Accidentally started by documentary filmmaker Annabel Park, the Coffee Party movement faces its first test today:  newly-formed Coffee Party chapters are meeting all across the country.  Formed out of frustration over what some call the extreme views of the Tea Party movement, and even racism, the Coffee Party movement started with a rant on her Facebook page by Park.

Several weeks ago, Park posted the following on Facebook:

"Let's start a coffee party — a Red Bull party — anything but tea. Let's get together and drink cappuccino and have real political dialogue with substance and compassion."

After Park was swamped by responses agreeing with her, that the Tea Party movement did not represent their of America, things snowballed.  The official Coffee Party movement Facebook group has swelled to over 130,000 fans.   They also have an official website. Interestingly, despite being founded in March of 2009, as opposed to weeks ago, the Tea Party facebook group has only 110,000 fans.

Saturday, local Coffee Party movement organizers will hold more than 350 meetings for the Coffee Party National Kick Off. Meetings will take place in almost every state, with national organizers encouraging groups of no more than eight people at a local (where else) coffee shop.

The Coffee Party movement declares the following on its Facebook page:

"We want jobs with decent pay for all Americans. We want affordable health care and education. We want our government to cut wasteful spending and practice fiscal discipline. We want regulation of Wall Street to protect consumers and promotion of financial literacy."

It also states the following in a message to Congress:

"You work for us, not for corporations. We hired you and we get to fire you. We pay you and give you great health insurance. Now get to work serving the interests of the American people, or get out."

The Coffee Party movement, like the Tea Party movement, believes that government does not represent them.  Unlike the Tea Party, however, the Coffee Party wants to change it so that government does represent them.  Meanwhile, the Tea Party wants government to go away.

It is clear, therefore, that the Tea Parties have not taken an example from Denmark.  For years (2007, 2008, late 2009) Denmark has been called the "happiest place on earth."

University of Copenhagen Sociologist Peter Glindelock described part of the reason for the happiness in Denmark is, in fact, big government. He has conducted many studies on this issue.

Glindelock says part of the reason is the country's social system. "The happiness standard is the quality of life in different societies. And Denmark scores very highly on all those different values. So even though the climate is poor, which is part of that analysis, it still shows that the welfare state is very important for people's happiness."

In Denmark, the state controls the health, educational, and other systems, and the Danes are willing to pay high taxes to support them. "And this kind of welfare state means that everybody gets more or less the same from the state," said Glindelock. "At least what the Danes like, they like an egalitarian society."

Watch a video from the Coffee Party Movement's website:

Originally on SNAFU-ed

Accidentally started by documentary filmmaker Annabel Park, the Coffee Party movement faces its first test today:  newly-formed Coffee Party chapters are meeting all across the country.  Formed out of frustration over what some call the extreme views of the Tea Party movement, and even racism, the Coffee Party movement started with a rant on her Facebook page by Park.

Several weeks ago, Park posted the following on Facebook:

"Let's start a coffee party — a Red Bull party — anything but tea. Let's get together and drink cappuccino and have real political dialogue with substance and compassion."

After Park was swamped by responses agreeing with her, that the Tea Party movement did not represent their of America, things snowballed.  The official Coffee Party movement Facebook group has swelled to over 130,000 fans.   They also have an official website. Interestingly, despite being founded in March of 2009, as opposed to weeks ago, the Tea Party facebook group has only 110,000 fans.

Saturday, local Coffee Party movement organizers will hold more than 350 meetings for the Coffee Party National Kick Off. Meetings will take place in almost every state, with national organizers encouraging groups of no more than eight people at a local (where else) coffee shop.

The Coffee Party movement declares the following on its Facebook page:

"We want jobs with decent pay for all Americans. We want affordable health care and education. We want our government to cut wasteful spending and practice fiscal discipline. We want regulation of Wall Street to protect consumers and promotion of financial literacy."

It also states the following in a message to Congress:

"You work for us, not for corporations. We hired you and we get to fire you. We pay you and give you great health insurance. Now get to work serving the interests of the American people, or get out."

