Author: Richard

Wentzville Missouri: Mom faces charges for topless hot tub photo with her teen daughter

From my high school hometown comes a story of a hero and her persecution by a fascist government.

A Missouri woman who posed topless in a hot tub with her teenage daughter faces misdemeanor child endangerment charges, prosecutors say.

The photo, taken by another daughter with a phone camera, was posted on Snapchat and circulated among students at two high schools in the Wentzville area, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported.

St. Charles County Prosecutor Tim Lohmar said both the 50-year-old mother and her 14-year-old daughter had covered their nipples, suggesting they were posing for the camera and expected the photo to be circulated. The girl has already undergone court-ordered counseling for circulating nude pictures of herself last year.

The clear response to this is:

Earlier this year, Kaitlyn Hunt, an 18-year-old — a high school senior, was expelled and charged with two counts of lewd and lascivious battery of a child 12 to 16 years of age (in this case: 14) which is normally something the popular culture frowns upon, but since the other party was another girl, it became a tragic love story or something and there was a big “Free Kate” movement put forward. The parents of the 14 year old girl in the relationship with Kate said they had to go to the law first because after telling Miss Hunt (senior) that Kate needed to “leave [their] daughter alone” and couldn’t stop their lesbian sex to the point of the younger girl sneaking out of the house and blah blah. So fine. Whatever ones position on that situation, there was at least some history and attempts made at avoiding legal entanglement regarding actual sexual activity.

But hand-bra shots of mom and daughter in a hot tub thrown out to Snapchat?
The mother has been charged with misdemeanor child endangerment…

St. Charles County Prosecutor Tim Lomar told local media the woman should be held to account on the charges, which were filed December 12.

“The mother was very clearly present, involved when the picture was taken,” Lomar told St. Louis television station KMOV in an interview. “It certainly had some sexual overtones. This was a mother who made a very poor choice.”

I kid about the unsung heroism of this mother (cuz-lulz) and her unjust persecution but really… it really is unnecessary hassle-by-government into a matter that’s not a big deal. As initially shocking as the summary sounds, examine the logic behind the known facts of this case…

Pictured: Not the photo…

THE PHOTO: Missouri doesn’t have a law forcing females to cover their breasts on private property. Female breasts, however, despite being the milk-sacks of life to our species, are highly sexualized by males and thusly considered  indecent by Western Civilization when exposed, similarly to an exposed penis. For that reason, female breasts are legally classified as nudity and photographs of exposed breasts fall under regulations of such. However, the standard for nudity of the breast is universally the nipples. Indeed, it is not the female breast that is considered indecent, but rather the female nipple, and everyone knows it. That’s why you can cover a boob with pasties and avoid public nudity citations. Well… there is no nipple reported in the photo, so there is no nudity. With no nudity there has to be evidence of abuse or something illegal. Hand-bra’s are usually sexually suggestive and the girl is a minor, but its one friggin picture with zero evidence that the mother had any knowledge of its distribution.

  
Pictured: Not the photo, either. 

THE CIRCUMSTANCES: The picture was taken by a daughter and sent via Snapchat (an app that sends pictures [between users] that are only visible for a few seconds and then deleted) so the boy she sent the awesome shot to either saved it and illegally distributed it or more likely (since no allegations or charges have been made to that affect), this girl sent the pic to everyone on her friggin address book and some buzzkill in the class tattled to their parents. But so what? The most this is is tacky if intentional and, if the mothers profuse claim that this was not posed is true then at worst this was a victimization since it would mean 2 people were breaking no law when a minor took a photograph and distributed it without permission to a person or people who in turn distributed it without permission and got government goons to bully an innocent family in order to protect this Christian country from public sin.

This “26-Ingredient School Lunch Burger” sounds pretty delicious and nutritious.

NPR did this video on hamburgers served in American schools and achieved the opposite of their desired effect. Their description reads “Thiamine mononitrate, disodium inosinate, pyridoxine hydrochloride. In this episode of Tiny Desk Kitchen we explore why so many hard-to-pronounce ingredients ended up in a school burger”. But as soon as you watch the actual video, every ingredient they analyze looks like a perfectly worthy addition to the food.

