Mediaboss Marketing

When one of Orange Is The New Blacks main characters lay dying on the canteen floor of Litchfield Prison in the second to last episode of season four, it referenced Americas senseless police brutality against African Americans. Held down by a young, white and inexperienced prison guard (CO Baxley) his knee pressed down on her back, his hand clamped around her neck this black inmate suffocates to death. The scene draws real-life parallels to when Eric Gardner an African American was pinned on the floor in a chokehold by a young, white and inexperienced police officer in 2014. He was held down for 19 seconds, and repeated I cant breathe eleven times. Gardiner had been accused of trying to sell single cigarettes. The deceased inmate was imprisoned for the intention to sell less than an ounce of marijuana, and held down before her death for trying to help calm her friend. Neither Gardiner nor the inmate were armed.

Photography by Netflix

This death was the most upsetting, but arguably the most brilliantly executed scene of Orange Is The New Black (OITNB). Free from melodrama, clichs and heartless hype, her death was as sudden, mundane and real as Gardiners. Compared to other shows that rip plotlines from headlines (Law And Order: SVU, The Good Wife) OITNB proved itself a cut above. Whats more, its meticulously developed characters, endlessly inventive plot twists, intelligent dark humour and incidental asides made it one of the most engaging and watchable shows of the last few years.

Until this season, that is. For season five out June 9 these carefully worked threads have unraveled, and at the worst moment, too. As OITNB finally scoops up the hefty responsibility to address racism in America (and give lesbian sex jokes a well-earned rest) its script has slipped. Big time.

Photography by Netflix

In the first four episodes, for example, nothing happens. Sure, there are about 500 inmates running around in exhilarated panic, throwing things, terrorizing guards and yelling at each other, but nothing develops. At least nothing worth writing about. You dont need to worry about plot spoilers here, because there is no plot. While this would be less problematic if the characters were interesting enough by themselves, for the first time in the shows history, theyre not.

Because, instead of following the shows usual trope of honing in on one character per episode and contextualizing their actions with a backstory served in comprehensive flashbacks, this season, it zooms out to span the whole cast as a group, most appearing at the same time. The effect is messy, vague, and impossibly dull. You cant empathize with 50 completely different people at the same time, in the same place, continuously over six hours. Especially when theyre grown adults running around like children, throwing soup at each other and brandishing tiny wooden weapons looted from broken furniture.

Photography by Netflix

Thats another problem. The characters have become farcical. And what happens when farcical characters peddle a shows messy plot championing a topic as critical as the Black Lives Matter movement? It looks silly, as does what it stands for. While the inmates affirm their riot as a heroic response to the unjust death, watching them enact a sance to talk their deceased friends spirit at the very spot she died whilst also eating their dinner on it only ridicules the tragedy. When inmates take celebrity chef Judy King hostage to punish her for her white woman prison privileges a theme the show takes seriously they make her walk with a large wooden cross on her back, and compare her to a crucified Jesus.

Photography by Netflix

The riot feels like a play-riot. Would two guards, locked in the kitchen by three inmates while the whole prison runs amok, really start playing shag, marry, avoid with three said inmates? Would an officer, while being publicly stripped in front of hundreds of angry female prisoners, really get a hard-on and then joke about it? And as if a very senior prison director would, not only dress up as an inmate to blend in (rather than using her mobile phone to send for help) but then actually enjoy engaging in a talent show devised by the inmates to humiliate the guards which includes her own boyfriend.

When each episode is thus strung together by a steady stream of scenarios each less credible than the last, its no wonder that, come the fifth episode, when the deceased inmates close circle make an impassioned (and very good) speech to the press gathered outside the prison about prejudice and racism, it falls just a little flat. Wed forgotten thats what this whole riot was about.

Its a real shame, though, because Orange Is The New Black could have done it so well and so much better than anyone else had it really tried.

Watch Orange Is The New Black on Netflix from June 9 2017.

View post:
Orange Is The New Black caricatures the Black Lives Matter movement - GQ.com

The United States Court of Appeals for theDistrict of Columbia Circuit has struck down a regulation requiring ordinary citizens to register drone aircraft.

