Sunday, May 19, 2013

Yahoo's Tumblr Porn Problem

I'm not on Tumblr, but when I was searching for Kelly Brook photos awhile back it wasn't long before I was "tumbled" to a lot of disgusting pornography.

At Business Week, "If Yahoo Buys Tumblr, What Will It Do With All That Porn?":

Marissa Meyer photo marissamayer_sq-11fbce3d248d03df874f3b974fab51f77021c6dd_zps6a56f632.jpg
If Yahoo! succeeds in its attempt to acquire Tumblr, it will end up with one of the hottest Internet properties in today’s Web, with access to the coveted youth market and a foothold in mobile.

It will also wind up with a whole lot of porn.

Tumblr has many options for people interested in artsy photography or teenaged musings. Then there are Tumblrs with such names as We Want Porn, Above Average Porn, Defcon Porn, Porn Gif Haven, POV Porn, Porn and Weed, and When Tumblr porn goes wrong.

It will be fun to see how these are integrated into Yahoo News.

Tumblr’s terms of service are pretty clear: Sexual material is welcome. It just asks that such posts be tagged as NSFW, noting that its users include many people “from a variety of locations, cultures, and backgrounds with different points of view concerning adult-oriented content.” (And, presumably, some people who work in offices with open seating plans.) The one exception is that Tumblr does not want to host people’s pornographic videos. Even this seems to be more about bandwidth than morality.

“We’re not in the business of profiting from adult-oriented videos and hosting this stuff is … expensive,” the company explains.

Tumblr does have standards. It objects to bigotry, sexually suggestive content including minors, anything that promotes self-harm, or gore that is posted just to be shocking.
Well, it's not like you can't find porn on the Internet. Maybe Marissa Meyer will crack down. We'll see.

Also, at AllThingsD, "Why Yahoo Doesn't Think Tumblr Has a Porn Problem," and "Yahoo Tumblrs for Cool: Board Approves $1.1 Billion Deal as Expected ."


Senior White House Adviser Dan Pfeiffer on IRS Scandal: 'The law is irrelevant...

Via Instapundit, "OBAMA AIDE: Legality of IRS targeting conservative groups “irrelevant”."


Plus, at Gateway Pundit, "OH GOOD GRIEF… Top White House Official: “It’s Largely Irrelevant” Who Doctored Benghazi Memo (Video)," and "Top Obama Official on Bengahzi: I Don’t Remember What Room Obama Was In – “It’s a Largely Irrelevant Fact” (Video)."

Saturday, May 18, 2013

Rob Ford Crack Scandal

The Toronto Star's got a punishing editorial, "Rob Ford crack scandal: Time for mayor to step down."

And at Blazing Cat Fur, "Toronto Mayor Rob Ford owes his supporters a serious explanation over crack cocaine allegations."

#RememberWhenBarackObama

At Twitchy, "#RememberWhenBarackObama: Time for a trip down gaffe-paved memory lane."

Willful Defiance: LAUSD Caves to Political Correctness on School Discipline Policy

Here's Sandy Banks, the far-left black feminist columnist, at the Los Angeles Times, "Troubled youths deserve more effective discipline than suspension":

 photo WillfulDefiance_zpsafdea163.jpg
The limits on student suspensions approved by the Los Angeles Unified school board this week may burnish the district's progressive credentials, putting L.A. in the forefront of a national shift away from zero-tolerance policies that ban kids from campus for minor offenses.

But the measure, which forbids suspensions for "willful defiance," has also shown how complicated and emotional the issue of student discipline can be. The two school board members who voted against it have markedly different perspectives that rarely make them allies.

The ban was prompted by national research that suggests suspension is a tool capriciously used and that it unfairly penalizes black children, who tend to be punished more severely and for less serious offenses than other students.

In Los Angeles Unified, blacks account for 26% of the district's suspensions, but only 9% of its students. That imbalance troubles Supt. John Deasy. He championed the measure, backed by community groups who consider suspension a "push out" practice that creates a "school-to-prison pipeline" for black and Latino students.

