Thursday morning links

Quicksearch

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Thursday, September 29. 2016

Former Navy SEAL commanders explain why they still wake up before dawn every day — and why you should, too

The drive to kill Airbnb is a war on the future

UCL Provides Trigger Warnings for Archaeology Students Who Are Afraid of Bones

The World's Oldest Library Will Soon Reopen in Fez

Regulation of occupations: a Hierarchy of regulatory Options

They’re Not “Protesters.” They’re Terrorists.

TERRORISTS RUNNING WILD WITHIN U.S. BORDERS

Obama Administration Admits It Does Not Screen Refugees For Radical Views

CAIR Accuses Tenessee Of “Islamophobia” After State Drops Islam From Middle School Curriculum…

ANTI-SEMITISM ON CAMPUS IS NOT JUST UNCIVIL, IT’S INTOLERANT

Reasons to Hate Politics

Economy: Government Can't Do It

Free Trade vs. Balanced Trade

US owes blacks reparations over slavery: UN experts

FBI Director: An FBI Agent Would ‘Be In Big Trouble’ If They Did What Hillary Did

Hillary to working-class voters: I worked hard for my money

Too Good To Check: Hillary Had Debate Questions Weeks Beforehand

Hillary failed as secretary of state — why would president be any different?

Hillary’s Debate Prop Turns Out to be Porn Actress Who Had Mexican Drug Kingpin’s Anchor Baby

Election reset:

In this election, Clinton’s honesty problem is not a big issue because her lying does not change the voter’s sense of where she stands on the big three items. On the other hand, Trump’s authenticity is a great benefit because it makes him trustworthy. You may not agree with his position on an issue, but you know what you are getting with Trump. His authenticity not only helps him on a personal basis, it helps him overcome the uncertainty issue all newcomers face. It makes him seem less of a risk.

Beyond Mosul

North Korea’s Nuke Program Is Way More Sophisticated Than You Think

Hamas calls for ‘Day of Rage’ during Peres funeral

Where every day is a day of rage

Gagged in Gaza - Hamas and Fatah try to silence the press

Posted by Bird Dog in Hot News & Misc. Short Subjects at 06:43 | Comments (36) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Re: "Protests".
"protest" has become a synonym for "riot".

#1 oolioo (Link) on 2016-09-29 09:25 (Reply)

No. There were peaceful protests in Charlotte, but there were riots as well. It's incumbent on march organizers to help maintain order, just as it is incumbent on police to protect peaceful protest.

#1.1 Zachriel on 2016-09-29 09:46 (Reply)

Zachie-baby, you still don't get it. A protest ain't worth its salt unless a few fisticuffs are traded, a few cars rolled and some windows broken. Setting fire to a flag is optional.

Actually, Soros pays his "march organizers" to create havoc. He even underwrites training sessions so everyone knows how to confront the LEOs effectively and terrify the bejesus out of the community. Any questions?

#1.1.1 jma on 2016-09-29 10:37 (Reply)

jma: A protest ain't worth its salt unless a few fisticuffs are traded

Some people certainly think so, but violence is nearly always counterproductive in a democratic society guaranteeing the right to peaceably assemble for a redress of grievances.

However, the point wasn't effectiveness, but that the majority of people are engaging in peaceful protest, and only a minority in violence. After the first two days, Charlotte's protests have been largely peaceful. While it is appropriate to condemn violence, it is not appropriate to color all protesters as engaging in or supporters of violence.

jma: Soros pays his "march organizers" to create havoc.

If it feels true ...

#1.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2016-09-29 10:56 (Reply)

"just as it is incumbent on police to protect peaceful protest."

Police are Law Enforcement - not protection - the police are under no legal obligation (i.e. not incumbent) to protect anyone.

"June 27 [2005]- The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html?_r=0

http://tribunist.com/news/supreme-court-ruling-police-have-no-duty-to-protect-the-general-public/

http://nypost.com/2013/01/27/city-says-cops-had-no-duty-to-protect-subway-hero-who-subdued-killer/

#1.1.2 L.B. on 2016-09-29 21:43 (Reply)

L.B: Police are Law Enforcement - not protection

"To Protect and to Serve" is one of the most common police department mottoes. It's morally incumbent on police to make an effort to protect citizens whether going to the store, or peaceably assembling for the redress of grievances.

