That's a strange question. Why would I want that?

Hey there, friend! Long time, no see! You seem a little off your game, though - you put your punchline right in a recent entry - I thought we were going to keep to our two-man routine where you set 'em up and I knock 'em down.

Changing the subject? No, I'm waiting for you to get to the subject. Why would you care about Wisconsin politics anyways? Every other political topic you bring up comes back to demonizing and removing the POTUS, there is no reason to expect this one to be different. Just get to how you are going to tie this to President Lawnchair; the suspense is killing us!

It is highly unusual for "failure machine" samzenpus to post something that is critical of republicans. Thanks to whoever hit him.

If there was any indication of him having had mental health issues (beyond illusions of grandeur) prior to the announcement of the charges against him, then if anything memorials for him should be for mental health awareness. Instead people are dedicated to making a martyr out of him in spite of the fact that he broke the law.

And your condescending assumptions do nothing to move the conversation forward.

I am not portraying any conspiracy here myself. I am merely pointing out that you have shared a great number of them with us since the first time you heard of Candidate Obama. Furthermore the majority of your JEs (particularly if we exclude the Burma Shave ones from the count) are about your unending enthusiasm for ending the current presidential administration prematurely by any means possible.

But I can't force you to acknowledge reality.

FWIW, I've had (at least) WD, Seagate, IBM (from the DeskStar SCSI line, no less), Micropolis, and Samsung drives. The only one that was a disappointment for me was a Seagate that I purchased from Circuit City that crapped out at around 6-8 months of age that Seagate gave me all kinds of silly hell over trying to get a replacement under warranty. Since that nonsense I have refused to buy a Seagate drive.

He had - until he took the coward's way out by taking his own life - the constitutional right to a fair trial. He could have defended himself or had an attorney do it for him. It is not uncommon in this country for prosecutors - particularly long before a trial has begun - to suggest that they will shoot for the moon with punishment. However the maximum possible sentence is very rarely handed down.

In the end, though, he knew what he did was illegal. He was never granted access to that wiring closet; the mere fact it was unlocked does not mean he had the right to abuse it. The charges that were going to be brought against him had more to do with the methods he used than the number of papers he was trying to release.

Nobody but Aaron Swartz killed Aaron Swartz. Nothing he did was honorable or worthy of being honored.

No, he did more than just infringe on copyright. His followers try to make it sound as if that was the meat of the charges but that overlooks the more egregious parts of what he did. He opened a closet at the library and connected through there (rather than using the connection in his own office). He then used so much bandwidth in the library that he made it more difficult for other users to access the resources they were there for. The real charges are along the lines of vandalism, disruption, and breaking and entering.

Come on smitty, don't leave us hanging. Where is Obama's responsibility in this? Did he order it himself (just like he did with Benghazi)? Is it part of a grand socialist takeover (just like with the Health Insurance Industry Bailout Act of 2010)? Is it a power grab for the Illuminati (just like his election)? Is it part of how he is going to use 1984 as a how-to guide to government (just like he did with the secret unmanned NASA vehicle)? Is it part of a top-secret government communications network (just like Hillary Clinton's private email server)?

Where is it going? How are you going to get it there before the next president is inaugurated in 2017?

Interesting, you've done more investigation into this than any of the sources that smitty has linked to thus far. However, the presence of these subpoenas does not get us to where they are trying to go. Both Rush's meta-regurgitation and the original "news" from National Review is making the claim that political operatives of the Wisconsin Democratic Party disguised themselves as law enforcement and went out looting, pillaging, and terrorizing innocent supporters of Scott Walker (aka the Kevlar Kandidate).

Basically, smitty has a new conspiracy-of-the-week. There may well be something bad going on, but he hasn't shown any meaningful sources for it so far.

As best I could tell the closest you came to a point in your JE was your fantasy that somehow Rush spinning this already-spun bit would cause the democrats to rally to do something against him, personally. As per the vast overwhelming majority of your conspiracies, you provided no logical support for why that would pan out.

If there was some other point in your JE, please let me know. All I saw was you trying to claim that because a hype-master got excited about an article from a conservative "news" source, it somehow is automatically valid "news" that is worth getting excited (and, of course, using extralegal methods to remove the POTUS!) about.

I'm so tired of seeing people masterbating over chances to honor Aaron Swartz I wish I could vomit on the laps of these political idiots. Yeah, the prosecution was heavy handed but that completely overlooks the fact that Swartz broke the fucking law and was a total idiot about it. He had the constitutional right to defend himself in court and face his accusers. He did not, however, have any constitutional right to enter the wiring closet at the library and interfere with other peoples' ability to use library resources just to further his agenda.

I even agree that the papers should be accessible. But I do not agree with his methods. He could have downloaded all these papers from his own desk instead, but he had to make it into performance art and go enter the library wiring closet. And don't use the fact that the door was not properly locked as a defense, either - no reasonable person would have assumed that a wiring closet was intentionally left unlocked so people could monopolize library bandwidth at their leisure.

In short, let the dead kid lay dead. He doesn't deserve any honors. He didn't deserve the ones he has already been given and doesn't deserve any additional ones either. He was a fool and a coward to boot.

Are you referring to the college rape article that they are getting so much flack over now? I don't read Rolling Stone with any regularity so I hadn't noticed it before the coverage of it that came recently..

That said, any article from Rolling Stone is a far cry from any article in National Review. National Review exists to push a political agenda. They were founded by conservatives, they are staffed by conservatives, they provide a voice for conservative beliefs. Rolling Stone may lean a bit to the left (though only on the American spectrum where "left" would be considered "right of center" in any other nation on earth), but the National Review proudly proclaims their lean towards the hard right.

Furthermore, if you are talking about the rape article, what was the political motivation of it? This National Review article - like every other article they publish - is published to further a political agenda. I'm not aware of anyone who takes a pro-rape stance. Yeah, it was irresponsible to publish an article on a rape when the sources were not properly vetted - and some people suffered as a result who should not have - but it did not serve any obvious political purpose or any agenda beyond selling magazines.

You linked to Rush giving his additional spin to the only "source" on this matter - and the "source" is the same collection of partisan hacks you linked to in your previous JE. I suspect based on how far you have slipped in what you like to pass off as "reading", I probably paid more attention to this than you did.

But go ahead, tell us your latest conspiracy attached to this. I'm sure you have somehow already connected this in your mind to President Lawnchair (or someone else has already handed you a fact-free claim for how it connects). Bring it home, smitty - tell us how this leads to impeachment without any demonstrated facts. You don't usually write multiple JEs for conspiracies unless you believe on some level that they can be used to bring down the guy at 1600 Pennsylvania who has the wrong consonant after his name.

When I see facts, I will look at them. I do not consider the source smitty linked to for this to be factual. They are honorable enough to be very plain with their political agenda, but when they are trying to break such a politically loaded story I reserve the right to be skeptical until it is evaluated by honest journalists.