Just because an ingredient of something you eat is hard for you to pronounce doesn’t make it bad. Acidopholus is one of the best things you can ingest for your guts ecology.

Shocking: Illinois girls suspended for bending their ring fingers

Three Farmington (Ill.) High senior girls basketball players were suspended for making an obscene gesture formed by keeping ones fingers extended, minus the ring finger. The hand formation is called “The Shocker” and refers to a way of penetrating a lady by inserting 2 fingers in her sexual organ and one in her anus but the description is more often referred to in a do-it-yourself phrase that involves the number of fingers with fill-in-the-blank rhyming words to describe the vagina and rectum. ie: “Two in the pink, one in the stink” or “Two in the goo, one in the poo” were the most popular variations back when I was in high school and this kind of thing was slightly more hilarious than it actually is.

From Yahoo Sports:

Farmington senior point guard Jessica Settles addressed the matter on Twitter, first tweeting, “Farmington’s administration shocked us,” followed by a hashtag that included the phrase “f— Farmington.” When a basketball player from a neighboring town responded, asking what happened, Settles tweeted, “suspended two games for shocking ’em in our team and senior picture,” accompanied by an “LOL” and a copy of the picture.

Surely, the administration isn’t pleased with the social media firestorm that has ensued.

Guards Taylor Wassi and Julie Broadway also appear in the photo of the lone seniors on the Farmington girls basketball team. The Canton Daily Ledger recently ran a story on the 10-player team entitled, “Short on experience, low in numbers,” which includes a team photo that does not feature any players on the roster flashing the hand gesture.

The gesture received national attention when cheerleaders for Wichita State’s men’s basketball team flashed it on TV during the Shockers’ Final Four run this past March.

Tis the Season to shoot, stab, kill and trample your fellow man for less expensive products

It’s the wonderful time of year again where early in the morning the day after a national holiday celebrating thankfulness of what we have, the follow-up holiday of trampling over your fellow patriots in pursuit of getting more begins.

It’s the one time of year when American’s wait in lines and navigate often violent and dangerous crowds in pursuit of products now lowered to their normal profit margins for a fake-sale event after having been artificially inflated in order to facilitate the illusion of a grand bargain.

Amidst the human bulldozing and brawls and Salvation Army kettle thefts and stabbings over parking spots and shootings over televisions and dragging of cops through Kohls parking lots and general holiday cheer – it’s important to remember that… actually, I lost the point of where I was going with that.

http://blackfridaydeathcount.com tracks deaths and injuries on this joyous day. So far the tally is at 4 dead, 74 injured.

Merry 25-days-of-Christmas, Everyone!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_aGuMvMyik

Ann Coulter defends Alec Baldwin with logic

Alec Baldwin is being attacked by the Tolerance-Police thugs in the hippie faction he supports. The truth is that there’s nothing there to attack him over. While some conservatives might take delight at Baldwin being such an outspoken liberal democrat and then getting chewed up by the liberal democrat wing policing his private conduct with someone allegedly harassing him, Ann Coulter uses logic to come to his empathetic defense.

Speaking with NewsMaxTV host Steve Malzberg Monday evening, Coulter defended the hot-headed MSNBC host from suspension, dismissing his use of the word “fag” as throwaway curse word.

“They shouldn’t have suspended him,” she said, noting that the photographer was “not actually gay.” According to Coulter, “This was just a curse word. It was like using the f-word and, frankly, a lot of these paparazzi photographers deserve it.”

After his comments resulted in media outrage, Baldwin apologized (but not before claiming he said “fathead,” not “fag”). Coulter is willing to forgive the actor’s outbursts, given how much entertainment media hounds him and his family.

“It’s not something Alec Baldwin said in a calm moment on television,” she told Malzberg. “He has been harassed horribly by photographers and now this stalker, and he’s trying to protect his family and he curses. That is what happened.”