L.B: The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm

That's right. It's not a constitutional requirement. It's a job requirement to make the effort, pursuant to state laws.

#1.1.2.1 Zachriel on 2016-09-30 09:28 (Reply)

Z: "To Protect and to Serve" is one of the most common police department mottoes.

Irrelevent: A motto is not an oath nor is it a legal obligation - it's a PR slogan.

Z: It's morally incumbent on police to make an effort to protect citizens whether going to the store, or peaceably assembling for the redress of grievances.

Irrelevent: Morals do not equal law and are relative for the secular state.

Zidiot: It's a job requirement to make the effort, pursuant to state laws.

RFLMAO! That's funny.

#1.1.2.1.1 L.B. on 2016-09-30 20:38 (Reply)

L.B: A motto is not an oath nor is it a legal obligation - it's a PR slogan.

That's irrelevant. You posted that there was no individualized obligation under the U.S. Constitution, which is correct. Rather, it's part of the job description, that is, to ensure preservation of peace and public safety through the enforcement of the laws.

U.S. Legal: "The primary goal of the department is prevention and protection of the public from dangers affecting safety such as crimes or disasters."

#1.1.2.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2016-10-01 09:53 (Reply)

Returning to the original point: It's incumbent on march organizers to help maintain order, just as it is incumbent on police to protect peaceful protest.

#1.1.2.1.1.2 Zachriel on 2016-10-01 09:55 (Reply)

UCL Provides Trigger Warnings for Archaeology Students Who Are Afraid of Bones

You would think if you were drawn to a study of previous cultures you wouldn't have a problem with bones and such.

Might I recommend this:
https://www.amazon.com/War-Before-Civilization-Peaceful-Savage/dp/0195119126

#2 fjord on 2016-09-29 09:30 (Reply)

QUOTE:

Too Good To Check

Truthiness prevails!

"Someone revived the Baltimore Gazette to spread fake news"

#3 Zachriel on 2016-09-29 10:11 (Reply)

Why wouldn't they giver the questions in advance Zach?

They want her to win.

They are all friends.

They socialize together.

She has a history of knowing the questions in advance.

It is a logical conclusion to draw.

#3.1 feeblemind on 2016-09-29 10:17 (Reply)

feeblemind: Why wouldn't they giver the questions in advance

If it feels true ...

#3.1.1 Zachriel on 2016-09-29 10:23 (Reply)

The flow probably goes the other direction, in effect if not in practice.

Hillary's people know what oppo research, talking points, and disinformation they are spreading to the MSM, and can be fairly certain the same will be reflected as questions.

#3.1.2 Christopher B on 2016-09-29 13:21 (Reply)

QUOTE:

Hillary failed as secretary of state — why would president be any different?

The last Republican Administration saw the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history, letting the mastermind slip away. They imploded the Middle East. They watched helplessly as a major U.S. city was nearly destroyed by a hurricane, realizing too late that appointing a political hack to emergency management may not have been the best choice. They presided over the collapse of the U.S. economy, nearly bringing down the global system.

Sure, Clinton's made a lot of mistakes, and has many blind spots. But she is rational, capable of learning, worked well with the opposition when in the Senate, and has knowledge of nearly all the major players in the U.S. and abroad.

Then there's Trump.

If you are a U.S. voter, those are your only two viable choices.

#4 Zachriel on 2016-09-29 10:22 (Reply)

I know better than to engage, but I've had lots of coffee this morning...

"But she is rational, capable of learning, worked well with the opposition when in the Senate, and has knowledge of nearly all the major players in the U.S. and abroad."

You've GOT to be kidding. Well, I guess she does have knowledge of all the major players. That is, the ones with money to donate.

#4.1 mary on 2016-09-29 10:51 (Reply)

mary: You've GOT to be kidding.