The Coffee Party movement, like the Tea Party movement, believes that government does not represent them.  Unlike the Tea Party, however, the Coffee Party wants to change it so that government does represent them.  Meanwhile, the Tea Party wants government to go away.

It is clear, therefore, that the Tea Parties have not taken an example from Denmark.  For years (2007, 2008, late 2009) Denmark has been called the "happiest place on earth."

University of Copenhagen Sociologist Peter Glindelock described part of the reason for the happiness in Denmark is, in fact, big government. He has conducted many studies on this issue.

Glindelock says part of the reason is the country's social system. "The happiness standard is the quality of life in different societies. And Denmark scores very highly on all those different values. So even though the climate is poor, which is part of that analysis, it still shows that the welfare state is very important for people's happiness."

In Denmark, the state controls the health, educational, and other systems, and the Danes are willing to pay high taxes to support them. "And this kind of welfare state means that everybody gets more or less the same from the state," said Glindelock. "At least what the Danes like, they like an egalitarian society."

Watch a video from the Coffee Party Movement's website:

Originally on SNAFU-ed

Sexting is (unfortunately for parents) popular among teens and tweens. Some of the teen sexters have even been charged with child porn because of it. Many think that is unnecessary, but in this case, with a New Hampshire teacher, the door to jail seems wide open.

Melinda Dennehy, 41 and a mother of two, is an English teacher at Londonderry High School. Despite her degree, she apparently did not read, or did not understand, laws on indecent exposure, however.

Melinda Dennehy turned herself in to Londonderry police last Friday. She reportedly sent four "sexy" shots of herself to a 16-year-old male student at that high school. The student thought the pictures were "hot" enough that he forwarded the images to his friends.

According to the police, the pictures were sent two months ago. The teenager also told police that Melinda Dennehy had "continuously sent him text messages." Many of those were, he said, sexually explicit. He added that she "kissed him twice on two separate occasions" in a classroom.

According to the local Londonderry website, the charge of indecent exposure leveled at Melinda Dennehy is considered a Class B Felony. The maximum punishment is up to seven years in state prison and a fine of $4,000.

Dennehy was released on $10,000 personal recognizance bail; she is due to be arraigned in the Derry District Court on April 30, 2010. Dennehy is to have no contact with anyone under the age of sixteen and was ordered to stay away from all Londonderry School property.

Sexting is a word that combines sex and texting (or text messaging). As previously noted, child pornography charges have been brought against some teens due to the practice. In response, the question of when sexting should be a crime, particularly among consensual teens, remains an open issue.

You can listen to the school districts press conference on Melinda Dennehy here.

Originally on SNAFU-ed

Sexting is (unfortunately for parents) popular among teens and tweens. Some of the teen sexters have even been charged with child porn because of it. Many think that is unnecessary, but in this case, with a New Hampshire teacher, the door to jail seems wide open.

Melinda Dennehy, 41 and a mother of two, is an English teacher at Londonderry High School. Despite her degree, she apparently did not read, or did not understand, laws on indecent exposure, however.

Melinda Dennehy turned herself in to Londonderry police last Friday. She reportedly sent four "sexy" shots of herself to a 16-year-old male student at that high school. The student thought the pictures were "hot" enough that he forwarded the images to his friends.

According to the police, the pictures were sent two months ago. The teenager also told police that Melinda Dennehy had "continuously sent him text messages." Many of those were, he said, sexually explicit. He added that she "kissed him twice on two separate occasions" in a classroom.

According to the local Londonderry website, the charge of indecent exposure leveled at Melinda Dennehy is considered a Class B Felony. The maximum punishment is up to seven years in state prison and a fine of $4,000.

Dennehy was released on $10,000 personal recognizance bail; she is due to be arraigned in the Derry District Court on April 30, 2010. Dennehy is to have no contact with anyone under the age of sixteen and was ordered to stay away from all Londonderry School property.