That is exactly what happened and good for her for pointing it out.

 

Wonderama’s Snake Game is Weirdly Compelling

I heard someone on a podcast reference this “Wonderama with Bob McAllister” thing and I looked it up. What I found was oddly fascinating.

If you feel like ingesting an 8 minute sample of children’s programming from another time (at least a decade before me, since one of the questions is “who is the president” and the answer is Nixon and he was prez from 1960-1974), check it out in this Snake-in-a-can game segment. It seems like a lot of time-filler just to occupy groups of kids with working moms. Or something. Every can appears to have a snake, even though it felt like to me that the host was implying its not certain that there are any inside. After you get the snakes, you get a chance to win the prize for that can if you can answer a question on sports, entertainment or government.

No other TV game held quite the thrill and suspense of Snake-In-A-Can. Wonderama aired on weekends in NY on WNEW-TV. It started out as a six-hour show, later shrinking to an equally unreasonable four hours. Two-to-three of these hours were shots of kids waving their arms; the rest of the program had exciting games like this one, where many contestants were too short to be seen. But Bob McAllister was really great with the kids – just watch!


This little girl went on to grow up to be Michelle Obama. or something.

Thirst for approval makes you a weirdo

No one trusts people who try too hard to be liked because we all naturally assume they’re up to no good. Everyone is drawn to people who appear not to care about their acceptance for the same principals. I realized this in 8th grade when I literally wrote analysis down in a notebook one night trying to compare myself to the cool kids in my class and figure out why the hell despite my best efforts for the past 3 years I had completely failed to advance into that group. After realizing the difference between “I want people to like me” and “I’m not at all worried about whether or not people like me, I’ll just do me” I felt like I had wasted a significant portion of my life, but that is only because I was a dumb teenager. Many people continue to not realize and notice this into adulthood and actually *do* end up wasting precious years and missing out on experiences and relationships because of the lack of self awareness.

This aspect of human psychology is articulated well in an interview in the Washington Post with behavioral economist Sendhil Mullainathan about how scarcity and insecurity lead people to make more desperate decisions because… they are more desperate.

The title is “Being poor changes your thinking about everything” but that thesis seems too obvious to most people I think. Instead, I find his articulations about behavioral reactions in regards to scarcity to be more enlightening when applied to social interactions. Mainly that most lonely people don’t actually lack social skills, they just find themselves in lonely situations that activate survival instincts that make them offputting and weird because they’re trying so hard to make people like them. This traps them in isolation because their response to their loneliness is literally perpetuating their loneliness…

Another tragic example concerns lonely people. The lonely are interesting because it’s so tempting to say: “Oh, lonely people. Yeah, those are just losers, or whatever. Those are people who can’t make friends.” Actually, the data suggests that the vast majority of lonely people don’t lack any social skills at all. It’s just they found themselves in lonely situations.

You move to a new town and you don’t really know anybody. How do you meet people? It’s hard to meet people. The longer that persists, now the longer you’ve been lonely, and then ‑‑ this is the key part with the lonely and the busy and the money and the poor ‑‑ now that you’re in that state, your behavior changes, and the way your behavior changes seems to keep you in that state.

There are, I think, a few ways in which your behavior changes. Scarcity draws a lot of attention to itself. That’s the key finding that I think motivates everything. When you’re experiencing scarcity, your mind automatically focuses on that thing. That focus brings benefits, which we talk about. But it has some costs, too, which help create the scarcity trap.

One cost, for the lonely: If you want to be interesting, the one thing you shouldn’t do is really focus on the fact that “I want this person to like me.” That’s going to make you very uninteresting. But the lonely, they just can’t help but focus on that.

There’s this beautiful study in which subjects speak into a microphone and they either think that someone else listening to them, or they think they’re just talking. Among the non-lonely, there’s very little difference in how third parties would rate subjects’ responses. A third party rates subjects as equally interesting in both conditions. Yet lonely people become less interesting when they think someone is listening. It’s sort of a choking effect. That’s one kind of scarcity trap.

More people should learn this about themselves and others.

The “Why aren’t you protesting Divorce?” fallacy has a really obvious answer…

I wish this dumb culture-war over redefining marriage would either end or be fought more wisely and logically by both sides, but since you dummies can’t seem to think straight and I have a peeve about rampant illogic, here I am again to remind you what should be obvious.

On the pro-redefinition side (ie: the winning side), the dumb argument goes something like “if you’re so outraged over homosexuals destroying the sanctity of marriage then why aren’t you equally outraged over divorce??”. This takes many forms, often with specific examples of celebrities like Britney Spears and Kim Kardashian’s super short marriages. The argument goes: if THEY can get married and divorced so easily, why shouldn’t people of the same gender get legal marriage rights? Adultery is brought into the mix too sometimes and neither makes any sense at all.

Bringing up divorce in the redefinition of marriage  is like bringing up car accidents as evidence that cars should be redefined to include boats. The response should be a resounding: WTF?

What do car accidents have to do with anything? Yes, some cars get into accident. The relation of that to redefining what a car is, is nothing.

Yes. Some marriages similarly don’t work out. No one is celebrating that. So what is making you dummies think you have a good point there? (rhetorical question. the answer is that its a strictly emotional appeal that no one bothers to examine logically to understand what they’re actually saying the way i’m doing right now).

And no, it’s not “half of all marriages” that divorce as the myth goes (check the data yourself), but that’s a tangent anyway since same sex break-ups are no less frequent, so all you’re arguing on THAT front is to…er…add more divorce… Your point is supposedly “redefining marriage makes sense because there is so much divorce so lets add more divorce by redefining marriage”… you’re unmaking your point, bro.

But even though opposite-sex divorce isn’t an argument for same-sex marriage: why are people protesting against same-sex marriage and not protesting against divorce or adultery?…

Because there aren’t advocacy groups, parades, and entire political movements arguing for adultery and divorce to legally and socially change the definition and practice of marriage from what its always been (divorce and adultery aren’t new in the institution but redefining it from opposite sex unions is).

The “what about divorce” fallacy is used to say “why are you unfairly picking on us homos, you bigot jerks??” but outside of the tiny percentage of actual-bigot-jerks (the dozen or so people in the Westoboro cult) the whole “sanctity of marriage” thing has been entirely a reaction to an assault on said sanctity of marriage in the ways I listed.

So… that’s why… You’re on a side assaulting something large groups of people care about and…they’re resisting that assault on that thing they care about…

If there were advocacy groups and attempts to change laws to redefine marriage to include non-committed relationships, are you claiming that there wouldn’t be exactly the same push-back? Come on, people… THINK a little.

Except exactly that kind of critical thinking is prohibitive to the argument since the premise is claiming victimhood and thus doesn’t work if the pushback is legitimate.

The crappy thing that I am upset at the gay-activists over is the dishonesty and dirty trickery in making this otherwise neat-o societal and governmental change. It could have been a glorious thing if you used logic, reason, understanding and leading-by-example to advocate for such a shift. Instead, the dominant voices on the issue are bigoted hatemongers that claim there is no possible legitimate argument against their position other than being (ironically) a hatemongering bigot.

Back to the boats and cars analogy: This really annoys me as someone who thinks it would be an interesting societal change to include boats as “cars” because you are forcing me to endorse falsehoods for a good cause and doing so totally needlessly. I find it wildly distasteful that the immediate argument so often trends to hating on the traditional-car people for unprovoked and unreasonable reasons. I don’t care if you want to redefine cars to include boats but could we not be total jerks to the millions of people who are car enthusiasts and want to keep calling cars cars and boats, boats? Why do we need to call those car-lovers people anti-boat just because they love cars? How do you not see that it’s not hypocritical for them to even have enjoyed or currently enjoy boating while still thinking it is a better societal idea for the words to refer to distinct vehicles? Especially when they are for full legal privileges to both vehicles – wtf are you doing by needlessly hating on people who don’t hate you? You’re dividing America and being a jerk is what. Their position of not wanting the word “car” to refer to boats doesn’t ban boats or boating or water sports or anything at all. It just makes a separation with verbiage  by using different words for things that are, derr, different. Why can’t we just logically argue with these car enthusiasts that it won’t be the culture shock or motorized-travel disaster that they think it will be if we redefine the word? Why do emotional appeals need to be used to smear the side resisting an arbitrary change that you just decided was important within the last 10 years (out of 100% of the existence of both boats and cars living harmoniously throughout history)?

Personally, I don’t give a crap about the word-opening cuz it pushes the culture and society closer to accepting and legally endorsing polygamy which is what I want for myself when I’m ready to settle down with my herem, but wanting something to happen doesn’t mean we need to be stupid about it.

The Zimmerman Witchhunt was a historical event in manufactured outrage

A Florida man has been charged with attempted murder and hate crime after fatally shooting an African American man in the head. He expressed disbelief over his arrest, telling officers that he “only shot a nigger.” That mans name is Walton Henry Butler and if the allegations are true, he obviously deserves a lot of scorn from the public in addition to his hopefully lifetime jail sentence.

Instead of being targeted by activists however, race-baiters are collectively going after a made-up charge of racism in a different Florida shooting in where a hispanic man shot a single bullet, allegedly in self defense from having been attacked and suffering a brutal beating by a teenager. Despite no evidence of racism being involved in the shot that resulted in the alleged attackers death, he is being lionized as a martyr and the shooter is being demonized as a racist.

The prosecution is going big with the “taking the law into his own hands” angle.

Judge Debra Nelson issued her ruling over the objections of Zimmerman’s lawyers shortly before a prosecutor delivered a closing argument in which he portrayed the defendant as an aspiring police officer who assumed Martin was up to no good and took the law into his own hands. “A teenager is dead. He is dead through no fault of his own,” prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda told the jurors. “He is dead because a man made assumptions. … Unfortunately because his assumptions were wrong, Trayvon Benjamin Martin no longer walks this Earth.”

There is literally zero evidence that Trayvon Martin is dead because of “assumptions” that were made because, while there is zero evidence that Zimmermans single shot was based on suspicion or taking the law into his own hands but rather was a legitimate use of self defense against an attacker who evidently assumed it would be a good idea to violently assault someone who had a legal firearm on them.

George Zimmerman called the police to express concern about a “punk” he saw suspiciously roaming the eves of other peoples houses and attempted to talk to the individual. Trayvon Martin called a girl friend and mentioned annoyance about a “creepy ass cracker” he saw watching him. Juan Williams:

George Zimmerman faces life in jail as a jury considers second-degree murder charges against him for killing 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. But thanks to the media he is already sentenced to life in the American public’s mind as a racist. NBC edited a tape of Zimmerman’s call to police as he was following Martin to make him appear to be focused on Martin’s race. The New York Times has referred to him in unique racial terms as a “white Hispanic.” The terminology was necessary to have the story fit into a well-worn news narrative throughout American history from the Scottsboro Boys to Emmett Till to Rodney King – the black victim of white racism. Hispanic people can be as racist as black or white people in a country with a deep history of racism. But, apparently for the Times, Zimmerman’s whiteness was important. It fit their good versus evil tale of a white racist killing an innocent black man.

This is a stunning case of media malpractice in fomenting hatred in service to an immoral and divisive agenda. There is absolutely nothing special about this unfortunate case that merits such media attention and making up details in order to fluff it up to justify the undue attention is some crazy propaganda-conspiracy shit unfitting of this Great Republic.
As I saw someone post on Facebook:
My prediction: George Zimmerman will walk on all charges, and appear in the next season of Dancing With the Stars alongside America’s favorite diabetic, Paula Deen. Then maybe (video courtesy of the Washington Free Beacon)