Those are all supportable claims.

mary: Well, I guess she does have knowledge of all the major players.

If you are raising money to fight malaria and HIV, then you go where the money is, which is also where the political power is held.

Now, you might complain of the confluence of money and politics — something Republican have worked hard to preserve. Some regulations might temper the ill effects, but some of the confluence is inevitable.

This was the lesson the Clintons learned early on. They saw how Nixon and his cronies used money and dirty tricks to win elections. They determined themselves to use the tools at their disposal, edging but not crossing the line, to the betterment of society as they saw it. To do so, they made compromises that often enraged the political left, and made enemies on the political right, but have consistently moved the ball in the direction they had set out to do.

The Clinton Administration saw the longest peacetime economic expansion in modern U.S. history, federal budget cash surpluses, millions of new jobs and low unemployment, support for the new Information Superhighway, more police and a significantly reduced crime rate, family leave act, reduced welfare rolls, reduced poverty and teen pregnancy rates, reduced government spending as percentage of GDP, and a significant reduction in the rate of abortion.

As for the Clinton Foundation, among many Foundation projects, they have saved millions of lives by providing lifesaving medicine for HIV and hepatitis.

#4.1.1 Zachriel on 2016-09-29 11:11 (Reply)

You can claim anything you want - she claimed she was under sniper fire in Bosnia, as I recall.

I don't see ANY indication she learned and improved as Secretary of State. If anything, quite the reverse - faced with events in Benghazi that weren't anticipated she didn't push for a quick response and blamed a Youtube video for the event. Classic CYA, where it was more important to save face and preserve the narrative than help the people who were calling for aid that didn't arrive.

As far as her economic vision for America - yeah...

"Clinton, on the other hand, would raise taxes on “the wealthy” to “make the economy fairer”, further discouraging investment and condemning us to prolonged abysmal economic growth. She would also further enlarge the regulatory state and destroy energy industry jobs in the name of global warming. In her efforts to make the economy “fairer”, Clinton would sacrifice even the potential for economic growth.

Lacking that potential, Clinton turns to government mandates as the means to address stagnating wages, the decline in good paying jobs, the shrinking middle class, and growing income inequality. Her policy proposals include government mandates raising the federal minimum wage, forcing businesses to share more of their profits with employees, and increasing paid family leave and sick days. In other words, she would try to provide employees with the benefits of economic growth (increased wages and benefits) without any actual economic growth." http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/09/28/government_cant_do_it_131914.html

Because growth is bad, m'kay? FAIRNESS is the highest priority in life, no matter how much it may actually hamper economic recovery.

So I'm faced with a choice. Elect someone who's massively incompetent, corrupt and deceitful (Don't get me started on her email/server issues) - or vote for Trump - the unknown.

I'm not wild about Trump. But having seen Hillary at her 'finest' as SoS, I'll vote for him in a heartbeat.

#4.1.1.1 Jlawson on 2016-09-29 12:18 (Reply)

Jlawson: You can claim anything you want - she claimed she was under sniper fire in Bosnia, as I recall.

And that would be a false claim.

Jlawson: If anything, quite the reverse - faced with events in Benghazi that weren't anticipated she didn't push for a quick response and blamed a Youtube video for the event.

That is an oversimplification of a complex situation. That fact is that riots broke out across the Middle East because of the video. They were trying to tamp down the political friction by disassociating the U.S. government from the video. They were carefully diplomatic in most of their rhetoric, but that can sometimes lead to confusion. As for a quick response, it would seem after the Iraq War that it was clear that the U.S. doesn't have a magic military. There was no military solution. The ambassador was taking risks of his own devising for the benefit of the Libyan people.

Jlawson: Clinton would sacrifice even the potential for economic growth.

Actually, the U.S. is growing faster than most of its developed competitors since the Great Recession.

Jlawson: Because growth is bad, m'kay?

No. Growth is essential in a rapidly evolving economic landscape.

Jlawson: Elect someone who's massively incompetent, corrupt and deceitful (Don't get me started on her email/server issues)

You haven't supported any of those claims.

Jlawson: - or vote for Trump - the unknown.