Yet the school board's only African American member, Marguerite LaMotte, voted against the ban, and lectured the students who crowded the board room to support it.

"I'm going to vote 'no' because it will give you the wrong message," she told them. "I'm not going to give you permission to go out and act crazy and think there are no consequences for your behavior."

LaMotte represents the region with the most black students in the district. She sees toleration of bad behavior as a disincentive for good behavior, a soft-bigotry-of-low-expectations deal.

"We love you," LaMotte told the students. "But there's a path you have to walk."

Board member Tamar Galatzan represents a suburban chunk of the San Fernando Valley with the most white students in the district. She didn't need to give a speech; her hard-edged 'no' made her feelings clear.

"It frustrates me," Galatzan told me later, "to hear all the protesters talk about the rights of the students who are causing problems in class, and there's nobody that's talking about the rights of the other 35 students who are trying to get an education."

I've heard grumbling like that from parents and teachers, who imagine good kids held hostage by troublemakers, out of discipline's reach.

The problem is that the troublemaker and the kid who wants to learn just might be the same student. And tough love feels like no love if we bounce them out of school...
Yes, because the troublemaker kids are really victims!

She goes on:
"Willful defiance" is a very broad label that can cover anything from wearing baggy pants to fighting to mouthing off in class. The category accounts for almost half of California's 700,000 yearly suspensions, and more than one-third of those in LAUSD.

Critics say it gives school officials too much discretion and too little incentive to work with struggling children.

"Teenagers misbehave. They make mistakes, bad choices, a lot," said Jose Huerta, principal at Garfield High. "We react to that. The kid disrespects a teacher, says the F-word in class and you don't know what to do. So you kick him out until you figure it out.

"And you miss a chance to help a kid who may be crying out for help,"

The ban is part of a broader push to move away from suspensions as a disciplinary tool. Research shows they do more harm than good, depressing achievement and alienating students who don't see incentives to improve.

The resolution is loaded with timelines and noble concepts like "restorative justice," but short on guidance for a teacher wondering what exactly she's supposed to do when Johnny curses her out in class.

School board President Monica Garcia doesn't see that as a drawback. Schools need to find ways to engage students who feel angry, disrespected, unloved. "I'm expecting that an educated adult ...can create [disciplinary] alternatives that don't say to a student 'You don't deserve to be in school.'"
Yes, and it's no surprise that statistics show the 53 percent of public school teachers cite discipline problems as a reason for leaving the profession. (And teachers at LAUSD charter schools have especially difficult challenges.)

But hey, "restorative justice"!

Here's the Times' report from this week, "LAUSD board could ban suspensions for 'willful defiance'."

I'm surprised this comment squeezed by the newspaper's moderators:
"And a disturbing finding has surfaced: African Americans are bearing the brunt of the harsh discipline policies. Statewide, black students are three times as likely as whites to be suspended; in L.A. Unified, 26% of those suspended in 2010-11 were African Americans although they make up 9% of students."

Notice the Orwellian phrasing here. Suspensions just happen, unrelated to student conduct. The only possible explanation for a racial disparity in suspenions is racism. Carefully avoiding the fact that black students are EARNING the suspensions because black students are COMMITTING INFRACTIONS at a much higher rate. But at the L. A. Times you are not allowed to commit truth if it reflects badly on blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, or homosexuals.

The average black IQ is 85. The average white IQ is 100. Low IQ is closely correleated with poor impulse control, high time preference, poor ability to foresee consequences, low ability to retain previously imparted information, lower ability to engage in delayed gratificiation, and even lower empathy. We should EXPECT, not be shocked, by blacks causing trouble and getting suspended more often. Nor should we consider it unjust any more than the overwhelming portion of prison inmates being male a reflection of "sexism" in the justice system. The fact is, men are overwhelmingly more likely to commit violent crime.
Yes, Orwellian language.

It's all Orwell these days, from the White House on down. Truth is thought crimes and hate speech.

