Liberals are like Nazi Scum. They allow illegals to have sanctuary cities but want you in jail for a straw.
A group of California legislators wants to punish waiters who offer “unsolicited” plastic straws to customers with a six-month jail sentence and a $1,000 fine.
Democratic California Assembly Majority Floor Leader Ian Calderon has introduced a bill that could put waiters in jail for offering their patrons a plastic straw without them asking for one.
“This bill would prohibit a food facility, as specified, where food may be consumed on the premises from providing single-use plastic straws to consumers unless requested by the consumer,” the bill reads. “By creating a new crime and imposing additional enforcement duties on local health agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.”
Yes this looks real dangerous.
“Existing law requires, except as otherwise provided, a person who violates any provision of the code to be guilty of a misdemeanor with each offense punishable by a fine of not less than $25 or more than $1,000, or by imprisonment in the county jail for a term not exceeding 6 months, or by both,” it states.
Calderon estimated that Americans use 500 million plastic straws per day. A report on the bill from Reason revealed that the estimate came from a 2011 survey conducted by then 9-year-old Milo Cress. Cress calculated the number by calling straw manufacturers.
In a press release, Calderon explained that the bill is motivated by a push to create greater awareness about the effects of plastic straws on the environment.
This Sissy Drank From A Straw.
“We need to create awareness around the issue of one-time use plastic straws and its detrimental effects on our landfills, waterways, and oceans,” Calderon said in the release. “AB 1884 is not ban on plastic straws. It is a small step towards curbing our reliance on these convenience products, which will hopefully contribute to a change in consumer attitudes and usage.”
After intense scrutiny, Calderon issued a series of tweets that contradict with the text of his bill. Calderon claims now that the bill would not make serving plastic straws a crime. “I’d like to clarify that #AB1884 (Straws Upon Request) is (a) NOT a ban; (b) should it become law, it will NOT make it a crime for servers to provide plastic straws,” he wrote. “My intention is simply to raise awareness about the detrimental effects of plastic straws on our environment.”
I’d like to clarify that #AB1884 (Straws Upon Request) is (a) NOT a ban; (b) should it become law, it will NOT make it a crime for servers to provide plastic straws. My intention is simply to raise awareness about the detrimental effects of plastic straws on our environment.
This conflicts with the text of your bill. “By creating a new crime…” Why do you need a bill to raise awareness? Go make a TV spot, create a website, get Buzzfeed to do a write-up. Legislation is a last resort. https://twitter.com/IanCalderon/status/956691670522724352 …
An incensed bride punched a wedding crasher in the face after the interloper disrupted her reception by pawing several teenage female guests, according to a criminal complaint.
Cops say that William Dickinson, 25, and two co-workers were drinking at the bar of a Best Western in Eau Claire, Wisconsin Friday night when they decided to crash a wedding reception being held in the hotel.
The goal was “getting laid,”Dickinson’s buddy Patrick Smith later told police.
But Dickinson–wearing jeans and a t-shirt–quickly caused an uproar when he sought to dance with two 17-year-old girls and an 18-year-old woman. Police charge that he inappropriately touched all three teenagers. Two of the victims said Dickinson rubbed and squeezed their buttocks. When a 14-year-old girl confronted him about his behavior, Dickinson allegedly yanked on the child’s hair, causing her pain.
During a scuffle that followed, Dickinson allegedly punched the bride’s father in the face, knocking the man down. Smith said that Dickinson later told him that wedding guests “were mad at him for dancing with the girls and accused him of being a pedophile.”
When questioned by police, Dickinson admitted decking the bride’s father, adding that he planned to ground and pound the man, “but then realized that he was so old so he stopped punching him.” Dickinson, police reported, said that he “liked to fight people.”
Dickinson, the complaint notes, later apologized to the bride, saying that he “hoped he didn’t ruin her party.” The woman responded by punching the wedding crasher (seen above) in the face. “Dickinson said he probably deserved it,” cops noted.
Dickinson was charged with physical abuse of a child, a felony, disorderly conduct, and two counts of fourth-degree sexual assault (the latter two charges are misdemeanors). Dickinson was freed from jail Tuesday after posting $1000 bond.