Trump is hardly unknown. He is petulant, and has a very shallow grasp of policy.

#4.1.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2016-09-29 12:44 (Reply)

Jlawson: You can claim anything you want - she claimed she was under sniper fire in Bosnia, as I recall.

zack: And that would be a false claim.

Remarks at The George Washingon University in Washington, DC
March 17, 2008

Good morning. I want to thank Secretary West for his years of service, not only as Secretary of the Army, but also to the Veteran's Administration, to our men and women in uniform, to our country. I certainly do remember that trip to Bosnia, and as Togo said, there was a saying around the White House that if a place was too small, too poor, or too dangerous, the president couldn't go, so send the First Lady. That's where we went.

I remember landing under sniper fire.

There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base.

#4.1.1.1.1.1 Hank_M on 2016-09-29 13:06 (Reply)

Yes, the claim was false.

#4.1.1.1.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2016-09-29 14:45 (Reply)

zach: The last Republican Administration saw the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history
Wouldn't have happened if Bill Clinton had gotten bin Laden as he said on Sep 10, 2001.

zack: "They [Bush administration] imploded the Middle East"
Egypt, Libya and Syria all blew up in 2011.

zack: "They watched helplessly as a major U.S. city was nearly destroyed by a hurricane"
Was Bush supposed to stop the hurricane somehow, perhaps the same way Obama stopped hurricane Sandy?
More seriously, as Donna Brazile herself stated, "Bush came through on Katrina."

zack: They presided over the collapse of the U.S. economy
The collapse caused by Bill Clinton and the democrats and their manipulation of the sub-prime housing markets

As for Hillary working " well with the opposition when in the Senate", even politifact rates that as false. And politifact isn't exactly non biased.

Normally I ignore you here and at Pirates Cove but you re-wrote way too much history to let it pass.

But while I am wasting time replying to you, who is this we your sometimes refer to? Like yesterday in comments where you wrote: "In any case, we answered your question" and "We largely agree"

#4.2 Hank_M on 2016-09-29 11:45 (Reply)

Hank_M: Wouldn't have happened if Bill Clinton had gotten bin Laden as he said on Sep 10, 2001.

There's a lot of woulda-coulda-shouldas. Nonetheless, Bush was provided information that bin Laden was intent on striking in the U.S., but the administration was diverted by Iraq, and remained diverted even after 9-11.

Hank_M: Egypt, Libya and Syria all blew up in 2011.

There's no reasonable doubt that the Bush Administration allowed chaos to envelope Iraq, creating a vacuum that allowed radical groups to metastasize.

Hank_M: Was Bush supposed to stop the hurricane somehow

No, but he's supposed to make the investments necessary to protect cities, and then to provide relief when disaster strikes. The problem in New Orleans wasn't a secret. Here's a public service video that explains what could happen if New Orleans were left unprepared.

Act Now Before It's Too Late!

Hank_M: More seriously, as Donna Brazile herself stated, "Bush came through on Katrina."

There's no excuse for the lack of preparedness in Iraq or New Orleans. It took a long time for Bush to understand the depths of the problems in his administration, but he finally got smart and starting getting better advice. That led to the surge in Iraq, and to long-term followup on New Orleans.

Bush isn't a bad person, but he allowed himself to reside too long in the right-wing ideological echochamber.

Hank_M: The collapse caused by Bill Clinton and the democrats and their manipulation of the sub-prime housing markets

Oh gee whiz. That's just right-wing talking points. Bush had been in power for two terms, and had ample opportunity to take corrective action. The Bush Administraton was blinded by ideology, just as they were before 9-11, in Iraq, and in New Orleans.

Hank_M: As for Hillary working " well with the opposition when in the Senate", even politifact rates that as false.

That's not what they say. While they dispute her claim about co-sponsors on legislation, they also say "None of this is to say she didn’t work with Republicans during her time in the Senate." Her campaign said she meant to say "Just about every Republican senator I served with co-sponsored a piece of legislation I introduced," which does support that she is capable of working with Republicans.