Mid-level Officials in the White House and the State Department Do Not Call the Shots — They Carry Out Orders

From Andrew McCarthy, at National Review, "The 10 P.M. Phone Call: Clinton and Obama discussed Benghazi. What did they say?":

‘What would you be focusing on in the Benghazi investigation?” I spent many years in the investigation biz, so it’s only natural that I’ve been asked that question a lot lately.

I had the good fortune to be trained in Rudy Giuliani’s U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan. Rudy famously made his mark by making law enforcement reflect what common sense knew: Enterprises take their cues from the top. Criminal enterprises are no different: The capos do not carry out the policy of the button-men — it’s the other way around.

So if I were investigating Benghazi, I’d be homing in on that 10 p.m. phone call. That’s the one between President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton — the one that’s gotten close to zero attention.

Benghazi is not a scandal because of Ambassador Susan Rice, State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland, and “talking points.” The scandal is about Rice and Nuland’s principals, and about what the talking points were intended to accomplish. Benghazi is about derelictions of duty by President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton before and during the massacre of our ambassador and three other American officials, as well as Obama and Clinton’s fraud on the public afterward.

A good deal of media attention has quite appropriately been lavished on e-mail traffic between mid-level administration officials in the days leading up to Sunday, September 16. That is the day when Ms. Rice, a close Obama confidant, made her appalling appearances on the Sunday-morning political shows. Those performances were transparently designed to mislead the American people, during the presidential campaign stretch run, into believing that an anti-Islamic Internet video — rather than a coordinated terrorist attack orchestrated by al-Qaeda affiliates, coupled with the Obama administration’s gross failure to secure and defend American personnel in Benghazi — was responsible for the killings.

Fraud flows from the top down, not the mid-level up. Mid-level officials in the White House and the State Department do not call the shots — they carry out orders. They also were not running for reelection in 2012 or positioning themselves for a campaign in 2016. The people doing that were, respectively, President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton.
Continue reading.

Sabine Jemeljanova Bikini Crew

Via Twitter:

Sabine Bikinis photo BikiniSabine_zpsf1fb423e.jpg

Warning Graphic: Sryian Rebels Execute Regime Loyalists

Man, that's painful. I mean for the dudes getting shot, to say nothing of those watching the damned video.

And who knows if these are regime forces, loyalists or civilians? They're dead now.

At Blazing Cat Fur, "Today in Syrian Atrocity - Our Aid Recipients Execute 2 of Assad's Men - Graphic Content."

Kitten Freaks Out Over Lizard

Pretty funny:

Deer Crashes Through Bus Window

The deer makes it out of the bus. Bruised and battered, but still alive: "On camera: Deer crashes through bus window."

White House Should Try the Truth

From Charles Krauthammer, at the Washington Post, "Let the facts speak for themselves":

Note to GOP re Benghazi: Stop calling it Watergate, Iran-contra, bigger than both, etc. First, it might well be, but we don’t know. History will judge. Second, overhyping will only diminish the importance of the scandal if it doesn’t meet presidency-breaking standards. Third, focusing on the political effects simply plays into the hands of Democrats desperately claiming that this is nothing but partisan politics.

Let the facts speak for themselves. They are damning enough. Let Gregory Hicks, the honorable, apolitical second-in-command that night in Libya, movingly and grippingly demolish the president’s Benghazi mantra that “what I have always tried to do is just get all the facts” and “every piece of information that we got, as we got it, we laid it out for the American people.”

On the contrary. Far from assiduously gathering and releasing information, the administration was assiduously trying to control and suppress it.

Ezra Klein 'may turn out to be one of the stupidest people ever to be given column inches in a printed medium of any variety...'

Jeff Goldstein slams WaPo's juicebox moron, "BREAKING: The Scandals are Falling Apart!":

Ezra Klein photo iKMqOnw_2e3Q_zps195dc76b.jpg
The fact is, Klein is right, but not for the reasons he wants us to believe. That is, his premise — that a scandal is only a scandal if high-level political figures fall — is true. But his implication — that because Obama and Holder and Hillary Clinton likely won’t fall, we aren’t in the midst of any scandals — is cynical, disingenuous, and largely exactly what you’d expect out of a useful idiot who fancies that he’s respected by those whose approval he so longs for.