The May 19 decision stated that the Federal Aviation Administration did not have the authority to regulate model aircraft.

Prior to the ruling, the FAA told the appeals court, it would threaten the safety of the national airspace system if they were to do away with the registration requirement. The reasoning for its nullification was in reference to the 2012 FAA Modernization and Reform Act, passed by Congress and signed by President Barack Obama. The law had a rule which stated that the FAA may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft.

All citizens who wish to legally fly a drone are required to pay a $5 fee and register the drone with their name, email address, and home address. They also have to place a registration sticker on the drone with a unique identifying number. This regulation has been in place since 2015.

Failure to comply with the registration would result in up to a $250,000 fine as well as up to three years in prison. The registration must be redone every three years in order to remain compliant. Commercial drones were already under a different set of rules. Currentlythere are about 550,000 registered drones in the USA.

In response to the outcome of the case with the appellate court, the FAA had stated that they are carefully reviewing the US Court of Appeals decision as it relates to drone registrations. The FAA put registration and operational regulations in place to ensure that drones are operated in a way that is safe and does not pose security and privacy threats. We are in the process of considering our options and response to the decision.

The reaction to the decisionregarding the FAA drone regulationmade by the US court of appeals was met with mixed reactions. Those against it said the registration was worthwhile to provide some accountability for individuals who could be reckless and endangering others, whereas the hobbyists, includingJohn Taylor who filed the suit, stated the registration requirement was a burden on hobbyists that Congress did not want to create.

He also stated in an interview with Market Watchthatas of today, no American has been seriously injured by hobby drones, they may get cuts or bruises, but look at ATVs and watercraft, where dozens are killed every year. Its all a reaction to new technology. People are afraid of drones because theyre something new. I just dont see that the risk justifies the action that has been taken over the last 100 years around model aircraft.

The reality of all this fear mongering by government officials is that this is the natural response to all new technology as detailed in aWired Magazinearticle titledWhy the US Government Is Terrified of Hobbyist Dronesas well as Tech Republics12 drone disasters that show why the FAA hates drones.Love them or hate them, they will be here to stay.

It should be noted, however, that the ruling is not yet enforced as the court gave the FAA seven days to consider their current legal options.

Photo: Sukie Kim

This post was written by Alon Ganon.

The views expressed here belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect our views and opinions.

Knowledge of Mac, GNU/Linux, Windows but preferring to use GNU/Linux. Bitcoin user and expert, Cyber Punk, Minarchist libertarian, Businessman, Firearm lover, Constitutionalist, and a supporter of Free, Libre, and Open Source Software (FLOSS).Businessman and IT Contractor by trade available for hire. Specializing in Medical, Dental, and Small Business IT solutions https://alonganon.info

Like Loading...

Read this article:
Appellate Court Lets Your Drone GoUnregistered - Being Libertarian

In a Monday meeting with a state business group, Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, a North Dakota Democrat, said that the staunch Resistance position many of her party members are taking toward President Donald Trump is a waste of my time.

The thing is that there are two things that are happening that are really challenging us, Heitkamp told theNorth Dakota Chamber of Commerce, according to a video that was posted of the proceedings.

One is the resist movement. Which is nothing. Just resist, right? Dont do anything, just resist, she said.

According to Heitkamp, merely resisting Trump is not a way to achieve good public policy.

I think thats a waste of my time, if all Im there for is to resist, Heitkamp said. Thats not persuasive.

While Heitkamp has said she opposes to Trumps currenthealth care plan, she has also voted to confirm his picks to head up the Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Interior. She also joined the GOP in voting for a repeal ofan Obama-era regulation on coal mine pollutioninto streams and rivers.

Heitkamps rejection of hard-line Trump opposition is unlikely to win her any popularity with Democrats at the national level but the freshman senator is in a bit of a tough spot. Heitkamp is one of 10 Democratic senators up for re-election in 2018 in states won by the GOP in the 2016 presidential contest. Trump won North Dakota last year with 63 percent of the vote, while Hillary Clinton got just 27.2 percent.