Sexting is a word that combines sex and texting (or text messaging). As previously noted, child pornography charges have been brought against some teens due to the practice. In response, the question of when sexting should be a crime, particularly among consensual teens, remains an open issue.

You can listen to the school districts press conference on Melinda Dennehy here.

Originally on SNAFU-ed

Funny or Die is back more political satire. This time they've done a great job of organizing a SNL presidents reunion, gathering a large cast of comedians (most of which are Saturday Night Live alumni) doing POTUS impersonations to educate viewers about the banking industry and the need for financial reform.

The SNL presidents reunion video is described as follows:

Barack Obama gets a surprise visit in the night from ex-Presidents Bush Sr., Bush Jr., Clinton, Ford, Reagan and Carter to get a few pointers about the Consumer Financial Protection Agency and why it's so important.

Here is the SNL Presidents reunion cast. The video is embedded below.

• Barack Obama (Fred Armisen)
• Michelle Obama (Maya Rudolph)
• Bill Clinton (Darrell Hammond)
• George W. Bush (Dana Carvey)
• Gerald Ford (Chevy Chase)
• Ronald Reagan (Jim Carrey)
• Jimmy Carter (Chevy Chase)

Originally on SNAFU-ed

Funny or Die is back more political satire. This time they've done a great job of organizing a SNL presidents reunion, gathering a large cast of comedians (most of which are Saturday Night Live alumni) doing POTUS impersonations to educate viewers about the banking industry and the need for financial reform.

The SNL presidents reunion video is described as follows:

Barack Obama gets a surprise visit in the night from ex-Presidents Bush Sr., Bush Jr., Clinton, Ford, Reagan and Carter to get a few pointers about the Consumer Financial Protection Agency and why it's so important.

Here is the SNL Presidents reunion cast. The video is embedded below.

• Barack Obama (Fred Armisen)
• Michelle Obama (Maya Rudolph)
• Bill Clinton (Darrell Hammond)
• George W. Bush (Dana Carvey)
• Gerald Ford (Chevy Chase)
• Ronald Reagan (Jim Carrey)
• Jimmy Carter (Chevy Chase)

Originally on SNAFU-ed

The FAA is investigating a report that a child apparently directed pilots last month from the air traffic control center at John F. Kennedy Airport. JFK Airport is one of the nation's busiest airports, and audio clips prove transmissions between pilots and the child occurred.

You can listen to the audio clips below. You can hear that pilots were not all that concerned with the incident, and one pilot even tells the child "awesome job." It is true that there appeared to be an adult monitoring the activity, as you can hear a voice say, "That's what you get guys when the kids are out of school."

Listen to the audio:

Originally on SNAFU-ed

The FAA is investigating a report that a child apparently directed pilots last month from the air traffic control center at John F. Kennedy Airport. JFK Airport is one of the nation's busiest airports, and audio clips prove transmissions between pilots and the child occurred.

You can listen to the audio clips below. You can hear that pilots were not all that concerned with the incident, and one pilot even tells the child "awesome job." It is true that there appeared to be an adult monitoring the activity, as you can hear a voice say, "That's what you get guys when the kids are out of school."

Listen to the audio:

Originally on SNAFU-ed

Michael Blosil, 18, and one of Marie Osmond's adopted children, jumped to his death Friday night from his downtown Los Angeles apartment building. He left behind a suicide note, according to ETOnline.

According to the report, the note stated that Michael Blosil "intended to commit suicide due to his life-long battle with severe depression that left him, he said, feeling as if he had no friends and could never fit in."

Besides Michael Blosil, Marie Osmond has seven other children. They are Stephen James Craig, 27, from her first marriage, who was adopted by Osmond's second husband Brian Blosil. While married to Blosil, Osmond had two more children, Rachael Lauren in 1989 and Matthew Richard in 1999. In addition, they adopted Jessica Marie in 1987, Michael Brian in 1991, Brandon Warren in 1997, Brianna Patricia in 1998, and Abigail Michelle in 2002. Osmond and Blosil announced they were divorcing in 2007.

