tvashtarkatena

I have a pair, thankyouverymuch. Have had them for a very long time. I still don't sign petitions. But by your own admission, it sounds to me like you do your own share of intimidation at the clipboard... It's not intimidation, it's an opportunity to man up and join the fight.

So, you'd rather not participate in a primary political process for reforming the major issues of our time because you fear your name will be disclosed to whom and for what purpose, exactly? I'd say Grandma's ballz are just a wee bit bigger in this regard, no?

Direct campaign ontributions have long been viewed as a form of political speech. Unlike other forms of political speech, however, they fall under a constitutionally regulated exception that applies to candidates standing for public office. SCOTUS has ruled that the public interest of free and fair elections outweighs privacy concerns here. Current law requires that the identity of individual donors be disclosed for amounts of $200 or more.

Wellllll...here's what I tell people who 'don't sign petitions' out of fear of (to date nonexistent) retribution. "Dude...that 80 year old lady over there just signed. Grow a pair." They usually sign.

If you want to grok how much that is, take a cup of rice, spill it on the kitchen floor, then loose a coup full of chickens to clean up up. See how long it takes. What's the average number of grains per minute a chicken can eat? Be sure to check the voltage on all the outlets beforehand.

That's over 38,500 in a single cup of rice. Think about it. Think a bout it.

BTW: 4,400,000 at an average grain weight of 25 mg

Post the number so FW can dispute it.

You're a Big Boy - you'll get over it. Now go rock yourself to sleep in a corner.

The less one understands science and complex systems, the more one is inclined to believe that the threat of climate change is being 'overstated'. That doesn't include fucking liars, of course. Melting permafrost worsens warming

A perfect summation of your self image. In reality, however, you just creaked open the church door during Sunday services and shouted "I remember TuTu! They had a swimming pool!"

I know you think it's important, darling, but we're busy here, little Petey. Now go play with the other Asbergers.

You're one out of several million, so it would be overly generous to allow you to influence him with even a single pixel of that last sentence... ...thankfully.

Petitioning is not voting, which is anonymous (although, historically, it wasn't always so). It's also not legislating or lobbying, which require disclosure under the PRA (public records act of WA). It's something in between. Is it more like voting or legislating/lobbying? The answer, IMO, is the latter. A petition signer is 'voting' to put a specific piece of legislation, AS WRITTEN, before the legislature and/or voters. The PRA's requirement for disclosure, provided that disclosure doesn't constitute a substantial harm to the signer. That leads to the second question: the possibility of intimidation. Bottom line: it never happened, and the anti disclosure folks couldn't present a credible instance where it it had. It remains a potential harm, but, so far, not an actual one. Finally, there is the 'reasonable expectation of privacy'. Petition forms in WA contain 20 names. They are gathered by thousands of signature gatherers, who can see all of those names. This is a much more open process than voting. Full disclosure: For the reasons above I either voted for disclosure or abstained because I was on the fence. Can't remember. This is an instance where the democratic principle of open government is pitted against privacy. Its not a simple issue.

Not much irony, considering that the ACLU filed an amicus brief strongly in favor of keeping those petition names from public disclosure. SCOTUS thought otherwise, so, yes, if you sign a petition, your name goes on the public record. I don't know what the disclosure process is. You have to apply for it, I believe. I was divided on the issue, as was our board of directors, but we eventually voted for nondisclosure. It's helpful to realize that the plaintiffs were the very folks we fought tooth and claw with to get equal marriage rights in place. So, yeah, we really do do things on principle.

The question remains how to treat the flag on the garment flag at night. Should it be folded and properly stowed? What is washing machine etiquette for a flag?

The feds are also aware that legalization initiatives will only multiply at this point. Gini's not going back in the bottle. It's in there best (political) interests to ride that wave and, at the very least, turn a blind eye to state level smokeouts, focusing their resources instead on international trafficking. They're budgets are non-existent, now, so its a good time for some long overdue shrinkage. The $ trillion plus War on Drugs has increased per capita illicit drug use, strength, variety, and availability. Pretty much a straight flush fail.

Greqoire knows I502 is coming at her. She's knows we're gonna get the signatures, and she's gonna have to deal with this steaming pile of stankweed sooner than later. Better to get a jump on it. Plus...the public in med marijuana states is REALLY FUCKING CONFUSED about what the feds are up to right now. Everybody believs the feds are putting the cabash on med weed. From what I know, that is not accurate...although if you don't actually work for the DEA offices involved in the raids, there's no way to really know that for sure.

An MBA can be as rigorous as any other masters program. Depends on the school, the program, and the student's choice of focus. Having said that...my undergrad mechanical engineering curriculum was WAY harder.

If an interracial fight breaks out between latinos and American flag wearing students (because of the latters' choice of clothing on Cinco de Mayo), and school officials determine that it can be stopped by having the flag wearing students turn their shirts inside out, do they have the right to make those students do that in order to prevent imminent or further violence?

Content restrictions must pass strict scrutiny. The restriction must serve a compelling state interest that cannot be served in a less speech restrictive manner. Time, place, or manner restrictions must withstand intermediate scrutiny. Note that any regulations that would force speakers to change how or what they say do not fall into this category. Time, place, or manner restrictions must: Be content neutral Be narrowly tailored Serve a significant governmental interest Leave open ample alternative channels for communication

Go Christine!

~ sigh ~ Remember the Alamo!

easy. She dodged the question.

A bunch of students wore American flag T shirts on Cingo de Mayo, presumably to poke the large, latino student population in the eye. The school has a history of racial tensions. The school told the students to turn their shirts inside out. So far, the courts have backed them up.