The Heitkamp approach of tracking more centrist in Republican-leaning states has worked to get politicians elected in the past many Democratic congressional candidates won in relatively conservative states in 2006, for instance but many progressive groups are pushing back hard against the idea that economic moderation is what Democrats need.

Instead, groups like Democracy for America are citing research showing that normally left-leaning voters who decided to pull the lever for Trump did so because he had convinced many of themthat he wasnt going to favor wealthy Americans as much as Clinton did.

Since hes been in office, however, Trump has essentially abandoned the themes of economic populism that he used to power him into office, potentially creating an opportunity for economically liberal Democrats who are more sensitive to rural culture.

Perhaps the best test case of this theory comes later this week, in the race to becomeMontanas sole representative in the U.S. House of Representatives. Democrats have nominated a singer-songwriter named Rob Quist, who isnt abandoning economically liberal viewpoints even as he plays up his local connections.

Montanas House seat is currently open after Trump nominated former Rep. Ryan Zinke to head up the Department of Interior. Democrats havent held the seat since 1997 but are hoping to pull off an upset in the Thursday special election thanks to a voting base that has become exceptionally engaged. Quist has outraised and outspent his Republican opponent, Greg Gianforte, in recent months. In April, Quistraised $2.3 million while Gianforte brought in $624,000. But Republican-leaning outside groups are trying to close the gap. According to one local reporter, GOP groups have spent $3.9 million in the race while Democratic ones have spent just $632,000.

While Quist has hit populist themes in his campaign, Republicans are accusing him of hypocrisy after he failed to pay $15,000 in property taxes to Montana and had liens imposed on him.

An April 26 poll had Quist trailing Gianforte by 15 points. No more recent surveys have been conducted.

Link:
North Dakota Democrat rejects the Trump resistance: I think that's a waste of my time An error occurred. - Salon

As Democrats try to win over rural and red state voters, they're divided over whether a candidate who opposes abortion rights belongs in the party. If I get asked about my views on abortion ... I get off the topic as quickly as I can," one House Democrat said.

As Democrats work to retake control of Congress, theyre running up against a major question for the party: Can they support a candidate who opposes abortion rights?

There is a growing disagreement among Democrats over whether it is worth the sacrifice to compromise their party's reputation of being an advocate of womens reproductive choices in order to win back seats in Congress or whether that sacrifice is necessary.

To broaden their reach in the era of Donald Trump, most Democrats accept their partys game plan. In order to win in the red states theyll need to take back Congress or the White House, theyll need to focus on an economic message that appeals to rural voters instead of buckling down on divisive social issues.

But whether they should draw the line on abortion rights and if a candidate who is anti-abortion rights has any claim to the Democratic party mantle or its money is a hotly contested debate raging through the party.

"We do not have to compromise on protecting women's health to win back the House or Senate, Democratic New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand told BuzzFeed News in a statement. I plan on doing everything I can to help recruit, support and mentor pro-choice women candidates all across the country."

But even as the partys base has been activated with nationwide womens marches and other pro-choice rallies since Trumps election, the problem for liberals is that abortion isnt exactly seen as a means to expanding the Democratic map and winning political power.

Red state Democrats, regardless of how they feel about abortion, tend to avoid the subject in their campaign messaging. Instead, they focus on kitchen-table issues, like jobs and the economy, a safe-zone for candidates who have to run in districts that arent safely blue.

This is not an issue that is one bit really helpful to talk about in swing districts, a Democratic member of the House said. (Several sources on both sides of the issue spoke to BuzzFeed News on the condition of anonymity for this article in order to speak candidly.) Its very much a divisive issue.

If I get asked about my views on abortion I just say, Im pro-choice, but thats not what I focus on. I focus on jobs and the economy, and I get off the topic as quickly as I can, the member said.

New York Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney, a moderate Democrat whose district voted for President Donald Trump by two points in 2016, argued to BuzzFeed News that a strong economic message can help give Democrats in difficult districts cover on social issues.