On November 14, 2007, MSNBC reported that Michael Blosil, then 16, had entered rehab. Marie Osmond confirmed the news later the same night during a taping of the show "Larry King Live."

Through her publicist, Marie Osmond said:

"My family and I are devastated and in deep shock by the tragic loss of our dear Michael and ask that everyone respect our privacy during this difficult time."

Meanwhile, her brother Donny said:

"Please pray for my sister and her family."

Saturday night's "Donny & Marie" show at the Flamingo hotel in Las Vegas was canceled.

Originally on SNAFU-ed

Michael Blosil, 18, and one of Marie Osmond's adopted children, jumped to his death Friday night from his downtown Los Angeles apartment building. He left behind a suicide note, according to ETOnline.

According to the report, the note stated that Michael Blosil "intended to commit suicide due to his life-long battle with severe depression that left him, he said, feeling as if he had no friends and could never fit in."

Besides Michael Blosil, Marie Osmond has seven other children. They are Stephen James Craig, 27, from her first marriage, who was adopted by Osmond's second husband Brian Blosil. While married to Blosil, Osmond had two more children, Rachael Lauren in 1989 and Matthew Richard in 1999. In addition, they adopted Jessica Marie in 1987, Michael Brian in 1991, Brandon Warren in 1997, Brianna Patricia in 1998, and Abigail Michelle in 2002. Osmond and Blosil announced they were divorcing in 2007.

On November 14, 2007, MSNBC reported that Michael Blosil, then 16, had entered rehab. Marie Osmond confirmed the news later the same night during a taping of the show "Larry King Live."

Through her publicist, Marie Osmond said:

"My family and I are devastated and in deep shock by the tragic loss of our dear Michael and ask that everyone respect our privacy during this difficult time."

Meanwhile, her brother Donny said:

"Please pray for my sister and her family."

Saturday night's "Donny & Marie" show at the Flamingo hotel in Las Vegas was canceled.

Originally on SNAFU-ed

If corporations can have free speech rights, why can't zombies? That's basically the ruling given by an appeals court in Minneapolis, Minnesota on Wednesday.

The appeals court, a three-judge panel, overturned a lower court by a 2-1 vote in finding that the group of seven "zombies" had been wrongfully detained during a 2006 shopping mall protest against consumerism. The court ruled that Minneapolis police lacked probable cause to arrest the demonstrators for disorderly conduct.

The demonstrators were wearing makeup at the time that gave them a "Night of the Living dead" look (white face powder, fake blood, etc. etc.). They also tromped stiff-legged through the mall, as zombies are wont to do.

However, the panel did dismiss the zombie plaintiffs' claims of "First Amendment retaliation" and "false imprisonment." On the other hand, the ruling they made gives the protesters the right to revive their lawsuit against the city of Minneapolis and its police department. According to the Star Tribune paper the zombies are seeking damages of at least $50,000 per corpse arrested.

The panel said:

"An objectively reasonable person would not think probable cause exists under the Minnesota disorderly conduct statue to arrest a group of peaceful people for engaging in an artistic protest by playing music, broadcasting statements (and) dressing as zombies."

The reference to corporations above refers to the recent Supreme Court decision in which they gave corporations unfettered rights to throw as much money as they want toward an election. The fact that a WaPo poll shows bipartisan opposition to the decision (with 76 percent of conservatives against the ruling) shows that the five conservatives in the Supreme Court, who want to please their base, are probably saying "Oops."

Originally on SNAFU-ed

If corporations can have free speech rights, why can't zombies? That's basically the ruling given by an appeals court in Minneapolis, Minnesota on Wednesday.

The appeals court, a three-judge panel, overturned a lower court by a 2-1 vote in finding that the group of seven "zombies" had been wrongfully detained during a 2006 shopping mall protest against consumerism. The court ruled that Minneapolis police lacked probable cause to arrest the demonstrators for disorderly conduct.

The demonstrators were wearing makeup at the time that gave them a "Night of the Living dead" look (white face powder, fake blood, etc. etc.). They also tromped stiff-legged through the mall, as zombies are wont to do.

