Fuck its silent in here.......

[Shooter]

Let's not go nuts here, IAN.  They're good looking, I'll grant you that.  But if you're putting them any higher than a 5 for the left one and maybe an 7 for the right one, then you're off your rocker.

Go back to railing interweb asses.  Kidding.

You look me in the eface and tell me those two chicks wouldn't some fine drunk rage banging?

Oh I'm not saying that they wouldn't be doable, moreso if they/I were drunk.  But on any objective standard, they're not exceptionally hot.  

It pains me to admit this, but I need TDubbs' take on this.

Hey, I never said they were ultra hot.  They just look like fun for a couple of 6-7s.

You were just shocked we didn't drop everything so we could collectively imagine how fun it would be to get drunk enough that they'd be ultra hot and rage-bangable.

Sans penis, of course.

Of course, sans penis.

coarse sand on your penis?

Corso's hand on your penis?

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

Clarence Thomas with this concurring opinion on yesterday's campaign finance ruling:

"The success of such intimidation tactics has apparently spawned a cottage industry that uses forcibly disclosed donor information to pre-empt citizens' exercise of their First Amendment rights. I cannot endorse a view of the First Amendment that subjects citizens of this Nation to death threats, ruined careers, damaged or defaced property, or pre-emptive and threatening warning letters as the price for engaging in core political speech, the 'primary object of First Amendment protection'."

So, he's worried that public disclosure of who gave money to candidates for public office will be subject to retribution for their donations.

That would mean that Thomas thinks that there is a constitutional right to privacy.

Fucking liberal.

I have a personal issue about visiting the "Dead Pool".  So can someone tell me if Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy and Alito made anyone's list?

It doesn't appear to be so. I'm not sure if the late entries are incorporated in what I looked at, though.

All entries are accounted for.

The only Supreme picked appears to be Ginsberg, selected by both Fork and RV.

[Brownie]

So the prevailing opinion from the lawyers here is that the press and speech can be regulated by law by Congress?

Explain.

[Gil Gunderson]

So the prevailing opinion from the lawyers here is that the press and speech can be regulated by law by Congress?

Explain.

Can you lie under oath?

[Gil Gunderson]

DPD, but after being scolded in the SBox, I think my answer needs some more nuance than my pithy attempt.

I think you are asking this question because of Citizens United, correct?

[CBStew]

So the prevailing opinion from the lawyers here is that the press and speech can be regulated by law by Congress?

Explain.

That is nothing new.  The courts, including the US Supreme Court, have always agreed that notwithstanding the First Amendment, lawmakers could regulate time, place and manner and other aspects of allegedly free speech.  You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater.  You have to get a permit to run a parade down Main Street.  You can't play loud music after 10:00pm.  Unions have to picket where no one will see them.  Unions can't ask you to not shop at a certain store if their real beef is against the manufacturer of a product sold at that store.  Unions can't shut down an entire construction project when they have a beef only against one subcontractor.  But now, because they are similarly situated with WalMart, unions can contribute as much as they want to reelect Harry Reid.

[Armchair_QB]

So the prevailing opinion from the lawyers here is that the press and speech can be regulated by law by Congress?

Explain.

Can you lie under oath?

Sure.

But don't get caught doing it.

[Gil Gunderson]

So the prevailing opinion from the lawyers here is that the press and speech can be regulated by law by Congress?

Explain.

That is nothing new.  The courts, including the US Supreme Court, have always agreed that notwithstanding the First Amendment, lawmakers could regulate time, place and manner and other aspects of allegedly free speech.  You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater.  You have to get a permit to run a parade down Main Street.  You can't play loud music after 10:00pm.  Unions have to picket where no one will see them.  Unions can't ask you to not shop at a certain store if their real beef is against the manufacturer of a product sold at that store.  Unions can't shut down an entire construction project when they have a beef only against one subcontractor.  But now, because they are similarly situated with WalMart, unions can contribute as much as they want to reelect Harry Reid.

Precisely.  It's always contentviewpoint-based restrictions that rarely survive strict scrutiny.

Read: RAV v. St. Paul.

[Chuck to Chuck]

If  corporations are persons, is it legal for gay corporations to merge?

[PenFoe]

If  corporations are persons, is it legal for gay corporations to merge?

The "preview" feature is your friend.

[CBStew]

If  corporations are persons, is it legal for gay corporations to merge?

First the corporations will demand the right to vote.  Then the right to marry other corporations.

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMlPE1lV_5Y

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

For the Cook County Dems around here...