I think if you have those issues right, and youre in a good relationship with those voters, theyll cut you slack on a lot of other things, from abortion to gay rights to things like gun safety, said Maloney, who is openly gay. All I can tell you is theres a lot of examples of members who are able to hold positions that are at first blush at odds with the way the districts might think, and I think the reason is the voters trust them more broadly.

The fight over whether abortion should be a litmus test for Democratic candidates recently rolled into the public debate over an unlikely contest the race for mayor in Omaha, Nebraska. Liberal icons like Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Keith Ellison, as well as the Democratic National Committee, faced significant backlash for backing Heath Mello, an anti-abortion Democrat who had a history of voting for laws that restrict abortion access in his state. Sanders and Ellison even joined Mello on a unity tour to support Democrats in local elections, earning criticism from progressive groups. (Mello eventually lost.)

NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue issued a statement at the time, calling the tour less of a fight back tour look more like a throw back tour for women and our rights.

Amid mounting pressure from abortion rights groups and the liberal base of the party, Perez backtracked in a statement, saying that supporting abortion rights was not negotiable for Democrats. Every Democrat, like every American, should support a womans right to make her own choices about her body and her health, Perez said in the statement, adding that every candidate who runs as a Democrat should as well.

Unfortunately for Perez, these statements triggered backlash from the other side, this time with congressional Democrats leading the charge. In multiple interviews House Democrat Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi openly disagreed with Perezs comments, saying that anti-abortion Democrats should of course have the support of the Democratic party.

When asked about Mello, specifically, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer told BuzzFeed News earlier this year: "Democrats are a pro-choice party. Im proudly pro-choice, but we dont have a checklist."

When asked whether he could support an anti-abortion rights candidate, however, Schumer said he wouldn't speak in the abstract, but that it would trouble him. "Id try to persuade them to be pro-choice, even if they were personally pro-life.

A DNC spokesperson later told BuzzFeed News that the chairman does not believe in a litmus test for Democratic candidates and that he recognizes there will be pro-life candidates in our party.

As the party pushes the view that it is open to a diversity of ideas, many Democrats see hypocrisy in the idea of a litmus test, regardless of what the base wants.

They get to sit and watch Rachel Maddow and tweet about how unfair the world is while were going out trying to win elections with one arm tied behind our backs, said Colin Strother, a Democratic strategist based in Texas, of turn hard left members of the party. We need every tool in the toolbox that we can get.

North Dakota Sen. Heidi Heitkamp,, another red state Democrat who believes abortion is a personal decision, but opposes federal funding for abortions, told BuzzFeed News that suggesting all Democratic candidates should be in favor of abortion rights was inappropriate and unfortunate. The Democrat added that abortion should never be a litmus test for whether you're welcome in the Democratic Party."

Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine, Hillary Clintons former running mate, said that hes been able to find a comfortable place in the party, despite his his personal opposition to abortion. While Kaines position on the issue is rooted in his Catholic faith, he feels that individuals can make up their own minds and has a record of supporting pro-abortion rights policies as a lawmaker.

People should be able to make their own moral positions, Kaine told BuzzFeed News. I feel very free to have the position that I have. I do think this is a very important moral issue. ... Ive lived according with my values.

But while many Democrats insist that anti-abortion candidates are welcome within their party, some say they dont feel like their views are accepted by the party brass.

Former Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak, an anti-abortion rights Democrat, told BuzzFeed News that he has seen the opposite of acceptance of those views in the Democratic party. Stupak left Congress in 2011 after receiving massive backlash and threats from abortion rights groups and activists for introducing an amendment to the Affordable Care Act that would prevent federal funding of abortion. Stupak called his life at the time a living hell in an interview with The Hill.

I dont see any pro-life candidates theyve been treating as real options, Stupak told BuzzFeed News, adding that this has been the case in the Democratic party his entire career.

Stupak pointed to his first campaign for the House in 1992, saying that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (the campaign arm of the House Democrats) asked him to drop out of the race against a pro-abortion rights Democrat and funded his opposition. When youre a right-to-life Democrat youre pretty much alone, he said.

Were the minority because we cannot attract candidates that fit their district in the more conservative parts of the country, Stupak said.

