Racist Ranting Anti-Spanish Creepy Lawyer Gets Awesome Mariachi Party

Aaron Schlossberg, whose vile racist rant went viral, has a very,
very bad week because everybody is hating on him. Good!

I've heard a few people say that maybe we're piling up too hard on Aaron Schlossberg.

Schlossberg is that icky New York lawyer in that viral video ranting against a couple of people because they were speaking in Spanish to each other in public.

Imagine! Hearing someone speak a language other than English in New York City of all places!

Uh-huh.

Well, that video has everybody thinking Schlossberg is a piece of crap, and they're right. And he's had a rough few days because of it. Hounded by the press, his landlord kicking his law office to the curb, everybody hating on him.

It's been suggested it's time to lay off him. However, Schlossberg was exercising his free speech, in a particularly odious way, when he ranted at those people for gawd knows why. And people are exercising their free speech when they're callilng Schlossberg out on his stupidity.

Incidentally, Schlossberg seems to have a habit of ranting at "foreigners" or whatever, so he's finally getting his comeuppance.

And I have to say, some of the protests have been pretty damn fun. I don't know why he just doesn't participate. Yesterday, there was a mariachi party in front of Schlossberg's apartment building. (In a nice touch, whoever manages that building flew a Mexican flag on its roof.)

I also hear the tacos served at the mariachi party/protest in front of Schlossberg's apartment building were delicious.

I'm sure Schlossberg has gotten death threats, which is completely wrong and shouldn't happen. But these simultaneously light hearted and serious protests against Schlossberg are just perfect. And should continue.

Here's a clip of the mariachi event in front of his building yesterday:

Today's Overreaction: Cop Has Ex-Wife Jailed For Griping About Him On Facebook

The Facebook post that got Anne King arrested by
her vengeful ex-husband cop. He's now being sued

There's a strange lawsuit bubbling down in Georgia that started with this Facebook post by Anne King, griping about her ex-husband.

"That moment when everyone in your house has the flu and you ask your kids' dad to ge them (not me) more Motrin and Tylenol and he refuses."

OK, so that doesn't put the ex-husband in the best light possible, but hey, everybody complains on Facebook right?

Well, if the allegations in a lawsuit are correct, the ex-husband now looks much, much worse.

The ex-husband is Washington County sheriff deputy Corey King, who, according to the lawsuit filed  Anne King, had her arrested and jailed for posting the complaint. He also had Anne King's friend Susan Hines, who posted a response in support on the Facebook message.

All Hines said was "POS. Give me an hour and check your mailbox. I'll be GLAD to pick up the slack."

A local magistrate called the comments a criminal defamation case and threatened to an Mrs. King from Facebook says television station WRDW.

The case finally went to a more professional state court judge, who told the women, "I don't even know why you're here," as he promptly dismissed the charges, as Popehat notes.

Small town "justice" being what it is sometimes, Corey King and a local magistrate didn't seem to have a firm grasp of the niceties of First Amendent law.

The local magistrate, Ralph O. Todd, who is not a lawyer, somehow got elected to be that local judge, but boy does he seem to relish the role.

According to Popehat, Todd's criminal complaint against the women said, "Subject did, without privilege to do so ad with intent to defame another, communicate false matter which tends to expose one who is alive to hatred, contempt or ridicule, ad which tends to provoke a breach of the peace, specifically subject did make derogatory and degrading comments directed at and about Corey King, for the purpose of providing a breach of the peace."

Them there's some hifalutin' words, but of course, sometimes people who don't worry all that much about what's legal when they get into petty feuds over an insult.

Anne King could well get the last laugh with her lawsuit. She had the constitutional right to her opinion, expressed on Facebook, and her sheriff deputy ex might himself end up on the wrong end of the law after all.

Pettiness boomerangs sometimes, doesn't it?

Professional Anarchists And That Terrible Bowling Green Massacre Humor Social Media

Here's one image of the "Bowling Green
Massacre" that's been making its way
around the web

Say what you want about the Trump administration: When somebody there misspeaks, we get a torrent of online humor.

Hey, you need something go get you going.

Today's humor came from President Trump's unfortunate wording in a tweet complaining about protesters opposed to him.

"Professional anarchists, thugs and paid protesters are proving the point of the millions of people who voted to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!" Trump wailed in a 6:48 a.m. tweet Friday morning.

