Tuesday - March 01, 2005

Teachers Gone Wild

After reading this story, I was intrigued by one very serious statement in it. I have a question for Officer Risley: how can their actions only have ”appeared to be sexual intercourse”? Were they screwing or not? What else looks like screwing but is not? Hmmmmm?

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (Reuters) - A California high school teacher was arraigned on Monday at a Sacramento court accused of having sex with a student in a car as her two-year child was strapped into the back seat.

Margaret De Barraicua, 30, a teacher trainee, was charged with four counts of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, a 16-year-old student. The married woman was caught having sex in the late afternoon last week in what was apparently a consensual agreement, officials said.

“We received a call about a suspicious parked vehicle at a school here in Sacramento,” said local police spokesman Justin Risley. “They got there and observed two people, windows-steamed-up type of thing.”

“They found them to be partially clothed and engaging in what appeared to be sexual intercourse.”

Her two-year old son was strapped by a seat belt in the back of the car during the time, he said.

Posted by The Skipper     on 03/01/2005 at 02:27 PM   
Filed Under: • Colleges-Professors •  
• Comments (11) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

The Jerk

OK, I know I promised not to show any interest in the Micharl Jackson trial but I saw this picture of the King Of Weird with his mother and brother entering the courtoom and before I knew it my brain had connected the dots in the usual weird way. I was instantly reminded of Steve Martin in the 1979 movie “The Jerk”. If you remember the movie then you know what I’m talking about ....

Posted by The Skipper     on 03/01/2005 at 01:39 PM   
Filed Under: • Celebrities •  
• Comments (9) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Road Kill

“Over The Hedge” by Michael Fry and T Lewis

Posted by The Skipper     on 03/01/2005 at 08:46 AM   
Filed Under: • Humor •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Privacy? Security?  What’s The Law Say?

ot much.  Yet.  Read this story about an eccentric millionaire in San Francisco who is bucking the system.

the piece is humorously well--written and makes a great read.

I’m looking forward to your comments.

Posted by Ranting Right Wing Howler     on 03/01/2005 at 08:24 AM   
Filed Under: • Miscellaneous •  
• Comments (52) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Pussies In The News

here do I begin with this?

Let’s start here.  One hell of a cat-fight took place in Ill-Annoy.  It was so bad that an eye was put out and police had to use a taser in order to subdue.  Given the injuries they were also left with no recourse but to use gunfire to end the misery.

Meanwhile, in Florida, a fire-fighter gets in hot water because he got pissed off his truck was scratched so he dumped the pussy in the swamp.  The pussy came back.  Like all good pussies do.

Posted by Ranting Right Wing Howler     on 03/01/2005 at 08:11 AM   
Filed Under: • Miscellaneous •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

More About Eminent Domain

It’s happening right here in Florida, about 3 hours south.

A guy goes into the boondocks, buys 160 acres, fights off predators and insects; builds his own house, digs his own well, lives there for over 30 years.

Now the state wants it for an everglades restoration project claiming it used to be underwater and it needs to be reverted back.  I agree with the state...................if that were the case.  But the guy says he has huge timber on the land that predates any canal work to block the water and those trees would not have grown is their roots were water bound.

So the state needs to fuck off!!!!

The place was appraised at over $850,000. The state offered about $700,000 in 2002.  Then $1.2 million.  Then $4.5 million.  he won’t sell.

This is what he thinks of the enviro-weenies:

What I’m talking about is sense. We’re up to our armpits in alligators because people are just crazy. They’re fanatics.

“In the paper today, there’s a story about damn red-cockaded woodpeckers and they’re saving them and going through all kind of hell. People are not running around shooting red-cockaded woodpeckers. I haven’t shot one in 20 or 30 years.

“God, spare me from the damn environmentalists, ‘cause they are the cause of me being in the jam I’m in.”

Meanwhile, the enviro-weenies, living in their little bubble of fixed definitions, say he can’t love the land because he’s mining it.

What?  That’s supposed to have some relevance to anything?  Are they attempting to re-define “love?” And what’s wrong with taking the lime-rock out?  Someone’s gotta do it.  And he gets $18 a truck for it with a couple of hundred trucks a day going through his property!!!!  Do the math.  I’d LOVE it, too!

Read about it here.