Stupak told BuzzFeed News that he and some fellow members of Democrats For Life Of America, an anti-abortion rights organization, have tried to set up meetings with Perez to talk about his stance, but that the meetings keep getting cancelled. A DNC aide told BuzzFeed News that they are working on scheduling a meeting with elected officials, as they requested, and have not cancelled anything.

Former North Carolina Rep. Heath Shuler, another anti-abortion rights Democrat who left Congress in 2012, emphasized the importance of staying true to the big tent philosophy of the Democratic party and accepting diverse points of view, including anti-abortion ones.

No one issue is going to put you in the majority, its policy that puts you in the minority, Shuler told BuzzFeed News. If everyone had to agree 100% on every single issue then well have to be just like the Republicans.

Still, some Democratic congressional aides expressed concerns that supporting anti-abortion rights candidates as a party could end up angering and alienating the most motivated part of their base women who support abortion rights.

When the Democratic party added repealing a law that bans federal funding of abortion to its platform last year, it marked a height of the partys support of abortion rights. If the DNC and DCCC start backing down even more from their support of abortion rights, some aides worried the base may feel betrayed or abandoned.

And it could mean losing the help of groups like NARAL Pro-Choice America and Planned Parenthood, both of whom organize their millions of activist volunteers around local elections and make significant contributions to Democratic candidates.

In a statement send to BuzzFeed News, NARALs Hogue called supporting anti-abortion rights candidates bad politics.

The conversation about whether the Democratic Party has room for people who personally identify as pro-life is the wrong conversation and only plays into the hands of our political opponents, Hogue said. Encouraging and supporting anti-choice candidates leads to bad policy outcomes that violate women's rights and endanger our economic security.

Some advocates criticized the very idea that abortion was itself purely a social issue, arguing that it most affects people in the very rural parts of the country that Democrats are trying to expand to.

Women's issues ARE economic issues, Planned Parenthood Action Fund spokesperson Erica Sackin told BuzzFeed News in an email, echoing a common rallying cry used by congressional Democrats. The idea that you somehow have to make a choice between womens health care and economic issues is ridiculous.

Weve seen what happens when politicians alienate women, she continued. Thats why women, especially women of color, have been marching in the streets in record numbers, shutting down the Congressional switchboards, flooding town halls, and at the forefront of the grassroots energy weve seen sweeping the country.

Some in the party remain convinced that they dont need pro-abortion rights candidates to be competitive, even in red states and districts.

Weve just got to go out and get really good pro-choice candidates! There is not a single [swing] district in this country where you cant get a good pro-choice candidate elected, a Democratic Senate aide said. Stop trying to chase the coal miner vote, motherfuckers arent gonna vote for you anyway, theres no way were ever gonna get the coal miner vote.

Excerpt from:
Can You Be An Anti-Abortion Democrat? - BuzzFeed - BuzzFeed News

A Democratic Federal Election Commission member is urging the FEC to investigate whether Russian agents used Facebook to spread damaging stories about Democratic nominee Hillary ClintonHillary Rodham ClintonTrump, Clinton campaign aides launch their own bids Hannity: I won't discuss Seth Rich story for now 'out of respect for the family' Clinton slams Trump's budget: 'An unimaginable level of cruelty' MORE before the 2016 presidential election, Politico reported.

I think there is potential there for finding a violation, but I dont want to suggest that I have prejudged anything that could potentially come before me, Ellen Weintraub told the news outlet.

Weintraub wants to investigate whether Russian agents paid Facebook to promote damaging news stories that targeted Clinton's campaign, according to Politico. Federal law prohibits foreign companies and persons from donating to campaign committees or spending money "for the purpose of influencing" a U.S. election.

If there are U.S. citizens involved in any way in spending foreign money to influence a U.S. election, then that would be something that we could and should pursue, Weintraub said.

If the FEC moves forward with this investigation, it would be folded into an existing complaint filed to the FEC in December against the Trump campaign and the Russian government.

Continue reading here:
FEC Democrat pushes to expand Russia investigation - The Hill