A Circuit Court judge has ordered Dickinson to have no contact with “any underage females,” including the teens he allegedly groped at the wedding reception. Additionally, he must “maintain absolute sobriety” and stay out of “any taverns, bars, or place where alcohol is primarily served/sold.”
Angered that someone ate the last of his favorite chocolate chip cookies, a Florida man allegedly punched his live-in girlfriend in the face when she “did not want to argue over

something so petty,” according to a police report.
Richard Hessic, 31, was arrested Thursday evening on a domestic battery charge following a confrontation in the Port St. Lucie home he shares with the victim, a 34-year-old nurse.
The 6’ 4” Hessic, who works as a butcher, will be arraigned December 28 on the misdemeanor count.
In an interview with cops responding to a 911 call, Hessic said that he had gotten into an argument with his girlfriend “over cookies.” An investigator noted that Hessic “was upset someone ate the last chocolate chip cookie,” and was also angry “at his girlfriend for not taking him seriously.” Believing that she was “blowing him off,” Hessic said that he ripped down the curtain as the woman was showering.
The victim told a sheriff’s deputy that Hessic was angry that “the last of his favorite cookies were eaten.” The missing cookie was of less importance to the woman, who said she joked about “reviewing the surveillance cameras to see who ate the cookie.” The victim added that she “did not want to argue over something so petty” and told Hessic that she would purchase more cookies for him.
The woman alleged that after Hessic (seen above) followed her into the bathroom and tore down the shower curtain, he “punched her on the left side of her face.”
A judge has ordered Hessic to have no contact with his girlfriend and has placed him on house arrest with GPS monitoring, court records show. A court filing notes that Hessic (whose mug shot is below) has previously been arrested for battery, fleeing and eluding, child abuse, driving with a suspended or revoked license, and violating probation.
A Philadelphia lawmaker wants to ban bulletproof glass at convenience stores in the city.
Philadelphia, PA – Philadelphia councilwoman Cindy Bass has introduced a controversial bill that would require business owners to take down any bulletproof glass they have in their businesses, and not allow future installation.
Let Ray-Ray and Pookie Rob You Fool: Can You Say Thug-Life?
The bill, known as the Stop and Go bill, is moving through city hall, and reads “No establishment shall erect or maintain a physical barrier.”
Broad Deli is a local business on the corner of the 2200 block of North Broad. It has a wall of bulletproof glass separating its employees from customers.
“The most important thing is safety and the public’s safety,” Rich Kim, the owner of Broad Deli, told WTXF. His family has run the deli, which sells soda, snacks, meals, and beer by the can, for 20 years.
Kim said that he had the bulletproof glass installed after a shooting, and that it saved his mother-in-law from a knife attack.
“If the glass comes down, the crime rate will rise and there will be lots of dead bodies,” he said.
Bass was more concerned about customer’s feelings, and said her constituents shouldn’t have to suffer the indignity of shopping through bulletproof glass.
She said that she is trying to put some type of control on these small stores, which she claimed sell booze, very little food, and caused a lot of trouble in her district.
“Right now, the Plexiglas has to come down,” she said.
Kim disagreed with Bass’s characterization of businesses like the one he owns, and said when he called police about people loitering, the response time was usually slow.
He said he believed that he was being targeted as a Korean-American. Business owner Mike Choe agreed with him.
Choe, who runs a non-profit that supports Korean-owned businesses, said that he planned to raise $100,000 to fight the bill.
“I do think it’s a bad bill that will endanger Korean Americans,” he said.
Bass said that she is fighting for her constituents.
Choe responded to Bass, and said the “bill targets Korean Americans.”
Bass denied Choe’s allegation.
“Absolutely not. I find that offensive,” Bass said.
Do you think business owners should have the right to choose whether they want to install bulletproof glass in their businesses to protect employees? Tell us what you think in the comments below!
What I find absolutely fascinating is that everyone likes to look like the big shot but no one wants to work like the big shot. I am so tired of people who have not earned a damm thing pretending to be significant. They do not work well under pressure, but it is very important for everyone to see how crucial they are to the company. I can tell you without a doubt what’s wrong with a lot of companies. Companies have too many damm chiefs and not enough Indians. They want to lead but they have never learned to follow. Everyone has a coworker who constantly comes up with ideas but when it comes time for work, they are nowhere to be found. They talk a good game but they can’t burst a grape in a fruit fight.
