date version of Georgia state law, you have to pay LexisNexis hundreds of dollars for a copy of the official version—which includes annotations.

Public.Resource.Org defied Georgia's rules and published the entire code, including annotations, on its website. The group argued that as an official document of the state legislature, it couldn't be protected by copyright. The state sued and won at the trial court level. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that ruling and sided with the non-profit. In an unorthodox move, the people at PRO urged the Supreme Court to review the case, even though doing so could reverse their appellate win, because they wanted to set a nationwide precedent.

The group's gamble paid off—but just barely. Five justices bought PRO's argument that Georgia's official code was in the public domain. Four justices dissented and would have allowed the Peach State to copyright portions of its official legal code.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/202 ... a-paywall/ for the rest.
This is heartwarming- the Supreme Court made a good decision on bipartisan grounds!

The bad uns, who think that the law can be locked away from the citizenry (2 conservative, 2 liberal):
Clarence Thomas
Sam Alito
Stephen Breyer
Ruth Bader Ginsburg

User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 22392
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed

Re: 'Murica

Post by Rob Lister »

What's being argued is annotations on the law, not the law itself. It is the work product of scholars, not lawmakers. I don't see the problem with copyrighting it.

User avatar
Giz
Posts: 2881
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: USA!

Re: 'Murica

Post by Giz »

Rob Lister wrote:
Sat May 02, 2020 1:06 pm
What's being argued is annotations on the law, not the law itself. It is the work product of scholars, not lawmakers. I don't see the problem with copyrighting it.
I think that normal citizens should be able to access “ supplemental information about the law, including summaries of judicial opinions, information about legislative history, and citations to relevant law review articles” about the laws that govern them, without shelling out hundreds of dollars.

The free version warned that it might be inaccurate. That’s unacceptable for the citizens who might have to rely on it. Honestly, it’s as bad as removing public defenders.

User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 22392
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed

Re: 'Murica

Post by Rob Lister »

Giz wrote:
Sat May 02, 2020 1:44 pm
Rob Lister wrote:
Sat May 02, 2020 1:06 pm
What's being argued is annotations on the law, not the law itself. It is the work product of scholars, not lawmakers. I don't see the problem with copyrighting it.
I think that normal citizens should be able to access “ supplemental information about the law, including summaries of judicial opinions, information about legislative history, and citations to relevant law review articles” about the laws that govern them, without shelling out hundreds of dollars.
Somebody has to create these summaries, opinions, history and citations; they don't create themselves. If that is the work product of the government, you're right. Is it?
The free version warned that it might be inaccurate. That’s unacceptable for the citizens who might have to rely on it. Honestly, it’s as bad as removing public defenders.
That's a different issue. Was that addressed by the SC?

User avatar
Witness
Posts: 27608
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: 'Murica

Post by Witness »


User avatar
Hotarubi
Posts: 894
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:12 am
Title: Enchantress
Location: This septic Isle.

Re: 'Murica

Post by Hotarubi »

Witness wrote:
Sat May 02, 2020 10:29 pm
Image

Details: https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premiu ... -1.8815257
FFS.
Yep, you totally outsmarted me ~ Wildcat.

:ball2:

User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 26930
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: 'Murica

Post by Anaxagoras »

Wow, so they really are Nazis.

Or just KY dumbasses.
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare

User avatar
Doctor X
Posts: 72270
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
Location: Your Mom

Re: 'Murica

Post by Doctor X »

Probably just the typical stupid bigot who thinks calling someone by an ethnic slur is some sort of "win" for them.

– J.D.
Mob of the Mean: Free beanie, cattle-prod and Charley Fan Club!
"Doctor X is just treating you the way he treats everyone--as subhuman crap too dumb to breathe in after you breathe out." – Don
DocX: FTW. – sparks
"Doctor X wins again." – Pyrrho
"Never sorry to make a racist Fucktard cry." – His Humble MagNIfIcence
"It was the criticisms of Doc X, actually, that let me see more clearly how far the hypocrisy had gone." – clarsct
"I'd leave it up to Doctor X who has been a benevolent tyrant so far." – Grammatron
"Indeed you are a river to your people.
Shit. That's going to end up in your sig." – Pyrrho
"Try a twelve step program and accept Doctor X as your High Power." – asthmatic camel
"just like Doc X said." – gnome

ImageWS CHAMPIONS X4!!!! ImageNBA CHAMPIONS!! Stanley Cup!Image SB CHAMPIONS X6!!!!!! Image