In case you haven't noticed, "professional anarchist" is more than a bit of  an oxymoron. By definition, anarchists aren't professional..

Then there was the Kellyanne Conway comment about the "Bowling Green Massacre" as justification for the so-called "Muslim Ban" executive order by Trump. She obviously misspoke, since there has been no "Bowling Green Massacre" that anybody can remember.

To be fair, Conway later tweeted that she misspoke, and was referring to a couple terrorists who had allegedly been plotting something around Bowling Green. There was obviously no real life massacre.

More on that in a minute.

It looked like quite a few people were ready to sign up to be "professional anarchists" if the pay was right.

One wag asked: "Wait, how do I become a 'professional' anarchist? What's the pay like? What paperwork do I have to fill out? What qualifications do I need?"

The Bowling Green Massacre got a lot more play, however.

One of the most popular things that popped up was the Bowling Green Massacre Victims' Fund.  If you click on the link, you get automatically transferred to the ACLU donations page.


I saw a tweet from Jimmy Kareliussen (@JMKareliussen) that said: "February 30th will henceforth be known as "Bowling Green Massacre Memorial Day."

Also on Twitter, mormonLIBERALmafia (@VoteMorales) said. "More people would have attended the @realDonaldTrump inauguration but they all died in the Bowling Green Massacre. Sad."

Natasha  Rothwell, (@nathasharothwell)  referencing what looked like Trump's confusion over whether Frederick Douglass is a living person, tweeted, "Saddened and sickened by Frederick Douglass' silence surrounding the Bowling Green Massacre. 

Others counseled people to tone it down regarding the massacre. Justin Shanes (@justinshanes) noted: "Finding these Bowling Green Massacre jokes to be a little too soon. Out of respect, we should wait until it takes place." 

More ominously, outside the jokes, Conway again whined that people aren't "respecting" Donald Trump. The common theme from the Trump folks seems to be that the media ought to just shut up.

I guess they don't want to do things that attract, you know, scrutiny and challenges.

Conway described the media approach to Trump this way, in an interview with radio host Sean Hannity:

"It never took on the aura of respect that it deserved, and if you are nt showing the President and his main spokespeople respect, then you're not showing the office respect, and you are inciting mob mentality if not mob violence."

That's so rich coming from the Trumpsters. Like they show anyone respect. Plus, you gotta earn it, bub. Act like a president and people might start treating you like one, Donald.

And yes, it's the job of the media to inform people. If they choose to protest based on the information about the Trump administration they can, since there's this little thing called the First Amendment.

Besides, with a few exceptions, most of the demonstrations against Trump have been quite peaceful.

So Kellyanne, Quitcherbitchin' and get back to work. And no more alternative facts, please.

Burlington, Vermont Police Chief Has Perfect Response To Protests On Veterans Day.

Burlington, Vermont Police Chief Brandon del Pozo
got veterans and democracy exactly right in
a statement about anti-Trump protests on Veterans Day.  

I'm going to let Burlington, Vermont Police Chief Brandon del Pozo be my unwitting guest blogger today.

Like many cities across the nation, people in Burlington are holding an anti-Trump rally.  

The march against Trump in Burlington is scheduled for today, Veteran's Day. Some people objected to the demonstration being held on Veterans Day.

Here's how del Pozo responded to that objection today on Facebook:

"There's a rally scheduled today at City Hall Park to rebuke what so many feel is the hateful and racist rhetoric of the United States president-elect.

Some people are upset that it's happening on Veteran's Day, a time reserved for somber reflection on the service and sacrifice of so many everyday Americans. 

But I think it's the perfect day for a protest rally. How do you better honor people's legacy than by using something great they've given you?

Protest on Veteran's Day, Americans, if you desire! It's our right, and it was secured by the men and women who are our veterans. It seems like a more profound way to honor them than simply laying a wreath."

By the way, responding to critics on Facebook, del Pozo assured everyone he'd have the same attitude had Clinton won and right wing protesters took to the streets. He also said he has no tolerance for violence. He just wants to encourage peaceful democracy.

Good work, Chief!!!

Milo Yiannnopoulos Can Just Shut Up Now, Thank You

Tech guy, all around troll and jerk Milo Yiannopouos
is whining that Twitter finally kicked him out
because of his abusive Tweets and how he
encouraged others to attack people online.  