If you want to be the chief, you must sacrifice like the chief. The chief should make sure that he or she leads by example. The chief should show up first, leave last, and work when no one else is working. He or she looks out for the well-being of the entire tribe, not just himself or herself. It is always a good thing to lead by example. People do not mind following a leader who is willing to do everything that he or she can do in order to accomplish a job.
Many companies hire people who are not necessarily qualified for or have not earned the right to a particular job. This type of character will make an attempt to supervise people on jobs that they have never performed themselves and do not have the expertise to adequately oversee. The only reason they have the position is because of Daddy or because someone that Daddy knows gave them the position.
That’s one of the problems with our leaders. They talk a good game about sacrifice but they make no sacrifices themselves. I don’t believe that anyone wants to follow a person who does nothing more than talk about what he or she wants the team to do, all the while refusing to get his or her hands dirty but always saying “we did this” or “we did that.” You would think they were French given the way they use the word “we.” Sometimes it makes you want to wee-wee listening to these clowns. Some of these so-called managers or supervisors come to work late and spend thirty minutes in the coffee room on a regular basis. They take two-hour “business” lunches but never discuss business. If they smoke, they are always outside sucking on cigarettes, talking about absolutely nothing.
What’s even worse is that they always want to have meetings or meet to discuss how the company could operate better and more efficiently. Well, I believe that the first thing the company could do to be more efficient is to get some damm work out of you or fire you to free up some budget space.
Sometimes you will notice that the “boss man” or “boss woman” wants to implement new procedures that do not make any sense. It would be one thing if the new process made the operation run more smoothly, but instead it causes more problems without producing a better product. You would think that the genius who came up with the plan would simply abandon the boat, but that will never happen because the moron in charge will never admit to being wrong. Nepotism or cronyism has put them in this position, not hard work.
Washington (CNN) –Texas congressman Ron Paul now leads among Iowa Republicans and has tied Newt Gingrich for second in New Hampshire. Republican conservatives have cycled through a series of “Not Mitts.” Is it now Paul’s turn?
Paul’s core following has been small but fervid. However, Paul now is gaining a larger following, especially among younger voters attracted by his message of drug legalization and his comprehensive — if utterly wrong-headed — explanation of the country’s economic crisis.
Unexpectedly, young voters seem also to appreciate Paul’s grandfatherly anti-charisma: his self-presentation as a good-natured old codger, charmingly baffled by the modern world. The ill-fitting suits, the quavering voice and the slack-jawed laugh all support the image of an anti-politician, the lone voice of integrity in a sullied word.
There is however a flaw in this benign image of Paul: the now-notorious newsletters published under his name in the early 1990s. Paul collected nearly a million dollars in one year from newsletters suffused with paranoia, racial bigotry and support for the period’s violent militia movements. Four years ago, Jamie Kirchick of the New Republic unearthed partial collections of the newsletters in the libraries of the University of Kansas and the Wisconsin Historical Society. From Kirchick’s subsequent report:
“Take, for instance, a special issue of the Ron Paul Political Report, published in June 1992, dedicated to explaining the Los Angeles riots of that year. ‘Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began,’ read one typical passage.
“According to the newsletter, the looting was a natural byproduct of government indulging the black community with ‘ “civil rights,” quotas, mandated hiring preferences, set-asides for government contracts, gerrymandered voting districts, black bureaucracies, black mayors, black curricula in schools, black tv shows, black tv anchors, hate crime laws, and public humiliation for anyone who dares question the black agenda.’ It also denounced ‘the media’ for believing that ‘America’s number one need is an unlimited white checking account for underclass blacks.’ ”
There’s a lot more in this vein.
Paul now claims that he did not write the newsletters, was unaware of their contents at the time and now has no idea who did write them.
It’s fair to say that almost no one who has followed the controversy believes that Paul is telling the truth about any of this. The authorship of the newsletters is an open secret in the libertarian world: they were produced by a community of writers led by Paul aides Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard, who wrote a newsletter of their own at the same time that expressed similar ideas in similar language. The racism of the newsletters — and the elaborate lying subsequently deployed to evade responsibility for the newsletters — say much about the ethics of Paul himself and the circle around him.
