Via @rdbrewer4, "prancercize" combines all the benefits of exercise with all the fun of prancing.

After the real video, check out the parody beneath it. more...

Posted by: Ace at 08:17 AM | Comments (283)
Post contains 37 words, total size 1 kb.

In the early twentieth century, there were a lot of prosecutions of Communists because they urged blowing up factories and train lines -- their literature was full of incitements to violence.

However, in a lot of cases, these incitements were largely (it was contended) rhetorical.

The Supreme Court decided that the First Amendment is too important to permit prosecutions of on-the-line speech -- speech had to be well over the line to be subject to prosecution.

Oliver Wendel Holmes established the "clear and present danger" test -- no speech could be prosecuted unless it produced a clear threat of imminent, immediate (present) lawlessness and violence.

Prosecutions could not be founded on speculative "This might lead to violence" grounds.

Yelling "fire" in a crowded theater could get one prosecuted -- because one can see how such speech would immediately provoke a panicked run for the exits.

Shouting to an angry, near-riotous crowd "Let's go kill the mayor!" could get you prosecuted, because that would be called an incitement which has a clear and present danger of actually being followed through on.

But less than that? Anything less than a direct incitement to perform a specific illegal action which has a present likelihood of being executed?

We are free in such speech. As Holmes argued almost a hundred years ago, we must be pretty free in our speech, or else we'll always be looking over our shoulders and censoring ourselves for fear of the Government Prosecutors putting us in jail for exercising our inalienable rights as Americans.

This was the law of the land for nearly a hundred years.

Apparently it is no longer US law in the Eastern district of Tennessee.

Why? And did we vote on this? At what point did we, as a free people which supposedly decides our own laws, decide to overturn this nearly 100 year old judicial precedent?

Did Bill Killian decide to overturn this precedent himself, or was this directive crafted by his boss, Eric Holder?

Corrected: I originally suggested this case came down in the 30s. It's older than that -- it came down in 1919.

More: A commenter notes the doctrine was expanded and intensified in Brandenburg v. Ohio in 1969.

I've never heard a liberal challenging this doctrine -- until now. They really liked the doctrine when it was protecting elements of the left from prosecution. Now it's protecting some elements on the right (well, I don't know if they're on the right, but they're antagonistic to members of the left's coalition) so apparently now it's been repealed.

At least as far as people hostile to the left's coalition.

Posted by: Ace at 07:38 AM | Comments (232)
Post contains 455 words, total size 3 kb.

Via Judicial Watch, Bill Killian, the US Attorney for the Eastern district of Tennessee, just wants Americans to know what the consequences for free speech might be.

Special speakers for the event will be Bill Killian, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee, and Kenneth Moore, special agent in charge of the FBIÂ’s Knoxville Division.

Sponsor of the event is the American Muslim Advisory Council of Tennessee — a 15-member board formed two years ago when the General Assembly was considering passing legislation that would restrict those who worship Sharia Law, which is followed by Muslims.

Killian and Moore will provide input on how civil rights can be violated by those who post inflammatory documents targeted at Muslims on social media.

“This is an educational effort with civil rights laws as they play into freedom of religion and exercising freedom of religion,” Killian told The News Monday. “This is also to inform the public what federal laws are in effect and what the consequences are.”

Killian said the presentation will also focus on Muslim culture and how, that although terrorist acts have been committed by some in the faith, they are no different from those in other religions.

...

He then cited the three non-Muslim terrorists acts they can never stop talking about.

Apparently he also babbled about how the US Government, law enforcement, and non-Muslim Americans are fostering an "us versus them" attitude.

See, we're doing that.

I might say that the "us versus them" attitude certainly seems to be fostered within the Muslim community itself, but I can't, because, as you'll see, US Attorney Bill Killian wants me to know he might put me in jail for saying that.

Killian said Internet postings that violate civil rights are subject to federal jurisdiction.

“That’s what everybody needs to understand,” he said.

The specific posting he mentioned was pretty egregious -- a picture of a guy holding a shotgun with the caption "How to Wink at a Muslim."