Poor Milo Yiannopoulos.

He's this weird guy, a former tech startup sort of guy who is gay and seems to hate gays, loves Donald Trump, and is more than a bit of an Internet troll who also has a somewhat shaky background in the tech industry.  

Last week, he launched a Twitter attack against Leslie Jones, the comedian and actor currently starring in the "Ghostbusters" reboot.

That part is unremarkable. People criticize and troll public figures such as actors and politicians on Twitter all the time.

What happened next turned into a big fight over free speech, and how awful you can get with your free speech before somebody tells you to shut up already. Twitter told Yiannopoulos to shut up already.

A lot of people cheered that move. Others didn't.

Yiannopoulos has got a great big posse of fans. A lot of them are trolls, and as Yiannopoulos egged them on, the trolls unleashed a huge and unrelenting racist and sexist attack on Jones, calling her a gorilla, saying she was the source of AIDS, you know, nice things like that.

The "problem" largely stems from Ghostbusters. The misgynistic trolls can't stand the fact the new movie has a female cast. And worse, Jones is African-American. Egads! On top of that, she's not a toothpick skinny supermodel with breast implants the size of watermelons. How dare she!

Also, female comedians are supposedly not funny, according to these idiots. (I'm sure my fellow fans of female comedians starting with Lucille Ball and Phyllis Diller going all the way up to today's Jones, Samantha Bee, Tina Fey and many others would beg to differ.).

In any event, Yiannopoulos and the followers he was encouraging  finally got so odious that Twitter permanently kicked him out, says BuzzFeed News.

"'People should be able to express diverse opinions and beliefs on Twitter,'  a company spokesperson said in a statement provided to BuzzFeed News. 'But no on deserved to be subjected to targeted abuse online, and our rule prohibit inciting or engaging in the targeted abuse or harassment of others."

Yiannopoulos and his legions of follows  (almost 400,000 of them before Twitter suspended his account.) are crying foul, saying Twitter is suppressing free speech and squelching comments that don't adhere to a liberal, politically correct skew.

Yiannopoulous was quick to respond that it was just Twitter hating on conservatives. "With the cowardly suspension of my account, Twitter has confirmed itself as a safe space or Muslim terrorists and Black Lives Matter exremenists, but a no-go zone for conservatives."

Twitter does make its terms of service pretty clear. "You may not incite or engage in the targeted abuse or harassment of others" You could get kicked off Twitter if you incite others to harass another account or if the primary purpose of an account is to send abusive messages to others.

Twitter's terms of service do not say conservative opinions can't be held. There's tons of conservatism on Twitter, actually. Take a look if you don't believe me.

Still, Yiannopoulos said of his banishment: "This is the end for Twitter. Anyone who cares about free speech has been sent a clear message You're not welcome on Twitter."

First off all, Yiannopoulos is confusing Twitter with the government. The First Amendment says that the government cannot squelch free speech. Like it or not, a private company can.

Still, the more free speech the better, and it's always a good thing for social media and media in general allow a full-throated airing of diverse opinions.

I generally don't like it when any business or institution, say, cancels a speech because activists don't like the speaker's opinion.  But it's a different thing entirely when the speech becomes harassment. Would you want somebody constantly yelling on your front lawn that they want to kill you? Well you shouldn't be doing that on Twitter either.

If you don't like somebody, you can say so on Twitter. Just don't turn the dislike into threats and harassment. Look, I'm saying here that I don't like Yiannopoulos, and I bet Twitter won't throw me off. Especially since I don't want to see him suffer any harm and I DON'T  want armies of trolls attacking him online.

However, Yiannopoulos forgets that free speech has consequences. Free speech is a right and a responsibility.

When you start massively harassing a person, and get your friends to pile on, there's going to be pushback, and a lot of us will tell you to shut up already, just like Twitter did.

So quicherbitchin' Milo, and remember that just because you're yacking up a storm doesn't mean we have to listen. You don't deserve a special platform any more than the next guy.

Yiannopoulos isn't the first person to whine about not being guaranteed a free public forum to spew garbage and he won't be the last.

According to Tech Dirt, the odious Pamela Geller, she of her virulent, wildly wrong All Muslims Are Murdering Assholes activism, is suing the federal government, and by extention Facebook, I guess.