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/01/poll-preckwinkle-leads-cook-county-board-president-race.html

Chicago Ald. Toni Preckwinkle has surged to a significant lead in the Democratic primary for Cook County Board president as she has become better known and liked among suburban voters, a Tribune/WGN-TV poll shows.

Board President Todd Stroger fell to last place among the four candidates, his support dropping to 11 percent from 14 percent six weeks ago.

During that time, Preckwinkle supplanted Circuit Court Clerk Dorothy Brown as the front-runner with the support of 36 percent of likely Democratic voters, up from 20 percent, the poll found. Brown, who held a lead last month built upon her name recognition, fell from 29 percent to 24 percent.

She's Ben Joravsky's (tepid) choice...

http://www.chicagoreader.com/gyrobase/cook-county-board-president-race-todd-stroger-toni-preckwinkle/Content?oid=1336966&showFullText=true

Before I reveal my choice, let me say this: my standards might be a little different from those of the average voter, who seems content electing and reelecting the same old crowd.

I love the fighters in Chicago politics—I want someone who will stick it to the Man. And by the Man I don't mean Todd Stroger. I mean the big guy himself, Mayor Richard Daley. And that other big guy, state house speaker Michael Madigan.

For county board president, I want a candidate who will cut the fat—including the patronage workers larding the payroll—and rework the budget so taxpayer money is spent on the people who need it the most. And I'd also like someone who's willing to rage against Daley's tax increment financing machine.

Yes, I've been known to rail against the abuses of the TIF program a time or two before. But there's a real connection to this office. The program collects about $500 million in taxpayer money each year, and roughly 10 percent of that would otherwise have gone to Cook County. Proposed TIF districts must be approved by the Joint Board of Review, which consists of representatives of the schools, parks, county, and other taxing bodies affected by TIFs. The board president could easily show up and raise a stink about the program's abuses. But none ever has.

But my hopes aren't terribly high for any of the board president candidates...

...

That leaves me with Alderman Preckwinkle. I've known her since 1982, when she was gearing up to run against incumbent alderman Tim Evans (now the chief judge of Cook County Circuit Court). I don't think she's changed much in those 27 years. She's still terse, humorless—though I do think I heard a story about her cracking a joke once—and supersmart.

Preckwinkle's got more spine than any of the other candidates in this race. She was voting against Daley's budgets long before it was fashionable. She also voted against last year's parking meter deal. Neither Brown, Stroger, nor O'Brien had a word to say about that—as county officials they generally get to avoid taking stands on any issues involving the mayor. It's a lot easier to claim boldness and independence when you never actually have to demonstrate either.

Preckwinkle's only drawback is that in the last year or so she's started sucking up to Daley, supporting his Olympic dream and even voting for his 2010 budget—you know, the one where the mayor raided the parking meter legacy fund that was set up to last for at least 75 years.

...

Still, did I mention that back in 2006 Preckwinkle voted against the creation of the LaSalle Central TIF district? Well, she did—and was one of only three aldermen to do so (the others were Rick Munoz and Joe Moore). That's the TIF that declared much of the downtown business district a blighted area. Before it expires in 2030, it will have collected more than $1 billion in property taxes that otherwise would have gone to fund county government (making Stroger's sales-tax hike even less necessary), the schools, the parks, and other cash-strapped public bodies. Instead, if recent history is any indication, much of it is likely to be showered on well-connected downtown developers.

O'Brien could have opposed it at the Joint Review Board but he didn't. Stroger could have voted against it in the City Council—he was still Eighth Ward alderman back then—but he didn't. Brown could have come out against it too, since she claims to be eminently qualified to look out for taxpayer interests. But she didn't.

In this bunch, Preckwinkle looks like Patrick Henry.

She also has the Dem primary endorsements of Trib, Sun-Times and Daily Herald.

[ChuckD]

So the prevailing opinion from the lawyers here is that the press and speech can be regulated by law by Congress?

Explain.

The day I can pick up a chainsaw and stand amid a pool of Halliburton's still-warm blood is the day I will respect it's right to "free speech."  Besides, doesn't a corporation have, by definition, an entire contingency of actual human beings with their own right to free speech?

I must admit to experiencing much loldenfreude when I recalled the last decade's worth of decrying "judicial activism."

[Wheezer]

She's Ben Joravsky's (tepid) choice...

I love Toni. She always wears the same orthopedic sneakers, and I once saw her whip one of her kids in the old Mr. G's grocery. Her failure to do much of anything to prevent the ongoing decay of the 4th Ward is no doubt the result of having been on too small a stage lo these many years.