Were The Remains in the Dorner Cabin Confirmed Female? NO. Here’s Why.

There’s an image making the rounds suggesting a CNN headline claims, “CHARRED REMAINS ARE NOT DORNER” and “Body found confirmed to be female,” but it appears to be a hoax.

Discussion on this page on Democratic Underground suggests it is a hoax, one post of which has a link to the actual video (here) interview shown in the photo, which does not contain that headline.

In this second screenshot of that interview, the remains appear to still be yet unidentified. The main on the left is LA mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

Advertisements

Did Obama Have An Arrogant Posture Listening to Dr. Benjamin Carson? NO. Here’s why.

There’s a picture being circulated that has a definition of “arrogance” edited onto a tiny picture of Obama with his chin seemingly in the air, as if to appear arrogant.

Actually, Obama is pictured there seated, and has his face pointed toward the man who is speaking. The two people (Obama and the speaker) are actually facing the same direction with Obama being seated and the speaker standing nearby, both toward the crowd, but Obama is turned slightly and is looking up at the speaker. His chin is not in the air because he is arrogant, his face itself is pointed in the direction of the speaker. It might be noted that Obama also smiled and laughed at portions of the speech, too.

If looking at the person who is talking about you in your presence is arrogance, then I think you’ve got a strange dictionary.

If spreading an image about arrogance that crops the tiny section away from the rest of the context that would otherwise suggest his posture made complete sense, then you’re as arrogant as they come.

Here is ~30 minutes worth of the speech in question! And it’s a fairly nice speech, with little criticism — and plenty of fun stories and little jokey jabs.

A Message to the Boy Scouts of America, And To Any Else Who Will Read It

Dear Boy Scouts of America:

I am a former Cub and Boy Scout (got up to Star rank) and have long identified with the Scout identity, and have served as a committee member to my BSA troop as an adult.

If you would please add me into the discussion of the issue regarding the acceptance of “gays” into the fold, I must comment on a pattern I’ve noticed that has seemed to go unmentioned:

The idea of what a “gay” person is in the minds of the BSA at large, seems to conflict with what a “gay” person is in the minds of the general gay community, and I think being clear on your particular distinction is where the issue really lies.

I think the issue actually boils down mostly to conflict of the self-discipline identity the BSA tries to promote to youth. I don’t see the BSA as declaring a rejection of gays on the basis of being gay, but rather conflict of the aim toward an identity of being self-disciplined and therefore in denial of desires of self.

By claiming the gay aspect of themselves as a fundamental element of their very *being* as a person, gays appear to be choosing an identity contrary to self discipline — since the self-disciplined person chooses to reject feelings that conflict with the rules and rather to embrace feelings that conflict with the rules (the rules based largely on the JudeoChristian texts).

Similarly, if minors who actively desired to drink alcoholic beverages and identified themselves as drinkers as fundamental elements of their character.. why would they have any credibility for entry? Minors drinking in the presence of consenting legal guardians isn’t illegal (in Texas), but to base your identity as a minor who drinks and suggest the acceptance of other minors to drink in defiance of parental consent, would be agreeable grounds for expulsion.

It’s not anybody’s business of whether who does what with whom in whose bed, but to claim that aspect of one’s life as a trait of one’s very identity is the problem — not the trait itself.

I find the subject to be quite similar in like manner to sexual harassment — matters of discussion of that topic are inappropriate and wholly off topic and do not belong in that venue. People who find themselves outspoken on matters of sexual preferences in the workplace to the point that an authority imbalance comes into play, are most certainly subject to removal.

If you can’t help but dream about drinking all day long, and you are tempted beyond measure to drink, but never do — you’re not an drinker, and you have the self-discipline to reject those feelings. The general operating concept of “gay” held by the BSA and Christianity in general I think is more along the lines of “homosexual act participant” (because of the verses that describe the disobedience as the act itself, rather than the thought behind the act) rather than simply having feelings that are never acted upon.

Likewise, having dreams of being a rock star, but having never been a rock star, means you’re not a rock star by that way of thinking. Similarly, if you feel compelled to participate in homosexual acts but never act upon them, you are not a homosexual by that same way of thinking. It is my understanding that gays themselves identify as “gay” based on the feelings alone rather than the action — and I think that’s where most of the conflict comes from, on misunderstanding what the other is even talking about in the first place.

Scouting, to me, is a technique of instilling honor and a sense of duty to God, country, and to help others rather than acting on behalf of natural desire that conflicts therewith. If you have a group of people who demand entry to Scouts, but yet insist on claiming a God-defiant trait as an aspect of their very *identity*, they should naturally face obstacles.

I think you, BSA, need to more publicly focus on your goals of instilling self discipline and the ability to reject desires of self for the greater duty to “my God and my country” (not “OR my country”) rather than specifically debating homosexuality. And I think the homosexual community at large would appreciate the knowing that there is a gap in definition of “gay” as a homosexual act participant (or even a promoter of such acts) rather than as people who identify as gay based on feelings alone but have discipline to abstain — so that arguments made by the community could reflect accurately on that angle, rather than the expulsion of gays on the basis of feelings.

Sincerely.

How to Win at SongPop! EASY ways! And Strategies! Post your username!

For those who don’t know, SongPop is a Facebook/smartphone game that pits you against other players in an attempt to see who can recognize songs and artists the fastest. You can choose from a set of playlists like 90s Alternative, 1980s, Classic Rock, and such.. and depending on whether you win or lose, you earn coins that you can use to unlock other playlists like K-pop, Country, and loads of others. I’ve only been playing for about a week, and I’ve noticed a few patterns that people could exploit to win easier or earn coins faster. There are two main patterns I’ve picked up on..

1. Intentionally lose on playlists you are bad at.

SongPop keeps a points-record of how experienced you are on a certain playlist by giving you a star-count — based on how many correct answers you get in a row. You will then have the opportunity to play matches with random strangers based on playlists that you have in common between you that you’re both good at. What you actually want, in order to max out the coins received from both of you, is to find someone who is bad at your best playlist and is willing to lose on all of those, in trade for you losing to a playlist they are good at, so you will alternate winning and losing and have a steady source of coins from wins.

Post your username in the comments below, with what playlists you are bad at, and other people can challenge you to maximize this tradeoff by choosing people who are bad at playlists they like. You can then trade by mutual alternating intentional failure, so that you both win an even amount of games consistently in order to unlock more playlists.

2. On the last day of tournament, “forget” to play turns when in the lead.

There are tournaments weekly, which add up your wins and losses between another username, and if you get more wins than the other, you will receive one powerup. I only use power-ups to shuffle playlists, personally, so I can pick on that I’m good at. If you are in the lead, you could conceivably simply “forget” to play your turns so that you win the tournament and rake in the powerups. As a spin on #1, you could both intentionally lose all matches of a single tournament and throw the game to one person, and then the next week decided that the other person will win all of that tournament’s matches, etc.

Do you have any other strategies like this? Post your username below so others can challenge you on playlists you are good/bad at, so you can alternate wins and losses ~__^