The truth is, Obama and Holder and Hillary Clinton likely won’t fall because they will find protection in the arms of the ruling class, while lower-level functionaries will act as fall guys and scapegoats. And that’s because it is, as I’ve been saying, not a real two-party system any longer, but rather the ruling class vs. the rest of us.

Congress never pressed the IRS issue. Boehner is resisting calls to impanel a special committee on Benghazi, and the AP, once they get over the butt hurt of realizing that, for all the cover they’ve given progressives, ObamaCo just really isn’t all that into them, will go right back to fluffing up the President, rationalizing to themselves that they are making a sacrifice to the greater good. There has been no special prosecutor called for in the House to look into the IRS; the Senate is giving us Carl Levin and Max Baucus as investigators — two men who themselves engaged in the very conduct that politicians are now pretending to be outraged by.

So let’s not be coy: if the scandals fall apart it won’t be because no scandals existed, as Klein wants to pretend. Instead, it will be because the ruling class and their parasitic fluffers like Klein care more about the furtherance of big government statism than they do about truth or justice or the people they ostensibly represent or keep informed while working diligently to do neither.
Well, I'd add further that Klein's also wrong on the basic facts at hand. But read his idiocy at Goldstein's click through. These scandals indeed reach up to the highest levels, contra the juicebox moron. And top players have lied on the record, from the president on down. As more whistle-blowers come forward we may approach smoking gun territory. The pathetic press lapdogs will still cover for the administration, but voters are not fools. The ultimate reckoning will come at the polls next year and in 2016. Never let a scandal go to waste.

Frank VanderSloot on O'Reilly Factor

At great talking points segment followed by the VanderSloot interview.

President Obama personally smeared Mr. VanderSloot, which paved the way to official harassment, including an audit by the IRS.


Kim Strassel reported on this yesterday:
Mr. Obama now professes shock and outrage that bureaucrats at the IRS did exactly what the president of the United States said was the right and honorable thing to do. "He put a target on our backs, and he's now going to blame the people who are shooting at us?" asks Idaho businessman and longtime Republican donor Frank VanderSloot.

Mr. VanderSloot is the Obama target who in 2011 made a sizable donation to a group supporting Mitt Romney. In April 2012, an Obama campaign website named and slurred eight Romney donors. It tarred Mr. VanderSloot as a "wealthy individual" with a "less-than-reputable record." Other donors were described as having been "on the wrong side of the law."

This was the Obama version of the phone call—put out to every government investigator (and liberal activist) in the land.

Twelve days later, a man working for a political opposition-research firm called an Idaho courthouse for Mr. VanderSloot's divorce records. In June, the IRS informed Mr. VanderSloot and his wife of an audit of two years of their taxes. In July, the Department of Labor informed him of an audit of the guest workers on his Idaho cattle ranch. In September, the IRS informed him of a second audit, of one of his businesses. Mr. VanderSloot, who had never been audited before, was subject to three in the four months after Mr. Obama teed him up for such scrutiny.

The last of these audits was only concluded in recent weeks. Not one resulted in a fine or penalty. But Mr. VanderSloot has been waiting more than 20 months for a sizable refund and estimates his legal bills are $80,000. That figure doesn't account for what the president's vilification has done to his business and reputation. The Obama call for scrutiny wasn't a mistake; it was the president's strategy—one pursued throughout 2012. The way to limit Romney money was to intimidate donors from giving. Donate, and the president would at best tie you to Big Oil or Wall Street, at worst put your name in bold, and flag you as "less than reputable" to everyone who worked for him: the IRS, the SEC, the Justice Department. The president didn't need a telephone; he had a megaphone.
Thug government, Obama's Chicago way.

