Disqus - Latest Comments for Ceara

Re: Dept. of Justice: Bush is above the law and torture laws don't apply

Ceara — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 10:37:33 -0000

I knew I wouldn't be the only one writing to UC Berkeley - here's what I said:

I have heard that John Yoo is currently a professor at your school, who has taught (amongst other things, I am sure) "International Civil Litigation."

I'm glad he wasn't attempting to teach a class about International Criminal Litigation, as he seems to think there is no international court that could bring criminal charges. Or does that only apply to the President of the United States?

I have begun reading his memo (March 14, 2003 Re: Military Interrogation of Alien Unlawful Combatants Held Outside the United States) and am quite honestly APPALLED. I have always held your University in high regard, but that you would employ a professor who espoused such criminal nonsense makes me seriously question the judgment shown in hiring him, as well as the quality of law education available at your institution. I am sure I am not the only one wondering why this man still has a job, and I sincerely hope that he was hired without knowledge of legal opinions such as the ones shown in this memo.

Please seriously consider showing the world that your respect for the rule of law and the Constitution of the United States is undiminished by firing Mr. Yoo. Any person who would willingly write such a memo does not deserve a position teaching future lawyers. Consider the world that would be created by lawyers willing to say that basically, the laws do not apply... what a horror!

Re: "He's a good decision-maker"

Ceara — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 12:10:03 -0000

DANG, beat me to it!

With these clowns and their ability to use newspeak, it makes me wonder if he thought about this alternate reading of that statement.

Re: A new day at the State Department: A Raucous Welcome for Hillary

Ceara — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 12:51:01 -0000

I would LOVE to see a video of Condoleeza Rice's reception to the State Department for comparison - can anybody find it?

Re: Congress gives itself a $4700 pay raise!

Ceara — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 17:53:07 -0000

It's really funny you should make this point - two days ago I wrote an email to President Obama suggesting that he refuse his salary and take a symbolic $1 a year pay - and that hopefully the press would take this and run with it, and shame all the members of congress whose net worth is over $1 million dollars to do the same. Do you know how many people in the Congress are worth more than a million? TWO HUNDRED AND THIRTY. Their salaries ALONE would save the government FORTY MILLION DOLLARS a year. Okay, I know we're talking about a budget of billions & trillions, but every little bit helps, right?

Imagine if all the CEOs, all the politicians, etc. - everyone whose net worth was more than one million dollars - symbolically took $1 a year pay for a while? Why don't we start a movement? As somebody who makes less than $40k a year and has no savings, I would say if your net worth is over a million, you're in really good shape financially, and can afford it.

Re: Congress gives itself a $4700 pay raise!

Ceara — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 21:12:16 -0000

Hang on, everybody, before you string John up - his point is valid, that $100K is not the same everywhere in the country. (After the housing bubble continues to flatten out, however, I think the differences won't be quite as huge as they have been...)

The BIGGER point here is not that the Congress gives itself $174,000 a year - which is a salary one could live on in DC - it's that almost half of them are MULTI-MILLIONAIRES ALREADY.

I've got no problem with Alcee Hastings (D-Fl) getting $174,000 - because according to her financial report, she's somewhere around $4 million in the hole. But Jane Harman (D-Ca)? Her net worth is around $397,412,077. (Those are commas, not periods.) Darrell Issa (R-Ca)? His is around $343,457,521. Good lord, they're richer than KERRY, and his wife is a frickin' heiress! Can ANYBODY with a straight face tell me that these people need $174,000 more a year?

Here, go look at the list of Congress-critters' net worth - I warn you, though - it'll make you nauseated.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/overview.php?ty...

Re: Congress gives itself a $4700 pay raise!

Ceara — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 21:27:45 -0000

I doubt John would say that somebody with three hundred million dollars needed a raise to live in DC. He's not stupid, he's pissed. And as far as I can tell, he usually tries to be logical. Everybody jumping on him seems to have missed his point.

I live in Tallahassee, Florida - which is basically southern Georgia, in terms of culture & cost of living. My brother-in-law got a job in California a while back, and got a huge pay raise - why? He was doing the same job there, _for_the_same_company_, that he had been doing _here_ in town. It's because (DUH) living in California is MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE.

Let's not get carried away by straw men. I mean, if I made the kind of money John does, I'd be thrilled - but then, I live here - not DC. I understand that. What don't you guys understand about the cost of living being different in different places?

