Comment

Comment by Adriana on May 23, 2012 at 8:40pm

I wonder if the offensive part was the "pro-choice" message or the word "fuck". One would have to test it with other T-shirts saying Fuck in different contexts.

Comment by doone on May 23, 2012 at 7:04pm

Woman Kicked Off Flight For Wearing A Pro-Choice T-Shirt

By Annie-Rose Strasser posted from ThinkProgress Health on May 23, 2012 at 1:02 pm

A woman was not allowed to board her connecting flight Tuesday because she was wearing a pro-choice shirt that was too offensive, according to American Airlines.

The woman emailed Jodi Jacobson, editor-in-chief of RH Reality Check, recounting the experience:

Right before we were set to land the flight attendant from first class approaches me and asks if I had a connecting flight? We were running a bit behind schedule, so I figured I was being asked this to be sure I would make my connecting flight. She then proceeded to tell me that I needed to speak with the captain before disembarking the plane and that the shirt I was wearing was offensive.

The shirt was gray with the wording, “If I wanted the government in my womb, I’d fuck a senator.” I must also mention that when I boarded the plane, I was one of the first groups to board (did not pass by many folks). I was wearing my shawl just loosely around my neck and upon sitting down in my seat the lady next to me, who was already seated, praised me for wearing the shirt.

The shirt’s words are actually lifted from a sign used by Oklahoma state Sen. Judy McIntyre (D) at a pro-choice rally. McIntyre told critics who found her sign offensive that “I would hope they would have that same passion about how offensive it is for the Republican Party of Oklahoma to ramrod, because they have the votes to do so, bills that are offensive to women and take away the rights of women.”

American Airlines has an exceptionally strict dress policy, according to CNN. It says that “it can refuse to transport you, or may remove you from your flight for reasons including ‘being clothed in a manner that would cause discomfort or offense to other passengers.’”

Comment by Chris on May 12, 2012 at 6:59am

While most of the country was watching the Green Bay Packers play the New York Giants, CBS aired an hour-long, severely one-sided special about the threat of global warming.

The special was hosted by CBS's Scott Pelley. In January 2007, Pelley was asked why he refused to include global warming skeptics .... He responded, "If I do an interview with [Holocaust survivor] Elie Wiesel, am I required as a journalist to find a Holocaust denier?"

Read more

Comment by Chris on May 12, 2012 at 6:55am

The Heartland Institute sponsored a debate over Climate Change. Two speakers withdrew. One saying , “You cannot simultaneously say that you want to promote a debate while equating the other side to terrorists and mass murderers.”

Having a debate sponsored by the Heartland Institute would be like having a debate on Fox against Billo Really. Why bother?

State Farm withdrew its support from the Heartland Institute because of complaints about the billboard. GM pulled it's support too.

“The most prominent advocates of global warming aren’t scientists,” said Heartland’s president, Joseph Bast, in the press release. He then names the figures above, and adds, “The leaders of the global warming movement have one thing in common: They are willing to use force and fraud to advance their fringe theory.”

Thanks for signing doone.

Comment by Neal on May 11, 2012 at 8:51am

That billboard only made it 24 hours before it was pulled. Heartland just another hate group in my opinion.

Comment by doone on May 11, 2012 at 8:41am

I signed - I am surprised Microsoft is still involved with them.

Comment by Chris on May 11, 2012 at 8:24am

Check out this petition. Ted Kaczynski didn't write an opinion about climate change. The billboards show how ludicrous the anti-climate change movement is.

Comment by Chris on April 15, 2012 at 1:28am

Stop the Online Spying Bill

The federal government and big companies want limitless new powers to spy on you.

And they plan to get them via legislation called CISPA — the "Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act" (HR 3523). 

CISPA would give Big Brother new powers to read, watch and listen to everything we do on the Internet.  The folks behind CISPA claim that national security interests make this surveillance necessary, but the bill's language is so vague and overreaching that it opens the door for rampant abuse of our online rights:

• CISPA would allow companies and the government to bypass privacy protections and spy on your email traffic, comb through your text messages, filter your online content and even block access to popular websites.
• CISPA would permit companies to give the government your Facebook data, Twitter history and cellphone contacts. It would also allow the government to search your email using the vaguest of justifications — and without any real legal oversight.
• CISPA contains sweeping language that could be used as a blunt weapon to silence whistleblower websites like WikiLeaks and the news organizations that publish their revelations.
• CISPA would create an environment in which we refrain from speaking freely online for fear that the National Security Agency — the same agency that has conducted "warrantless wiretapping" online for years — could come knocking.

CISPA could lead all too easily to governmental and corporate attacks on our right to speak freely online. And while there is a real need to protect vital national interests from cyber attacks, we can’t do it at the expense of our freedoms.

The House plans to bring HR 3523  to a vote in the coming weeks. Take action right now. Tell your member of Congress to vote no on CISPA and stop this bill in its tracks

Incredibly this bill even allows companies to spy on private citizens. 

Click on the title to sign the petition.

Comment by Chris on April 4, 2012 at 11:48pm

The 99% Spring non-violent protest Training will be held from April 9-15. There will be 3 hour, and 7 hour seminars  A 3 hour training will also be available on video. I don't think the training video is finished yet.  Here's the main 99% Spring page for general information. New material is often added to this site so check back often.

If you don't like the way the economy is going and want to participate in change you should go to a training class near you. Here's the link for the Spring Training. The goal is to train 100,000. 

I went to training to facilitate non-violent protest seminars. I haven't received my assignments yet so don't know where I'll be teaching. If you sign up for a class in Northern California maybe I'll see you there.

Comment by Chris on March 27, 2012 at 4:15pm

MoveOn has a web site called SignOn.org where anyone can  start a petition. They have a help page.

Will SignOn.org or MoveOn.org help me collect petition signatures?

SignOn.org provides tools that help you promote your petition and collect signatures. Some of the fastest growing petitions may also be featured on SignOn.org's homepage, and occasionally MoveOn.org will promote petitions by sending email alerts to MoveOn members in your area.

Will SignOn.org deliver my petition for me, or do I need to deliver it myself?

You should deliver it yourself! Petition targets are most likely to respond when real people deliver the petition in person. So your best bet is to print out the petition after you've collected enough signatures to make an impact and deliver it in person, and if your petition is large enough, you may even be able to get media attention when it is delivered.

SignOn.org does deliver constituent signatures by email to the President, governors, Congress, and state legislators if auto-delivery is set to "on." SignOn.org only delivers signatures to custom targets (i.e. targets you enter manually such as CEOs, local officials, etc.) if a valid email address is provided. You may turn off auto-delivery at any time.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• …
• 9
• Next ›
• Page