Agreed. We’ll start with any bat that has any black colored material around the grip area. We’ll randomly call these “ assault bats” and we will criminalize the possession thereof. Later, we will simply broaden the definition until we include all bats. This violence has to stop. It’s for the children!

How convenient for them. The top 100 US corporations paid a total of $0 Federal income tax last year, and this includes Microsoft and Boeing. How much State income tax do you think they will pay? Easy to advocate a tax increase when it is someone else’s money.

Hey I got an idea, how about the both of them pay that supposed 35% corporate tax (that businesses always bitch about) on their non-adjusted income, just once! Then tell us how they like the idea of adding a state income tax too!

They’re only blocking traffic if you're willing to slow down, otherwise they’re merely speed bumps.

"Seriously - would YOU take orders from Josh? " - A better question might be would Josh take orders from his father? When it is all said and done, it would not surprise me if they both are involved.

What he said - "The most important is to stop the bloodshed," al-Saadi told Al-Arabiya

What he meant - "The most important is to stop MY bloodshed," Now that THEY personally are in mortal danger, it is time to negotiate. Doubt that is going to work a$$hole.

I don't know that what the board was doing was in fact breaking the law or not, and of course I would like to see these meetings held in front of the public for all of us to see too, but that does not negate the fact that the parties asked it to be turned off. It was her personal device. They were in a "closed session" and had a reasonable expectation of privacy, they were clearly recorded without their "consent". Her intentions may have been honorable but I fear her actions are suspect.

If this was a "closed session", was that not because they intended the conversation to be private? and if so, did the woman not just record the private conversation of others without their consent? and did she then not just violate the law by both recording it and then releasing it to the public? I'm guessing someone is potentially in serious trouble.
Just my 2 cents.

"King County Council approves $20 car tab fee hike to save Metro"...... Save Metro my hairy white butt !!

Based on their track record, it appears the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals should be given a competency hearing.

Perhaps I am missing something, but I don’t believe a brand identifies a specific animal, but rather the ranch that owns(ed) the animal in question. A brand would not even identify the year the animal was born, let alone health history etc., whereas a tag can identify the specific animal and the data for that particular tag can track all information for a specific animal such as owner, when and where it was born, any medical treatments, antibiotics, feed etc.. I fully understand the desire to keep brands and wholeheartedly support the ranchers in this regard but surely an ear tag that identifies the specific animal that will not normally fall or be torn out easily can be devised and used in conjunction with the brands, and be installed at the time of branding. Again, maybe I am missing something?