Pamela Geller is also demanding a guaranteed
platform on social media, but fuhgetaboutit
 n

Geller says that Facebook would take down her page somehow is wrong, and the federal Communications Decency Act violates the First Amendment because she says it enables censorship.

Says her lawsuit:  

"Denying a person or organization access to these important social media forums based on the content and viewpoint of the person's or organization's speech on matters of public concern is an effective way of silencing or censoring speech or depriving the person or organization of political influence and business opportunities."

But, again, the First Amendment bars the government from censoring people. All the Communications Decency Act does is allow private companies to take down content they deem "obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing or otherwise objectionable."

As noted, I do think major social media outfits like Facebook and Twitter have the responsibility to let people air controversial topics, and they do.  But legally, they can take stuff down. And if the content relentlessly harasses anybody, including Muslims and Jews like Geller, it should be taken down.

Still, we have First Amendment rights, but we don't have a right to use a private platform for whatever we want. Almost all businesses, including Twitter and Facebook, have their own ethics policy and are free to adhere to them, unless they discriminate against a whole class of people based on things like religious affiliation, gender and race.

As Tech Dirt states: "(Geller's) lawsuit is the legal equivalent of that idiot who claims that any company moderating content is violating the First Amendment."

But as we all know, there's a LOT of idiots on social media.

Vox Magazine: Are Right Wing "Christians" Issuing More Threats Than Jihadists?

Vox, the online magazine, raised an interesting observation yesterday.

The online publication Vox got some threats
after running articles about Charlie Hebdo cartoons
and Islam. But the threats didn't exactly come
from jihadist sympathizers.  

They ran an image of a Charlie Hebdo cartoon, the kind that has occasionally inspired threats, and terrorists attacks by fundamentalist "Islamic" morons who think their religion was insulted, and that justifies mass murder.

Which is why you had that awful terrorist attack in Paris at the offices of Charlie Hebdo and that market. The Islamist extremists think insulting the prophet Mohammed should be a death penalty or something.

Vox reports that they have indeed received a number of threats. But not from who you'd think. I'll let Vox explain it:

"Writers at Vox have indeed been bombarded with threats for our Charlie Hebdo coverage. But not one of those threats has come from a Muslim or in response to publishing anti-Islam cartoons. Revealingly, they have rather all come from non-Muslims furious at our articles critizing Islamophobia."

Most of the threats are from people hoping jihadist militants kill the offending writer.

"A recent email hoped that Muslims will 'behead you one day' so that 'we will never have to read your trash again.'"

Um, wouldn't it be easier to just not read Vox if you don't like it? I'm not aware of any law that says we have to read Vox or any other publication.

Ok, Vox, go on:

"As is often the case, the strongest threats have been reserved for women. One writer received a message arguing that someone should 'put a gun up your ass' to make her understand terrorism."

My, these right wing fanatics are so imaginative! And have such interesting sexual fantasies! Though I'm not sure how putting a Glock 9 mm up one's anus will make anyone understand the intricacies of that terrorist attack in Paris. But what do I know?

Here's the richest part of Vox's piece on the threats they've been getting:

The Paris terrorists were/are surely some of
the worst people on the planet. Right wing bigots are
light years better, hut still not good people.  

"Ironically, these threats are typically couched in arguments that Muslims are inherently irrational and violent. Further, threats made with the explicit intention of silencing journalists from discussing Islamophobia are positioned as necessary 'defenses' of free speech against the threat of Islam."

Yeah, I don't get the logic either. "Let's ban free speech to protect free speech."

Sounds like the only speech the right wing Fox watching wackos want to preserve is their own. Probably because nobody listens to them as most other voices from other sources are more informative and interesting.

Hey, you gotta try something, right?

True, people who shoot up magazine offices and Jewish markets and kill 17 people are far, FAR worse than the ignorant morons on our nation's right wing political fringes.

But make no mistake, the dickheads that threatened Vox are bad people. Let's once again let Vox explain it, since they've been doing such a good job:

"The people who threaten us are crazies and there's no indication that they are representative of any greater whole or are considering doing any more than sending an email. But we are not the only outlet being targeted, and receiving dozens of threatening emails can have a real effect on journalists, even if we suspect the threats will come to nothing."

It seems that many, but not all on the right wing and evangelical groups seem to continually try to find ways to be petty and parochial.  Just look at what happened at Duke University in North Carolina yesterday:

Says Mashable: 

"Duke University has 'reconsidered' a plan that would have allowed Muslims to use its chapel's famed bell tower for a weekly, amplified call to prayer. 