Granted, I'm sure there are lots of things that upper middle class people could give up (gourmet food, eating out, nice clothes, etc.) and I think they're all going to have to do that soon - and those of us who don't even have that to give up won't have a whole lot of sympathy for them. This does not eliminate his point, that Congress seems to be passing laws using numbers that are not flexible based on location, which seems pretty damn dumb.

Re: Congress gives itself a $4700 pay raise!

Ceara — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 21:38:46 -0000

Are you TRYING to piss people off?

"bothered going to school"? "Didn't bother getting an education"?

Man, I worked TWO full time jobs while paying my own way through a community college for a two year degree. I haven't had the ABILITY to go back and finish my BS, or MS degree that I was planning on. (Or the PhD I dreamt about) I CAN'T AFFORD IT.

And the bricklayer has a point. You make yourself sound like an elitist asshole when you say "providing an incentive for people to get an education, to live in cities, to actually do something with their lives" - which implies that people who have not gotten an education or don't live in cities aren't doing something with their lives. You'd be damn miserable without the existence of plumbers. (Who make more than I do, by the way, and don't have to go to college. I work in education - small wonder that I don't make much.) And you'd starve without the existence of farmers (who don't live in cities, and also don't have to go to college).

I'm not lecturing you about how well off you are. But you're not making yourself look too good, here.

Re: Congress gives itself a $4700 pay raise!

Ceara — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 22:16:13 -0000

Um, I'll point out that most younger people probably rent, not buy, especially while they have huge student loans to pay off - and dude, you're self employed and have saved for retirement and pay your own health insurance? Go you, but know this - there are a lot of people NOT self employed, who don't get health care insurance, or retirement, at all. Check your math, and take a look at the real world out there. I know you're irritated, but you're still in a hell of a lot better shape than a lot of people.

Re: Congress gives itself a $4700 pay raise!

Ceara — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 01:04:00 -0000

Dang, I wish I'd heard it! Because it makes me wonder - what exactly do they mean by "not caring about salary"? That they wouldn't be good public servants because they're not getting paid? I'd like to point out that quite a few of them don't seem to be doing great work as public servants at the moment, and they've got full salaries.

However, I'm not talking about forever. I'm just suggesting that the millionaires give up their pay for 2-4 years. Call it patriotic. It would be an absolutely horrific long-term plan, and if that's what the guest was envisioning, I can understand the response. I do think that it would create undesirable results were we to make it permanent.

Re: Congress gives itself a $4700 pay raise!

Ceara — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 01:05:11 -0000

Ooops! My bad! Thanks for the correction. :)

Re: Congress gives itself a $4700 pay raise!

Ceara — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 01:12:18 -0000

So while we're on the subject of reasonable compensation for work, what do you all think of Senator McCaskill's suggestion?

Re: ESPN's homophobic NBA ad

Ceara — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 11:39:23 -0000

Here's the email I sent to ESPN:
I just saw your commercial w/Mike Breen and Shaq (the fist-kiss thing), and I have to say that I don't think holding up Shaq's insecurities about emotional interactions with other men is a particular service to any children watching, and doesn't make ESPN look good either. I watch something like that and think "Great, another commercial glorifying the 'scratch-balls-hit-people-grunt' method of interaction. Honestly, it makes me want to tell Shaq to see a counselor. It's not funny, just sad.

Re: UPM 1.1 Released

Ceara — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 20:12:15 -0000

Hey - I LOVE this program; have been using it since 1.0. However, it just stopped working, and I wonder if you have any ideas on what I can do?

I just upgraded to Leopard on my Mac, and when I copied the 1.0 version across, when I tried to open my database file I got this error: "input length must be multiple of 8 when decrypting with padded cipher." (The results I got from a google search on that phrase were, I have to admit, above my head.) I then went and found that you were at version 1.5 already (you've been busy!) and downloaded it. Now when I try to open my xml file, I get an error that says "Either your password is incorrect or this file isn't a UPM password database."

Needless to say, I'm positive I have the right password. Any thoughts? Any help would be muchly appreciated!

Re: UPM 1.1 Released

Ceara — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 23:10:35 -0000

You are awesome, thank you SO MUCH! That fixed it.

Works great in Leopard, people!