However, the panel did dismiss the zombie plaintiffs' claims of "First Amendment retaliation" and "false imprisonment." On the other hand, the ruling they made gives the protesters the right to revive their lawsuit against the city of Minneapolis and its police department. According to the Star Tribune paper the zombies are seeking damages of at least $50,000 per corpse arrested.

The panel said:

"An objectively reasonable person would not think probable cause exists under the Minnesota disorderly conduct statue to arrest a group of peaceful people for engaging in an artistic protest by playing music, broadcasting statements (and) dressing as zombies."

The reference to corporations above refers to the recent Supreme Court decision in which they gave corporations unfettered rights to throw as much money as they want toward an election. The fact that a WaPo poll shows bipartisan opposition to the decision (with 76 percent of conservatives against the ruling) shows that the five conservatives in the Supreme Court, who want to please their base, are probably saying "Oops."

Originally on SNAFU-ed

Toyota's woes may prove a boon to a Minnesota man who was convicted of vehicular homicide. He claimed, at the time, that his Camry suddenly accelerated and slammed into another car, killing three members of a family.

In June 10, 2006, Koua Fong Lee, 32, was driving home from church. In his 1996 Toyota Camry were his pregnant wife, his daughter, brother and father. After exiting Interstate 94 he smashed into the back of an Oldsmobile. The Camry hit the other car at a speed estimated between 70 and 90 miles per hour. Lee testified he shouted to his family, "Brakes, brakes not working," just before the crash.

Javis Adams and his 10-year-old son, Javis Adams Jr., died at the scene. Devyn Bolton succumbed to injuries from the crash a year later.

After Toyota's recent swarm of recalls, Lee's lawyers discovered that some 1996 Camrys had been themselves the subject of a recall because of "unintended acceleration" caused by a flaw in the cruise control. The recall was not presented as evidence at the trial.

In fact, while a 1996 model would not be among those in Toyota's recent recalls, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has received more than 17 complaints from owners of other 1996 Camrys alleging sudden acceleration. Among them:

• "Vehicle accelerated on its own."
• "It was a very dangerous situation."
• "The vehicle reached speeds of 60-80 mph while running two stop signs. Had to crash into a tree and another vehicle to stop the vehicle."

The last was very recently reported, in Oct. 2009.

Lee was given an eight year sentence and has been in prison for two. In criminal cases, a reasonable doubt is all that is necessary for an innocent verdict, and it appears reasonable doubt has even reached the family of those killed.

Bridgette Trice, whose seven-year old daughter later died from injuries suffered in the accident, as noted above, said "I can't believe that a guy with his pregnant wife, a kid in a car seat, his father-in-law and a brother-in-law in the car, would purposely be speeding up this ramp like that. Maybe there is something to what Mr. Lee said was going on with him in his car, that he couldn't stop, that he tried his hardest, and the brakes, that his car wouldn't stop. He's never wavered on his story that his brakes were bad."

Watch a video report:

Originally on SNAFU-ed

Toyota's woes may prove a boon to a Minnesota man who was convicted of vehicular homicide. He claimed, at the time, that his Camry suddenly accelerated and slammed into another car, killing three members of a family.

In June 10, 2006, Koua Fong Lee, 32, was driving home from church. In his 1996 Toyota Camry were his pregnant wife, his daughter, brother and father. After exiting Interstate 94 he smashed into the back of an Oldsmobile. The Camry hit the other car at a speed estimated between 70 and 90 miles per hour. Lee testified he shouted to his family, "Brakes, brakes not working," just before the crash.

Javis Adams and his 10-year-old son, Javis Adams Jr., died at the scene. Devyn Bolton succumbed to injuries from the crash a year later.

After Toyota's recent swarm of recalls, Lee's lawyers discovered that some 1996 Camrys had been themselves the subject of a recall because of "unintended acceleration" caused by a flaw in the cruise control. The recall was not presented as evidence at the trial.

In fact, while a 1996 model would not be among those in Toyota's recent recalls, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has received more than 17 complaints from owners of other 1996 Camrys alleging sudden acceleration. Among them:

• "Vehicle accelerated on its own."
• "It was a very dangerous situation."
• "The vehicle reached speeds of 60-80 mph while running two stop signs. Had to crash into a tree and another vehicle to stop the vehicle."

The last was very recently reported, in Oct. 2009.

Lee was given an eight year sentence and has been in prison for two. In criminal cases, a reasonable doubt is all that is necessary for an innocent verdict, and it appears reasonable doubt has even reached the family of those killed.

Bridgette Trice, whose seven-year old daughter later died from injuries suffered in the accident, as noted above, said "I can't believe that a guy with his pregnant wife, a kid in a car seat, his father-in-law and a brother-in-law in the car, would purposely be speeding up this ramp like that. Maybe there is something to what Mr. Lee said was going on with him in his car, that he couldn't stop, that he tried his hardest, and the brakes, that his car wouldn't stop. He's never wavered on his story that his brakes were bad."

Watch a video report:

Originally on SNAFU-ed

The parents of Blake Robbins, a student at Harriton High School in Rosemont, PA, have launched a class-action lawsuit against the Lower Merion School District, the Board of Directors of the school district, and the Superindent, as well. At issue: laptops that were given to students by the district, which can have their webcams activated remotely by school administrators, even when the student is at home or away from the computer.

The lawsuit (.PDF) alleges that students and parents weren't told about the webcam "feature." The lawsuit, filed on behalf of the 1,800 district students, seeks "to recover damages caused to the Plaintiffs and Class by Defendants' invasion of Plaintiffs' privacy, (and) theft of Plaintiffs' private information."

It was only when an assistant principal at Harriton High School told tenth-grader Blake Robbins that she had a picture that proved he “was engaged in improper behavior in his home” that the "feature" came to the fore.

The lawsuit alleges the webcams violate the U.S. Constitution’s guarantees of privacy, privacy under Pennsylvania common law, the U.S. Civil Rights Act, and a variety of other statutes. The filing adds:

As the laptops at issue were routinely used by students and family members while at home, it is believed and therefore averred that many of the images captured and intercepted may consist of images of minors and their parents or friends in compromising or embarrassing positions, including, but not limited to, in various stages of dress or undress.

That, of course, brings up the possibility that in some circumstances the images were basically child porn.

District spokesman Doug Young said on Thursday, “This is the first we have heard of the allegations. We can categorically state that we are, and always have been, committed to the privacy of our students."

Originally on SNAFU-ed

The parents of Blake Robbins, a student at Harriton High School in Rosemont, PA, have launched a class-action lawsuit against the Lower Merion School District, the Board of Directors of the school district, and the Superindent, as well. At issue: laptops that were given to students by the district, which can have their webcams activated remotely by school administrators, even when the student is at home or away from the computer.

The lawsuit (.PDF) alleges that students and parents weren't told about the webcam "feature." The lawsuit, filed on behalf of the 1,800 district students, seeks "to recover damages caused to the Plaintiffs and Class by Defendants' invasion of Plaintiffs' privacy, (and) theft of Plaintiffs' private information."

It was only when an assistant principal at Harriton High School told tenth-grader Blake Robbins that she had a picture that proved he “was engaged in improper behavior in his home” that the "feature" came to the fore.

The lawsuit alleges the webcams violate the U.S. Constitution’s guarantees of privacy, privacy under Pennsylvania common law, the U.S. Civil Rights Act, and a variety of other statutes. The filing adds:

As the laptops at issue were routinely used by students and family members while at home, it is believed and therefore averred that many of the images captured and intercepted may consist of images of minors and their parents or friends in compromising or embarrassing positions, including, but not limited to, in various stages of dress or undress.

That, of course, brings up the possibility that in some circumstances the images were basically child porn.

District spokesman Doug Young said on Thursday, “This is the first we have heard of the allegations. We can categorically state that we are, and always have been, committed to the privacy of our students."

Originally on SNAFU-ed