Friday, May 17, 2013

Christy Turlington Fabulous at 44

She looks great:

At London's Daily Mail, "'I can't wait to be 50': Christy Turlington, 44, says she'll 'never have surgery' as she stuns in racy new photo shoot."

Christy Turlington photo ChristyTurlington_zps60288202.jpg

Rosie Jones Frolicking With Lacey Banghard

Crazy ladies:


Plus, at Egotastic!, "Rosie Jones, Courtnie Quinlan, Nicole Neal, and Other Topless Hotties for i-D Magazine’s Spring Fling."

Gallup Poll: 74 Percent Want Investigation of #IRS Scandal

And the public wants answers on Benghazi too.

At Weasel Zippers, "Gallup: 74% Of Americans Want IRS Scandal Investigated Further, 69% Want Benghazi Follow Up…"

Steven Miller's testimony earlier was a complete disaster. This Lou Dobbs panel just rips the administration --- on the IRS, Benghazi, and the culture of corruption:


More at Neo's, "Are we paying attention yet?"


Obama Says Reject Voices Warning of Tyranny

Via the People's Cube.

Reject Voices photo RejectVoices_zps603a7b26.jpg

And from Katie Pavlich, "FLASHBACK: Obama Tells Graduates to Reject Voices Warning of Government Tyranny."

Obama Forces Marines to Break Protocol

It's against Marine Corps regulations for Marines to hold umbrellas.

But as Obama is commander in chief, he can force Marines to violate the rules. At CNN, "Marines holding umbrellas 'extremely rare'."

Of course, there's no rule against the president acting like a selfish asshole. That just comes naturally to Obama. We used to have dignity in our presidents, especially when George W. Bush was in office. This president is just an egotistical prick.

Obama Umbrellas photo BushObamaUmbrella_zps5b8e18f6.png

Added: At Twitchy, "Sarah Palin to Obama: ‘When it rains it pours, but most Americans hold their own umbrellas’."

Obama Administration Crushes Free Speech on Campus

From Greg Lukianoff, at the Wall Street Journal, "Feds to Students: You Can't Say That":

The scandals roiling Washington over the past two weeks involve troubling government behavior that had been hidden—the IRS targeting of conservative groups and the Justice Department's surveillance of the Associated Press, among others. Largely overlooked amid the histrionics has been a shocker hiding in plain sight. Last week, the Obama administration moved to dramatically undermine students' and faculty rights at colleges across the country.

The new policy was announced in a joint letter from the Education Department and Justice Department to the University of Montana. The May 9 letter addressed the results of a year-long joint investigation by the departments into the school's mishandling of several serious sexual-assault cases. The investigation determined that the university's policies addressing sexual assault failed to comply with Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972.

But the joint letter, which announced a "resolution agreement" with the university, didn't stop there. It then proceeded to rewrite the federal government's rules about sexual harassment and free speech on campus.

If that sounds hyperbolic, consider the letter itself. The first paragraph declares that the Montana findings should serve as a "blueprint for colleges and universities throughout the country." After outlining the specifics of the case, the letter states that only a stunningly broad definition of sexual harassment—"unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature"—will now satisfy federal statutory requirements. This explicitly includes "verbal conduct," otherwise known as speech.
Look, from Obama on down, the left can't tolerate freedom of expression. Speaking out freely undermines the progressive agenda in all respects. These people are totalitarian. Folks are just now starting to wake up to the abuses. But it's going to take a long, hard fight to destroy the left's anti-speech ghouls. It's a fight necessary to save freedom in America.

Acting IRS Commission Steven Miller Can't Remember Who Was Responsible!

Hello.

Pretty sucked optics for the embattled White House. This crapweasel Miller is lying through his teeth.


What a farce, at Politico, "Miller: IRS provided 'horrible customer service'."

And from Byron York on Twitter, "IRS digs in: No targeting, no bias, focus on conservative groups just employees seeking greater 'efficiency'."

And here's National Journal, "How Republicans Will Try to Pin the IRS Scandal on Obama."