Recent update

Subscribe to RSS feed

Cu vs csu

August 31st, 2008 by chapmanlogic

The Unfortunate Underwear Ordeal

so it turns senseless that i haven’t bought different underwear since ronald reagan was president.mrs. r reminded me of this recently when she said it was time to “throw away those things and fall some new ones, or go commando!” men my years should not at all go commando, i cogitate on it is hamper law # 461.in the interest of a whitey-tighties guy like me, purchasing unheard of undies is more craftiness than science. revenge oneself on em too small and you’re a soprano; get em too well and you’re support network is non-existenta few days later we headed off to the county suburban mall, my mission was to purchase new underwear. mrs. r’s mission was to contain her hysterics until we were no longer in public. it would prove to be a challenge for both of us.as we entered the stored, two small children ran in front of us. they were being chased by their mom, whom we’ll call “bouncing betty.” it seems that betty was wearing a tube-apogee genus clothe and was well, not as slender as she once was. betty was frantically bouncing across the store, desperately trying to catch her children. i took this as a bad omen.we reached the men’s underwear department where i was confronted by a bewildering exceptional of styles, cuts, colors and sizes. now the pressure was on. i made my special and grabbed several packages of new underwear.men’s underwear are not packaged discretely. in my instance the combination said in big striking letters, “caution contains men’s underwear as a replacement for old guys.” in addition, the nearest open checkout stand was across the store, adjacent to 6 miles away and right next to the “misses” department.misses is where all the shrewd young women shop, and this day was no exception. i patiently waited in line as several attractive young women walked former me, whispering and pointing and laughing.mrs. r and i finally made to the checkout accept where the teenaged lady behind the sign in asked “did we win everything okay?”this was too much for mrs. r who broke into hysterics, knocked over a couple of racks of dresses and had to leave the cache.i got checked out and we headed for the bookstore, with me carrying a bag of 15 pairs of whitey-tighties. i am not making this part up as we entered the bookstore the shoplifting alert went turned. as if i wasn’t self-conscious enoughso now i had to have my bag searched by some 16 year-erstwhile gal who may never give birth to seen quondam guy undies in the forefront. it would have been discomfiting if it weren’t so humiliating.we made it institution, i threw my purchase in the washing system, ran em through the dryer, and smugly thought that i would be all predetermined to go the next morning.well it turns out i had let me ego override my better judgment and got em too humongous. so i spent a few days without support and being crankier than conformist, if that’s possible.i went back to the market to purchase the appropriate, i.e. smaller, size. this set the checkout counter in the men’s branch was open and was staffed by a young gazabo.as i approached the counter he asked “so how is your saturday going so far?”being as articulate as i am, i cleverly replied “fine.”after i checked out he told me to “enjoy.”and i memory to myself “oh i will, sparky. i will enjoy these brand-spanking new whitey-tighties for the next 20 years or so. by the old hat they’re tattered elsewhere, i’ll probably be wearing diapers”at least i got the right size this time

Cu csu game

Related posts: Summerfest schedule, Tribal tattoo, Frank w. dux, The red violin, The baby borrowers

Posted in Uncategorized | | | 2 Comments

Alaska news

August 29th, 2008 by chapmanlogic

Voting Rights For All: Putting It to Work in California

Judy-Grether.gif

by judith grether voting rights for all!

One of the most moving experiences of my life came in 2004 when I had the opportunity, as a volunteer with Voting Rights for All!, to inform a man long-off parole that as a California resident and U.S. citizen who was not currently in prison or on parole, he could vote. In all the years since he had paid his debt to society, he thought he was forever barred from votingâ¦and no one had told him otherwise. With tears in his eyes (and mine), he said â?sign me upâ!

In subsequent months and years, those of us working to spread the word about voting rights for ex-offenders in California have repeatedly had similar, deeply memorable experiences. We have encountered widespread misinformation and disbelief, among offenders, their families, and friendsâ¦and perhaps most tellingly, among criminal defense attorneys, prosecutors, judges, and other legal professionals. Even among county registrars of voters, misinformation remains common and institutional silence pervasive. Finally, the walls of silence are starting to crumble.

What we have learned is that that man was not alone. Many people in California are not aware that, in this state, a felony conviction does not bar someone from votingâ¦only people who are actually in prison or on parole are disqualified. These provisions were written into California law in 1974, more than 30 years ago (Cal. Const. Art. II, section 4; Cal. Elec. Code section 2101). A recent legal decision further clarified that people with felony convictions can vote while in county jail if the judge mandated that they serve their time in jail instead of prison (League of Women Voters v. McPherson (2006)).

Voting rights for people with felony convictions are set by each state, a legacy of â?states rights❠concessions after the Civil War. At that time, many Southern and border states adopted lifetime voting restrictions for former felons, passing laws prohibiting voting by people convicted of certain crimes that were considered â?black crimesâ. Other crimes, often more serious ones, that were considered â?white crimes,❠did not result in voting restrictions. Amendments to the Constitution and court decisions have reaffirmed that states have the right to restrict offenders from voting, if everyone in the same legal status is treated the same wayâ”even if there is racial discrimination in law enforcement and in the legal and prison systems. Some states continue to effectively impose lifelong disenfranchisement for ex-felons. In contrast, in Maine and Vermont, and in most other democracies throughout the world, no restrictions are imposed–offenders retain full voting rights, even while incarcerated.

Many Americans were unaware of this important civil rights issue until the Presidential election of 2000, when national publicity focused on denial of voting rights to former felons in Florida. The magnitude of disenfranchisement is huge! Voting restrictions in Florida, alone, may have forever changed the course of historyâ”many scholars concur that if former felons had been allowed to vote in Florida, Al Gore would have been elected president instead of George Bush. In recent years, an estimated four million U.S. citizens of voting age face lifetime legal denial of the right to vote because of prior felony convictions, even after they completed their sentence. An unknown, but perhaps even larger, number of citizens have been effectively denied the vote through institutional silence and misinformation.

Pawlenty not McCain’s VP pick, sources say

The effects of restrictive laws and misinformation cut across the fabric of our society, with immense consequences for some communities. A U.S. Civil Rights Commission report concluded in 2001 that the disenfranchisement of former felons is â?the biggest hindrance to black voting since the poll tax.❠Now, in a widespread civil rights movement, efforts are currently underway throughout the country to address the specific injustices–and needed reformsâ”in each state.

Our work to spread the word about voting rights in California began during the recall election of 2003, using the slogan â?On probation? Off parole? You can vote in Californiaâ. Initially, we set up rather fledgling efforts in shopping centers and other traditional voter registration venues. Then in September 2004, before the presidential election, we set up shop outside the Superior Courthouse in Oakland (and sporadically at courthouses in Richmond and Hayward), starting at 7:30 in the morning. We passed out thousands of flyers, answered questions, and assisted with voter registration, as hundreds of defendants–and their families and friends–went in and out of the courtho …

Related posts: Summerfest schedule, Frank w. dux, Patent, Steve jobs ill, Tribal tattoo

Posted in Uncategorized | | | 1 Comments

Categories

Archives