Sunday, October 11, 2015
For some reason, people think they can post anything they feel like saying on the internet. Well, one woman learned (the hard way) that you simply can't do this (according to the judge who fined her).
She felt it was her 'freedom of speech' to attack a business owner whom she didn't like on the website "Yelp". Indeed, Yelp does not seem to have any guidelines posted for its users about what is freedom of speech and what isn't, so I think Yelp should be sued by the business owner as well.
Unfortunately, this is impossible because of a 1998 law that was passed by the US Congress. According to this law, no internet company can be held responsible for postings placed on it. So if I own a website that allows comments by anyone, and someone writes something horrible about another person which is not true or which is meant to harm the person, according to this law the person who posted the statement can be sued but I who own the website can't.
This law was passed during the early stages of the internet and is clearly a bad law. Why? Well, if someone who doesn't like you goes to a site and attacks you, and you write to the site, it will basically simply tell you that they don't care. Congress passed a law which absolves them of responsibility (says they are not responsible for what is on their site) and so they won't remove nasty, false and malicious comments even if it is readily apparent that the statements are false and that any decent company would remove them. You have to sue the person who posted the content.
Their attitude seems to be: "OK, this is horrible, it might destroy an innocent person's life, but we don't have to remove it and so we won't. It's too much trouble for us and we don't want to hire a few more employees to help make sure that innocent people are not hurt." The 1998 law was meant to protect these companies from crazy comments users might make, but the companies have been using the law to justify these harmful comments and the cyber-bullying that goes on on their sites. Why? Money makes the world go around. A responsible company would remove anything harmful and malicious, but the current internet companies simply refuse to do this.
So this woman learned a big lesson and she was lucky. The judge probably should have, in my opinion, fined her more for her attack on the guy.
for bashing floor refinishing business; for attacking a business that makes older and stained wooden floors look better
a fine - this is a type of punishment in which a person has to pay the other person or the government money
Staten Island - this is one of the 5 boroughs or areas of New York City
the reviews are in - the journalist is joking a little...after a play the actors will wait for reviews by theater critics and when the papers arrive they'll say 'The reviews are in!' In this case the review relates to what the woman from Staten Island wrote about the floor refinishing business
to bash, bashing - to attack, attacking
a judge - someone who is in charge of a courtroom
a con artist - 'con' comes from the word 'confidence' - a con man or con artist is someone who gains your trust or confidence only to try to get money from you illegally. If someone keeps promising something and keeps stealing money based on that promise, he is a con man or con artist.
a scathing review - a very, very nasty, harsh, severe review which is critical or attacks someone
rants - negative, nasty, mean and aggressive comments
crossed the line - she went too far, what she did could no longer be considered freedom of speech
to refinish a floor - usually the floor is sanded with an abrasive or rough material ad then varnished so that it looks new
green chemicals - chemicals that will not hurt the environment
peeling - she meant the surface of the floor was coming up in curls
she was unable to contain her anger in a coherent sentence - she was so angry she wrote in badly broken English; her English didn't really make sense because she was so angry
the guy mat the owner - should be: the guy Matt, the owner,
coherent - meaningful
is a scam - she meant, is a scammer (someone who steals money from people through scams - illegal plans
to rob - to steal from
BULL-----ER - a bullshitter, someone who lies (this is a dirty word)
urging - encouraging
libel - lying about a person to hurt him/her
personal in their invective - she made very personal comments in her attack on the owner
to impugn his integrity - to call his integrity or honesty into question; to make people believe that he has no integrity
her bid - her attempt
I'll fight you tooth and nail - I'll fight against you with everything I have (like an animal, with my teeth and nails)
Wednesday, October 7, 2015
Obama restricts immigration of 'legal' highly educated foreigners, but wants to harbor (protect) minimally educated 'illegals'
Sometimes it's been hard to understand why the current president has made various decisions which he has made. There's been little logic and no vision for the past 6 years. Instead of showing leadership, he's been hiding and reacting. At times, internationally, Vladimir Putin has made him look like a boy playing a man's game. Right now in Syria Putin is taking action and all Obama can do is complain like a spoiled child. Even his great accomplishment - Obamacare - is a badly flawed system that many people do not like and which may be eliminated if a Republican becomes president.
Now it seems he has made a decision which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. There are many many many highly educated foreigners who were lead to believe that they could enter the USA and gain green cards (the ability to work and live in the USA). Obama has changed his mind. Yet, he doesn't seem to have a problem with the 12 million minimally educated illegal immigrants who are in the country and often using government services for free without paying one penny of taxes.
Within a short time Latinos will be the largest segment of the US population, yet statistically Latinos under-perform every other racial and ethnic group in the country educationally. It seems as if we are going to need highly educated and skilled people from outside our borders.
An article about this issue:
to undo something - to reverse something, to take something that has changed and change it back to its original state
a green card - this is a card which gives the holder of the card the ability to stay and work legally in the USA and to possibly become a citizen some day
an order - something which must be executed, a command
a federal judge - a federal judge works for the US government, not a state or city government. A judge is the person you see in a court room.
to decline - to reject something, to say 'no' to something
permanent residents - people who can legally stay for a long time in the USA without being citizens
initially - at first, at the start, earlier
in the public interest - the judge said it would not benefit the American people if educated foreigners came into the country (we need more uneducated people - because they will stupidly vote for the most corrupt candidates of the Democratic party...don't worry, I hate Republicans too)
to sue - to go to court and try to get money from a person or to go to court to get an order from a judge
revised - changed
class-action status - this means that many people were being represented in this court case
curtailing - limiting
a temporary restraining order - an order by the judge that something has to stop immediately until it can be better looked at
blocking - stopping
backlogs - when work backs up and you fall behind on your work, you get a backlog; when something piles up
streamline - to make it shorter and less than it was
urging them to abide by... - these major companies desperately need qualified workers and are upset that Obama is streamlining this process; to urge is to encourage...to abide by means to obey or follow