"'Duke remains committed to fostering an inclusive, tolerant and welcoming campus for all of its students," a spokesman for Duke said. "However, it was clear that what was conceived as an effort to unify was not having the intended effect."

And why not? Because evangelist Franklin Graham, son of the Rev. Billy Graham is an asshole. Here's what Franklin Graham, that bigot, had to say:

"Christianity is being excluded from the public square (while) followers of Islam are raping, butchering, and beheading Christians, Jews and anyone who doesn't submit to their Sharia Islamic law."

Oh, that's so rich. Christians don't have a voice in America anymore? What doobie have you been smoking, Frankie?  Can I call you Frankie, Frankie?

OK, let's follow the Frankie "logic" here. It looks like Frankie thinks that since some Muslims are doing evil, murderous things, that means ALL Muslims are evil and murderous.

If that's the case then if there are a few so-called Christians who are threatening Vox and anyone else who dares to say something mildly positive about Islam, then ALL Christians are small-minded thugs who get off on sending vulgar, ignorant threats to people whose point of view they don't like.

I obviously don't believe that about Christians. But do YOU think Christians are all stupid bullies, Frankie?  If I follow your "logic," it seems you do.

It goes on and on. We have former GOP U.S. House Rep Joe Walsh issuing this lovely Tweet:

Yes, it's fair to argue CNN and MSNBC might not have shown enough bravery and free speech commitment when they didn't show the cartoons, but do you REALLY want Islamist terrorists to kill people at CNN and MSNBC?

Doesn't that make you as bad as the terrorists who do want to kill westerners. Joe, are you going to turn up at a jihadist training camp in Syria or something?

Since I've been on a pro-free speech rant, I certainly won't ask the likes of Frankie Graham and Joe Walsh to shut up. They can say whatever they like.

However, everyone has the right to free speech. Or at least should have that right. So let's raise our voices to increase understanding and peace between major religions.

We need more of that, not less.

Just ask the fine people of Paris.

First Amendment Follies Flummux Fiery Fanatic

One of the joys of living in this country is the First Amendment.

Really. The amendment pretty much gives the right to say what we want, when we want, how we want.

That doesn't necessarily mean having our say turns out well.

Ask Michael Leisner. He was not happy with General Mills, makers of cereals like Cheerios. The conglomerate's PR people have said the company opposes an upcoming Minnesota initiative that would ban gay marriage.

Leisner wants gay marriage banned, and he's unhappy with General Mills for disagreeing with him. So he showed up at General Mills headquarters to express his displeasure. It had to be dramatic, to get people's attention. And dramatic it was.

In protest he decided to burn a box of Honey Nut Cheerios. As you can see in the video below, things didn't go so well for poor Leisner. It was the start of a very bad week for him.



The video pretty much has the nation laughing at poor Leisner. The video, shot by his friends, went up on YouTube. He soon arranged it so you couldn't copy it into another Web page, like I did here, but it was too late. The version I have posted is somebody's copy, that does let me show the world the guy's clumsiness with fire.

Apparently, some of the people at an outfit called Greater Midwest Properties saw the video, too. Leisner was a real estate agent for them, but apparently he's been fired. Greater Midwest Properties says it doesn't condone the destruction of property. Even if the destruction isn't that bad.

This proves the perils of exercising your First Amendment rights. Exercising those rights means the government can't punish you for criticizing its leaders or its policies. However, there still can be consequences from other sources.

As Leisner learned, your employer has free speech rights, too. If it disagrees with your free speech, or the way you express them, you can become unemployed. That's been in the news a lot lately.

A guy in Tuscson, Adam Smith, decided recently to mercilessly berate the person at a Chick Fil A drive through window because he was mad at the chicken chain because its owner gives lots of cash to anti-gay organizations.

Smith seems to have picked on the person at the drive through because the person at a drive through window at a large fast food restaurant chain can change the mind of the head of the company, apparently. Ooookay.....

Smith was the CFO of Vante Inc. but his bosses saw the video and canned him. Smith posted a another video on YouTube apologizing but it was wayyyy to late for that.

All this is a lesson: Say what you want, but do it politely, please, without drama. Doing so could keep the unemployment rate down. Especially yours.