Posted by Ranting Right Wing Howler     on 03/01/2005 at 07:40 AM   
Filed Under: • Environment • Judges-Courts-Lawyers •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Women

esterday Allan ranted about this dim-bulbed bitch complaining about the plight of women.  She went on about the 19th Amendment (women’s right to vote) saying the Constitution was ratified with that particular amendment.  Dumbass.

But she also cried like a little girl (and you wonder why men can not respect women in the workplace when at the first sign of trouble they break down and cry?) about wages.

Funny how things work out.  I have here for you, gentle readers, an article from PMS-NBC talking to that very same subject.

Just exactly what is it about these femi-nazi bitches that they think they are owed anything?  They scream “UNFAIR WAGES” but cherry pick the data that supports their cries.  Data like only “averages” over “all fields.” They conveniently forget that many women like to have flexibility and safety in their careers so they PURPOSELY choose desk jobs, service jobs, inside jobs, low wage jobs (which give them lots of flexibility.)

When you have a work force primarily dominated by one sex wherein wages are already low (why should I pay police or fireman wages to an admin assistant?) OF COURSE the numbers will be skewed downwards.

Go read the piece.

Posted by Ranting Right Wing Howler     on 03/01/2005 at 07:23 AM   
Filed Under: • Colleges-Professors • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Gun Grabbers In The News

un grabbers are at it again.  This time it’s in Ill-Annoy. 

What do they want to ban?  .50-caliber rifles and ammo.  We wrote about this sort of shit here and here.

Even the nanny-staters are admitting these guns weigh 35 pounds and are about 5.5 feet long.

So far not one crime has been reported wherein the shooter in the crime used this type of rifle.

But they are trying to ban tem anyway.  Why?  They might be used to shoot at airplanes!!!!!!!!!  Anyone ever try hitting an object going 300 miles an hour?  Your common criminal can’t do it.  Your average gun owning home owner can’t. 

And for all you RINOs out there gushing and orgasming over Arnold Schwarzenegger?  He signed legislation like this into law.

Posted by Ranting Right Wing Howler     on 03/01/2005 at 07:22 AM   
Filed Under: •   
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Jail House Innovation

ou’re in jail.  In the cell next to you is a woman (yes, co-ed jails) who you are attracted to---and she to you.

Problem is, there’s a wall between you.

But hell, you’re a Turk.  You’re horny.  And she’s prettier than the goat fucker on the other side of you.

So you resolve to make a hole in the wall, “just so” high.

The wall is only 3.6 inches thick.

You look down at your crotchatorial area, do a little measuring and come (no pun intended---yet) to the conclusion that this could work.

She scootches up to the hole, you carefully insert “joey” so as not to abrade him on the concrete and, well, you get the picture.

Nine months later you have a third inmate.

The jail, by the way, gives you both 4 more months and makes you pay about $56 for damaging the wall.

True story.

Posted by Ranting Right Wing Howler     on 03/01/2005 at 07:22 AM   
Filed Under: • Outrageous •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

A Native American View

f you’d like to read a Native American professor’s view of Chief Ward “Shitting Bull” Churchill (yes, I stole it from Emperor Misha and I hope he does not send the Imperial Storm Troopers to kill me for it) see this piece.

While you’re at it, go visit David Yeagley’s site, Bad Eagle where he has a couple of good articles about this fraud, Chief “Shitting Bull” Churchill.  While you’re at it, read the guy’s bio. WOW!

Let’s stay with Chief Wad-ass Shitting Bull for a moment or so longer.

Reader Terry brings up a couple of things worth mentioning.  Read it for yourselves:

Two names that keep popping up throughout the Ward Churchill theater of the absurd are Michael Bellesiles and Joseph Ellis.  Both are academics that were censured for taking liberties with the truth.  Sound familiar?

Michael Bellesiles was a professor of history at Emory who wrote an historical account of firearms and their use in the early years of America.  From the beginning it was hotly disputed.  Bellesiles eventually resigned in disgrace because his scholarship was declared “unprofessional and misleading”.

Linked....is a summary of the Bellesiles story published in the WSJ. See if the excerpt in italics sounds familiar to what is playing out right now, today, in the Churchill saga.