Yet Ron Paul is something more (or less) than a racist crank. As Michael Brendan Dougherty aptly observed in the Atlantic last week:
“As crazy as it sounds, Ron Paul’s newsletter writers may not have been sincerely racist at all. They actually thought appearing to be racist was a good political strategy in the 1990s. After that strategy yielded almost nothing — it was abandoned by Paul’s admirers.”
A fellow libertarian offers more detail on Paul’s racism-as-strategy. Paul and his circle aspired “to create a libertarian-conservative fusion … [by] appealing to the worst instincts of working/middle class conservative whites by creating the only anti-left fusion possible with the demise of socialism: one built on cultural issues. … [The strategy] apparently made some folks (such as Rockwell and Paul) pretty rich selling newsletters predicting the collapse of Western civilization at the hands of the blacks, gays, and multiculturalists. The explicit strategy was abandoned by around the turn of the century, but not after a lot of bad stuff had been written in all kinds of places.”
Don’t get the idea, however, that racism-as-strategy was some brief, futile dead-end for Paul. Paul exploited bigotry throughout his career, before as well as after the newsletter years. As Dave Weigel and Julian Sanchez reported in the libertarian magazine Reason, “Cato Institute President Ed Crane told Reason he recalls a conversation from some time in the late 1980s in which Paul claimed that his best source of congressional campaign donations was the mailing list for The Spotlight, the conspiracy-mongering, anti-Semitic tabloid run by the Holocaust denier Willis Carto until it folded in 2001.”
Crane is the president of the premier institution in the libertarian world. If his recollection is correct, Paul was appealing to consumers of Holocaust denial for political purposes half a decade before the newsletters commenced.
Nor is it wholly accurate to describe Paul’s strategy of appealing to the extremes as “abandoned.” Ron Paul delivered the keynote address to the John Birch Society as recently as the summer of 2009. He is a frequent guest on the Alex Jones radio program, the central station for 9/11 Trutherism. As I can attest first-hand, anybody who writes negatively about Paul will see his email inbox fill rapidly with anti-Semitic diatribes.
Not all the “bad stuff” of Ron Paul’s newsletter period was racist, exactly. Some of it was just general-purpose paranoia, designed to trick money out of the pockets of the fearful and gullible. Reuters has unearthed an example of a solicitation letter for the Ron Paul newsletters:
The solicitation warns of the coming danger of “new money”:
“I uncovered the New Money plans in my last term in the US Congress, and I held the ugly new bills in my hands. I can tell you – they made my skin crawl!
“These totalitarian bills were tinted pink and blue and brown, and blighted with holograms, diffraction gratings, metal and plastic threads, and chemical alarms. It wasn’t money for a free people. It was a portable inquisition, a paper ‘third degree’ to allow the feds to keep track of American cash, and American citizens.”
[In an e-mail to CNN, Paul’s campaign chairman Jesse Benton said, “Dr. Paul did not write that solicitation and the signature is an auto pen. It does not reflect his thoughts and is out of step with the message he has espoused for 40 years.” He added, “He should have better policed it and… he has assumed responsibility and apologized.”]
The daffy old coot side of Ron Paul’s personality is genuine enough. The crank side is certainly genuine, as are at least some of the racial views. Even after Paul abandoned the crude race-baiting of his 1990s newsletters, he continued to engage in elaborate apologetics for the Confederate side of the Civil War.
Also genuine, however, is the huckster aspect of the Ron Paul persona. That’s the persona that terrifies people who had never before heard of “diffraction grating” that the government might use this optical scanning technology, which can detect counterfeiting, to wiretap their wallets.
Ron Paul’s admirers see him as a man of integrity. They are tragically mistaken about that. Despite his too-dotty-to-lie persona, Ron Paul is not in fact on the level. In evading responsibility for his newsletters, Paul has replied “I don’t know” and “I don’t remember” to queries whose answers he must know and surely remembers. The back story of the newsletters shows a man who, sufficiently saturated in racism and extremism himself, was ready to exploit the even greater racism and extremism of others for financial gain. Ron Paul is the Max Bialystock of monetary cranks — and this latest presidential campaign represents the summit of his bunco artist career, his very own “Springtime for Hitler.”