Nevertheless, what we have here is a US Attorney telling Americans that they can be arrested and imprisoned for the exercise of their First Amendment rights.

In the aftermath of the Woolrich slaughter in England, the British police immediately arrested... a man for making anti-Muslim comments on Twitter.

And I thought, "Ah well, that's Britain. They're doomed, but we already knew that."

But here we are in America, with one of the 100 or so US federal appointed Attorneys telling Americans that the federal government may lock them up for their internet postings.

via @jtlol

Posted by: Ace at 06:49 AM | Comments (410)
Post contains 448 words, total size 3 kb.

The ricin turns out to be "of poor quality and is a low-level, crudely made poison," said FBI ricin reviewer Mr. Blackwell.

So it's probably not that dangerous but it's the thought that counts.

This story will get some play because the notes tainted with the ricin contained anti-gun-control messages. Obama got a similar one, but it's not confirmed yet that it contained ricin.

Posted by: Ace at 06:24 AM | Comments (133)
Post contains 86 words, total size 1 kb.

• PA State Rep Caught Sock Puppet Trolling People On The Internet
  
• Go Away: Romney Plans To Rejoin National Dialogue
  
• Leviathan Fail
  
• So-Called 'Journalists' Huddle With Holder
  
• Americans Have Rebuilt Less Than Half Of Wealth Lost During The Recession
  
• House Questioning IRS Staffers In Ohio
  
• US Cyber Chief: Military Unprepared For Hacking
  
• Aging Chinese Face A Bleak Picture
  
• Illegal Immigrant, Mother Of Seven Given Food Stamps, Meds, Housing And Social Security For 20 Years
  
• The NAZI's Little Helper
  
• New Polls Show England Wants Their Guns Back
  
• Chicago Sun Times Lay Off All Photographers
  
• Maryland Boy Suspended For Pop Tart Gun Given Free Life Membership To The NRA
  
• It Is All Coming To Pass As Monty Foretold
  
• Michigan Woman Dies Fighting For The Opposition In Syria
  
• Holder Media Backlash Intensifies
  
• Man Arrested For Humping A Door
  
• George W. Bush Skeptical Of Current Immigration Push
  
• More IRS Incompetence
  
• Interviews At Koch Brothers Protest Go About As You'd Expect
  
• Seniors Warned, Think Twice Before Selling Pension
  

Follow me on twitter.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 05:30 AM | Comments (284)
Post contains 174 words, total size 4 kb.

Friday!

Posted by: andy at 03:00 AM | Comments (386)
Post contains 9 words, total size 1 kb.

Due to unforeseen interruptions and a 3+ hour visit at the dentist tonight's ONT will be teh vizual.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 06:14 PM | Comments (809)
Post contains 76 words, total size 5 kb.

I've got nothin'.

[Update JohnE.]: Me either.

UPDATE UPDATE PART TWO SO URGENT: [lauraw] : *cough*

Posted by: Ace at 04:11 PM | Comments (642)
Post contains 20 words, total size 1 kb.

I'm curious if MSNBC will still attend, or NBC still pretends to be the dog that wags the tail.

In a way, I think it's better for NBC if MSNBC does attend. That would help push the idea these are two separate operations and that the bizarre clownshow that is MSNBC should not reflect on NBC.

But if NBC calls the shots for MSNBC, that suggests, as I keep saying, the two are the same organization, one pitched to liberals, the other pitched to lunatic liberals.

Chris Hayes Releases Statement Regarding NBC's Decision to Boycott:

I'm going and fuck you Dad! You can't tell me what to do I'm an adult with adult ideas and adult plans!!

FUCK YOU DAD I HATE YOU!

Posted by: Ace at 03:06 PM | Comments (256)
Post contains 164 words, total size 1 kb.

"The chief Lawgiver of the United States," says professional idiot/expert in being black Michael Eric Dyson.

You gotta watch it, man. (It's the Washington Free Beacon's video.)

He said this on Martin Bashir. When confronted with this frothing lunacy, Bashir responds, "Indeed."

via @allahpundit

Posted by: Ace at 01:52 PM | Comments (320)
Post contains 68 words, total size 1 kb.