Yes, the spokesmen for the opposing interest groups threw themselves into the fray. But soon the real split became one within academia. It pitted those who cared about scholarly integrity against those who were happy to ignore, or promote, Mr. Bellesiles’s shoddy, perhaps fraudulent, work if it helped their political agenda.

Another name that pops up is Joseph Ellis.  Joseph Ellis, a professor at Holyoke, was given one year leave w/o pay for lying about his war record in Vietnam.  You may recall one of the allegations presently pending against Ward Churchill is that he lied about his service in Vietnam.  WC claimed to be a real snake eater, special ops, Rambo type. His record indicates he was a clerk/typist in the motor pool.

Thanks, Terry!

Posted by Ranting Right Wing Howler     on 03/01/2005 at 07:21 AM   
Filed Under: • Colleges-Professors • Education •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

One Of Those Days

I can already tell.  Today is going to be one of those days.

There is SO much stuff out there to comment on that I many be delayed in getting my normal number of postings up as I try to better organize my thoughts.

Or maybe I am just a bit discombobulated right now and can’t focus properly.

Stay tuned.

Posted by Ranting Right Wing Howler     on 03/01/2005 at 06:20 AM   
Filed Under: • Personal •  
• Comments (6) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Eminent Domain, Part II

ou folks might as well get used to it. This topic is going to be covered extensively here. What is happening in New London, CT is an abomination. Vilmar summed it up nicely yesterday with excerpts from an excellent article by Jeff Jacoby. The Supreme Court heard arguments last week and is deliberating now before delivering an opinion. Make no mistake, this will be a critical decision and will affect all of us. Here it is in a nutshell ....

■ The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution contain clauses prohibiting the federal or state governments from seizing your property without due process of law, meaning the government has to have a valid, legal reason for taking your property and has to reimburse you fairly for the theft.

■ In a 1954 decision (Berman v. Parker) the Supreme Court handed down a decision that opened up a can of worms. The decision basically said that urban blight is sufficient reason for government to condemn a piece of property and force the owner to sell the property to the government for cleanup to be put to better use.

■ However, in the fifty years since this decision, the state and local governments around the country have gradually broadened the definition of “eminent domain” as it is called to include all manner of reasons to condemn a person’s property and take it from them, at substantially lower than market value in some cases. In other words, the crooks at City Hall have gotten greedier and greedier.

■ In New London, CT, the city decided to take some property because (hold on to your hat) the property could be used for an office development that would generate more revenue for the city. In point of fact, the “office development” is only in the “wishful thinking” stage but the city wants the property now .... so they condemned it.

■ I’ve seen pictures of the property owner’s house in a recent issue of Time Magazine. Susette Kelo owns a very pretty, well-kept home. For the city to condemn this property is an affront to all sensible people in this country. It is theft, pure and simple. By government. Of a citizen’s house and home. For profit. Outrage.

I urge you to go read the Merit Briefs on this case at the American Bar Association’s web site. I cannot tell you how critical this ruling will be. In fact, I’ll just let you read the closing argument of the attorney for the homeowners in his Petitioner’s Reply Brief ....

A ruling in favor of the homeowners will not disturb the general course of development throughout the country. On the other hand, a ruling in favor of the Respondents will change the law dramatically for home and business owners. Every home and every business, everywhere in the country, will be subject to condemnation if a local government prefers some other private party’s use of the property. Or, as counsel for the NLDC (New London Development Corporation) put it recently, “We need to get housing at the upper end, for people like the Pfizer employees. . . . They are the professionals, they are the ones with the expertise and the leadership qualities to remake the city – the young urban professionals who will invest in New London, put their kids in school, and think of this as a place to stay for 20 or 30 years.” Iver Peterson, There Goes the Old Neighborhood, to Revitalization, The New York Times, Jan. 30, 2005, at A25. The condemnations in this case are an act of raw preference for one type of people, one type of housing, and higher tax dollars over the current residents. Cities may seek wealthy residents and higher taxes, but they cannot do so at the expense of constitutional rights. The ruling of the Connecticut Supreme Court paves the way for increasing use of eminent domain for private development. This Court should resist Respondents’ urging to read public use out of the Constitution and thereby fundamentally alter the rights of all property owners in the United States.

Posted by The Skipper     on 03/01/2005 at 01:10 AM   
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-Lawyers •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner