Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
7 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

Of course it’s harder to get today, but it doesn’t require a FOIA request like Bgal said and it’s not Orwellian. 

 

Plus this is just a data store. “These reports provide important information on demographics, sentence length, offense type, and other figures relevant to criminal justice and incarceration.” I’m sure that you were planning on compiling all this data into some good excel charts at home. The media, left and right, and campaigns left and right, can still put together any chart they want. 

 

If if you get the data, you can put it on your server and tweet the link to the world. 

 

Every act is not a boogeyman. 


You do not know it will not need a FOIA request. The email may be all you need. On the other hand, what is to prevent CA from slow walking requests? Telling the person/entity requesting to pound sand? Claiming the emails were never received? The next step would be... a FOIA.

 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Replies 10.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
Just now, Buffalo_Gal said:


You do not know it will not need a FOIA request. The email may be all you need. On the other hand, what is to prevent CA from slow walking requests? Telling the person/entity requesting to pound sand? Claiming the emails were never received? The next step would be... a FOIA.

 

 

Sigh. I also don't know if they will request 32 forms of ID. I go off what the single story you linked says, which is that the data (which is not the sexist data) that is no doubt already in the hands of many outside of CA government, can still be in the hands of many. 

Posted
Just now, BeginnersMind said:

 

Sigh. I also don't know if they will request 32 forms of ID. I go off what the single story you linked says, which is that the data (which is not the sexist data) that is no doubt already in the hands of many outside of CA government, can still be in the hands of many. 


I would hope all the opposition (of both parties) has everything downloaded and ready to roll out in negative ads (assuming there is something negative to be had). That still does not make the information readily available to the average schlepp.

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:


I would hope all the opposition (of both parties) has everything downloaded and ready to roll out in negative ads (assuming there is something negative to be had). That still does not make the information readily available to the average schlepp.

 

Right.  We live in the information age -- until we don't.

And you and I independently came to the same conclusion about that -- which makes us "you guys".

I'd rather be a "you guy" than a "that guy".

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 3
Posted
11 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:


I would hope all the opposition (of both parties) has everything downloaded and ready to roll out in negative ads (assuming there is something negative to be had). That still does not make the information readily available to the average schlepp.

 

You were planning on going through statistical data for California convictions? Before or after South Bend? 

 

I kid I kid. Only DR has that much free time. 

Posted
17 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

Right.  We live in the information age -- until we don't.

And you and I independently came to the same conclusion about that -- which makes us "you guys".

I'd rather be a "you guy" than a "that guy".

 

 

 

 

Proving again he's a child. Not worth the time to engage let alone read his drivel. :beer: 

Posted
39 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

That's true.  It's the only explanation of why a Hillary/Kaine ticket and the excitement that came with it didn't carry the state by a healthy margin.

 

Sounds like "What Happened" needs another addendum/publishing run.

Posted
39 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

You were planning on going through statistical data for California convictions? Before or after South Bend? 

 

I kid I kid. Only DR has that much free time. 


You don't write for a living, do you?

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
32 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:


You don't write for a living, do you?

 

15 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

Yes...but not in the same way as him.

 

pee-your-name-on-snow.jpeg&f=1

 

  • Haha (+1) 4
Posted
Just now, B-Man said:

 

Pardon me if I post about the 2020 candidates..........0:)

 

 

 

 


I wanna find the Anderson Cooper interview she yesterday.  Now she is "controversial" because she is against anti-depressants. I don't agree with her, I am just O.o at the labeling... she's said some batshit crazy things to date, but this is what gets her views labeled controversial? 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Foxx said:

 

Y'know...people keep telling me that socialism is pro-union, and the Nazis weren't socialist because they broke the labor unions.  And I keep reminding people that in socialism, the government represents the interests of labor, and socialists are fundamentally anti-union because the break the unions and seek to control labor through their own organization, as the Nazis did with the Reich Labor Front (and the Russians did, and the Cambodians, etc.)

 

And the socialists keep proving me right.  And denying it by saying "Well, that wasn't real socialism.  But hold my beer and watch this..."

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted

Love and compassion on display by the non-racist left... wait, did I say non-racist? 

 

 

Nothing like an old white man calling a woman of color an Uncle Tom. That's not racist, right? Because she's a conservative it's allowed? 

 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...