#4.2.1 Zachriel on 2016-09-29 12:25 (Reply)

zack;There's no reasonable doubt that the Bush Administration allowed chaos to envelope Iraq, creating a vacuum that allowed radical groups to metastasize.

As I stated, Egypt, Libya and Syria all blew up in 2011.

The year before, the Iraq you claim was in chaos was being touted by Joe Biden as one of Obama's greatest successes saying that "I am very optimistic about -- about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You're going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You're going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government."

As to your assertion about Hillary reaching across the aisle, tell me, what was the conclusion politifact came to about this claim? You linked it, It's right there at the bottom of the article and it starts with an F.

and again, who is this we you often refer to?

#4.2.1.1 Hank_M on 2016-09-29 13:21 (Reply)

Hank_M: As I stated, Egypt, Libya and Syria all blew up in 2011.

Yes, radicals metastasized in the chaos after the U.S. invasion of Iraq. It's not clear what could have been done differently. When reading the links on the blogs, conservatives see-saw between saying the U.S. shouldn't have intervened to the U.S. intervened too much. The U.S. tried invasion and it resulted in the failed state of Iraq. The U.S. tried air power alone and it resulted in a state that is teetering in Libya. The U.S. tried avoiding involvement, and it resulted in a disintegrating state that is Syria. It's not clear what the proper course of action might be, but invading Iraq set off a chain-reaction that is still going on today.

Hank_M: As to your assertion about Hillary reaching across the aisle, tell me, what was the conclusion politifact came to about this claim?

We provided the link to Politifact, and quoted them. "None of this is to say she didn’t work with Republicans during her time in the Senate."

The claim under consideration wasn't whether she could work with Republicans, but the specific claim as to whether Republicans co-sponsored just about every piece of legislation that Clinton introduced. That claim they rated false. However, her modified claim that most Republicans had worked with her on legislation is true.

#4.2.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2016-09-29 14:43 (Reply)

More terrorist attacks occurred under Dems, including this administration, than under GOP presidents.

More US citizens have died under terrorist attacks under Dems than under GOP presidents.

9/11 was conceived, practiced and initiated under Clinton. That it culminated under Bush was coincidence w/ our calendars and theirs...not fault of Bush. Quite opposite, as Clinton administration had reduced funding and effectiveness of intelligence gathering. Moreover, most efficacious approach to reducing terrorism on US soil is restricted immigration, and that's opposed by HRC.

This administration, particularly w/ HRC as SoS, destabilized middle east far more than previous one. Verifiable claim as you look at situation in Syria, Iran, Iraq, Libya, etc.

HRC's handling of middle east never demonstrated competence, quite the opposite. Verifiable claim.

HRC's mishandling of classified documents and communications completely demonstrates incompetence.

Multiple sources provide documentation that Clinton's "crossed the line" w/ their fundraising. You ignore those and continue to cite those who try to prove a negative...and fail.

"They watched helplessly as a major U.S. city was nearly destroyed by a hurricane, realizing too late that appointing a political hack to emergency management may not have been the best choice" Completely untrue http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/25/opinion/brazile-katrina-bush/
(but it feels true, right Zach?)

For a paid troll, you pretty much suck Zach, but then you don't have much material to work with.

#4.3 DrTorch on 2016-09-29 13:00 (Reply)

DrTorch: More US citizens have died under terrorist attacks under Dems than under GOP presidents.

False. Most US citizens that have died in terrorist attacks died in the single attack of 9-11.

DrTorch: 9/11 was conceived, practiced and initiated under Clinton.

Attacking U.S. skyscrapers was conceived of by bin Laden in 1982 during the Reagan Administration, when indiscriminate attacks on Beirut resulted in the death of hundreds of civilians.

"God knows it did not cross our minds to attack the Towers, but after the situation became unbearable—and we witnessed the injustice and tyranny of the American-Israeli alliance against our people in Palestine and Lebanon—I thought about it. And the events that affected me directly were those of 1982 and the events that followed—when America allowed the Israelis to invade Lebanon, helped by the U.S. Sixth Fleet. As I watched the destroyed towers in Lebanon, it occurred to me to punish the unjust the same way: to destroy towers in America so it could taste some of what we were tasting and to stop killing our children and women." — Osama bin Laden

DrTorch: That it culminated under Bush was coincidence w/ our calendars and theirs...not fault of Bush.

