Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Nuclear Unicorn

Nuclear Unicorn's Journal
Nuclear Unicorn's Journal
October 11, 2015

Is sexually objectifying people really all that bad?

Because I spent the afternoon watching Lover Boy split firewood.

October 6, 2015

Poles furious after Russia blames them for starting WWII

Poles furious after Russia blames them for starting WWII

WARSAW, Poland (AP) — The Russian ambassador to Poland has sparked outrage for putting some of the blame for World War II on Poland, creating a new spat amid deepening tensions between the Slavic nations.

Russian Ambassador Sergey Andreev on Friday described the Soviet's 1939 invasion of Poland as an act of self-defense, not aggression. The comment prompted Poland's Foreign Ministry to declare Saturday that the ambassador "undermines historical truth" and seems to be trying to justify Stalinist crimes.

World War II began after Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union sealed a pact in 1939 that included a secret provision to carve up Poland and other parts of Eastern Europe. Germany soon invaded Poland from the West, followed by a Soviet invasion from the east 16 days later. Millions of Poles were killed in the war.


I'm sure it will be argued Katyn forest massacre was an act of self-defense as well.
October 6, 2015

If we don't focus on the mentally ill how are background checks supposed to work?

Lots of people say we need to close the private seller loophole (I favor making NICS available to private sellers) and toughen laws against straw purchases (I'm good with that).

Many also say most mentally ill people are not violent. I believe them but we should acknowledge that the violent ones are. Moreover, these stories always seem to be accompanied by the line, "the suspect had a history of mental illness." Eliot Rodgers, Aaron Alexis, Jared Loughner, Adam Lanza, Seunh-Hui Cho, James Holmes, etc. are all examples of spree killers that someone in authority suspected of being potentially violent and yet those in authority did nothing.

If the objective is to keep guns out of their hands they have to be brought before the authorities and, through due process, be adjudicated as unfit to enjoy their rights. That is the only way their names end up in the NICS to be flagged against selling guns to them.

And here's a weird follow-on thought -- maybe while we have them before the authorities we can get them the treatment they need to no longer be tormented by the demons that drive them to these horrendous acts. Basic human compassion would suggest we would want to relieve them of the suffering they endure.

September 30, 2015

A modest proposal in lieu of reinstating the Fairness Doctrine

One of the arguments in favor of reinstating the Fairness Doctrine (FD) is that, if left to their own devises, consumers (hereafter, referred to as "consumers&quot of news and opinion will self-select narrow ranges of opinion that comport with their pre-suppositions and beliefs. The FD, it is proposed, will expose them to a broader range of opinion and in this vein those who produce news and opinion (hereafter, referred to as "producers&quot should set aside time and space within their publications and broadcasts to those of differing arguments.

I find this proposal lacking.

First of all, not all producers produce in equal measure. For example, Rush Limbaugh broadcasts for 3 hours a day whereas Rachel Maddow runs for only a single hour. It does not matter what percentage of broadcast time is set aside, Limbaugh will enjoy the decisive 3:1 advantage. Moreover, the proposal will invariably dilute the Maddow show more than Limbaugh's.

Second, what those making the proposal are actually saying is: They want those who consume Opinion X to have an equal amount of time consuming Opinion Y. They are cloaking this statement in the guise of regulating producers but at the end of the day it is really the consumers they are targeting.

In order to more closely conform with their intentions my counter-proposal is this --

Do not regulate producers but rather consumers.

If a person consumes news and opinion they must then seek out countering viewpoints or be in violation. Television and internet providers can track consumption habits. They do already for marketing purposes. Whatever time they spend consuming news and opinion from Source X they must spend a regulatory mandated counter-balancing amount of time consuming news and opinion from Source Y.

That way the producers do not have to dilute their time and space while the demand that consumers gain broader exposure to more diverse opinion will be met.

Those found to be in violation can assessed a penalty during the annual tax filing season.

Those who will protest on 1st Amendment grounds can be reminded that the 1A protects the freedom of the press but makes no prohibition towards mandates concerning secular media.

Democracy demands this mandate!

September 25, 2015

High school teen who defended a blind classmate who was being beaten by a bully is SUSPENDED

High school teen who defended a blind classmate who was being beaten by a bully is SUSPENDED and kicked off football team

A California teenager who rushed to help a blind classmate being beaten up by a bully has been kicked off the football team.

The high school junior was hailed as a hero for intervening after he saw the 'visually impaired' student being repeatedly hit round the head during lunch break at Huntington Beach High School, California on Wednesday.

Footage, filmed by a bystander, shows the teen knocking the bully to the ground with a single punch to stop the attack.

He leaves the boy lying bleeding on the ground while he checks on the visually impaired victim, before turning back to the attacker and asking him: 'You trying to jump a f***ing blind kid, bro? What the f*** is your problem?'


If we want justice we cannot punish people for doing the right thing -- and, yes, physically defending a victim of violence is the right thing (at least, it isn't wrong).


don't know how well these things work but this was posted at the end of the article:


Petition to reinstate Cody.

Thank-you DU'er OriginalGreek
September 25, 2015

Will the next Speaker be more RW or less RW?


September 23, 2015

Black Violin -- Stereotypes

Found this while listening to chick rock on YouTube. I thought I'd share with the peeps.

Brava, gentlemen. O' Brava
September 15, 2015

Scrawling 'F**k Your S**tty Town Bitches' On Speeding Ticket Is Free Speech, Judge Finds

Scrawling 'F**k Your S**tty Town Bitches' On Speeding Ticket Is Free Speech, Judge Finds

-- snip --

On May 4, 2012, Barboza, then 22, was driving through the small, scenic town of Liberty when he was given a speeding ticket.

Clearly sore about the incident, Barboza crossed out "Liberty" on the payment form and replaced it with "Tyranny." He then scrawled the offending phrase across the top, pleaded guilty to speeding and put the form in the mail.

Justice Brian P. Rourke informed Barboza in September of that year that his payment had been rejected and he'd have to make the two-hour trek from Connecticut to appear in court.

There, Rourke lectured Barboza over his use of foul language, before prosecutors from the Sullivan County district attorney's office instructed police officers to arrest Barboza on a charge of aggravated harassment. Barboza was taken to the Liberty police station, where he was booked, fingerprinted and handcuffed to a bench. After being shuffled between courts, he was eventually released when he paid a $200 bail.


Too many with power don't like having their power questioned, mocked or denigrated. Yet, it's their own conduct that undermines them the most.
September 1, 2015

China punishes 197 over stock market and Tianjin 'rumours'

China punishes 197 over stock market and Tianjin 'rumours'

Chinese authorities have punished 197 people for spreading rumours online about the recent stock market crash and fatal explosions in Tianjin, according to state news agency Xinhua.

A journalist and stock market officials are among those arrested, Xinhua said. It gave no other details.


Separately, the UK's Financial Times says Chinese leaders feel they mishandled their stock market rescue efforts.

The paper, quoting an account of a meeting of senior regulatory officials on Thursday, said the government had decided to abandon attempts to boost the stock market and instead step up efforts to punish people suspected of "destabilising the market".


"It's not the paper dragon we built; that is to blame. It's the people who are talking about the fact we built a paper dragon that need to be dealt with!"

Does anybody know the Mandarin word for "face-palm"?

Profile Information

Member since: Wed Sep 16, 2009, 07:33 PM
Number of posts: 19,497
Latest Discussions»Nuclear Unicorn's Journal