It was Bush's ultimate responsibility, especially as he was forewarned that such an attack was being planned. Perhaps he couldn't have stopped it, but it's clear from the record that they didn't focus on the possibility.

DrTorch: http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/25/opinion/brazile-katrina-bush/

We addressed that point. There's no excuse for the lack of preparedness in Iraq or New Orleans. It took a long time for Bush to understand the depths of the problems in his administration, but he finally got smart and starting getting better advice. That led to the surge in Iraq, and to long-term followup on New Orleans.

#4.3.1 Zachriel on 2016-09-29 14:35 (Reply)

Most US citizens that have died in terrorist attacks died in the single attack of 9-11.

Easily 300 more have died (on US soil) directly from terrorist attacks under Dem presidents than GOP.

Attacking U.S. skyscrapers was conceived of Another lie. You reworded the statement. I referred specifically to the 911 attack as it occurred. Not the concept of attacking.

It was Bush's ultimate responsibility, especially as he was forewarned that such an attack was being planned

Bush's ability was hampered by the gutting of intelligence assets by the Clinton administration.

We addressed that point.

You addressed it by propagating a known falsehood.

Otherwise, Clinton is responsible for Mississippi River flood damage.

#4.3.1.1 DrTorch on 2016-09-29 15:19 (Reply)

DrTorch: Easily 300 more have died (on US soil) directly from terrorist attacks under Dem presidents than GOP.

Not according to numbers provided by the CDC and the State Department.

DrTorch: Bush's ability was hampered by the gutting of intelligence assets by the Clinton administration.

The record is clear that the Bush Administration gave a low priority to the threat. They didn't even have a meeting of principals for nine months, even though the outgoing administration said it was urgent to do so.

For instance, Condoleezza Rice said "I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon; that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile." Yet exactly this sort of plot had been foiled by the French, so they should have been aware of the possibility.

DrTorch: Otherwise, Clinton is responsible for Mississippi River flood damage.

Actually, the Clinton Administration is known among preparedness analysts to have built a strong FEMA with expert leadership. The Bush Administration neglected FEMA, putting a political crony in charge. The Bush Administration also cut back protection of wetlands, which are crucial reservoirs for flood control. The risk wasn't some mystery.

Act Now Before It's Too Late!

#4.3.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2016-09-29 16:07 (Reply)

QUOTE:

Hillary’s Debate Prop Turns Out to be Porn Actress Who Had Mexican Drug Kingpin’s Anchor Baby

It's called the echochamber for a reason.

http://www.snopes.com/alicia-machado-adult-star/

#5 Zachriel on 2016-09-29 10:28 (Reply)

Golly Z that link is NSFW!!!!!

#5.1 Douglas2 on 2016-09-29 11:26 (Reply)

Re: reparations

The "reparation" is allowing them to live in the USA. If that's not enough, feel free to go back to Africa.

#6 mary on 2016-09-29 10:41 (Reply)

Oh, yeah, forgot the P.S.

As I read somewhere else--I'm all blacked out. (Don't want to hear it anymore.)

#6.1 mary on 2016-09-29 10:43 (Reply)

It's come to this:

New anti-Trump ad aimed at Millennials.

They do realize that not all Millennials are ignorant Liberal Arts majors, right?

#7 JK Brown on 2016-09-29 15:51 (Reply)

"US owes blacks reparations over slavery: UN experts"

I propose that we take the next 50 years of funds that would go the the UN and pay it to blacks, regardless of their connection to slavery in the US.

#8 JK Brown on 2016-09-29 15:54 (Reply)

Just stop paying the UN anything and evict them from NYC and have them move to, oh, I dunno, Havana or Caracas or someplace like that.

#8.1 OldFert on 2016-09-29 16:06 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Thursday, September 29. 2016

Thursday morning links