But Thats None Of My Business

But Thats None Of My Business

Read more: https://imgflip.com/i/bg6f6


Iran set to hang Reyhaneh Jabbari, woman who killed her alleged rapist

http://twitter.com/#!/AsallB/status/516729259348746240

It was just yesterday when Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei, used the protests in Ferguson to lecture the United States on racial discrimination and justice.

If US govt has a power, then it should use it to solve its own problems& put an end to racial discrimination. #Ferguson #Syria #Iraq 4/13/94

— Khamenei.ir (@khamenei_ir) September 28, 2014

Khamenei today posted a YouTube video to prove his point, but somehow overlooked the impending execution of Reyhaneh Jabbari, who is scheduled to be hanged tomorrow for killing her rapist in self-defense.

Shocking that an Iranian woman could be hanged tomorrow for killing her rapist in self-defence. http://t.co/pW9R6KSjjn

— Canada and Iran (@CanadaIran) September 29, 2014

@CanadaIran @HonJohnBaird they have no rights. Let's just destroy the Middle East. Case closed.

— Canadian Girl (@Trilliumgyal) September 29, 2014

The International Business Times reports:

Iran has upheld its decision to execute Rayhaneh Jabbari, charged with the murder of a man who allegedly attempted to rape her.

Jabbari, 26, spent seven years in prison and her execution by hanging could be carried out as early as tomorrow (Tuesday, 30 September), according to local reports.

Jabbari was arrested in 2007, after she had killed a member of the Iranian Intelligence Services, Morteza Abdolali Sarbandi, who she said tried to rape her.

Crimes punishable with a death sentence [in Iran] include cursing the Prophet, drug offences, murder, adultery, incest, rape, fornication, drinking alcohol, “sodomy”, homosexual sex, “being at enmity with God” (mohareb), and “corruption on earth” (mofsed fil arz).

My fellow Iranians: Gather at the #Rajai_Shahr_Prison to protest and try to prevent the execution of #ReyhanehJabbari pic.twitter.com/4qDcOd6pQN

— Reza Pahlavi (@PahlaviReza) September 29, 2014

@PahlaviReza What can we do for her? Unfortunately she is in the hands of mullas.

— Hamplus (@hamplus1) September 29, 2014

#ReyhanehJabbari is going to be executed! Her mother is in front of Rajai shahr prison!

— M Nasserchian (@SororIrani) September 29, 2014

#ReyhanehJabbari’s mother said today that prison authorities told her she would have to go to the facility to “collect the body” tomorrow PT

— Reinhard Lamsfuss (@rlamsfuss) September 29, 2014

#Iran: International call to stop execution of 26-year-old female prisoner #ReyhanehJabbari http://t.co/uMj1x3rXg8 pic.twitter.com/BSymaLcMtD

— Iran Arab Spring (@IranArabSpring) September 29, 2014

Iran's "Hanging Machine" to Execute Reyhaneh Jabbari @UN Save #ReyhanehJabbari from being hanged @IranianWoman pic.twitter.com/3Wh8TZ2meH

— PIRDHAN_BALOCH (@PIRDHAN_BALOCH) September 29, 2014

#ReyhanehJabbari 's planned execution is a political act. Please Help to stop it Now in #Iran.

— Irans Spring (@IransSpring) September 29, 2014

 

 

Read more: http://twitchy.com/2014/09/29/iran-set-to-hang-reyhaneh-jabbari-woman-who-killed-her-alleged-rapist/


‘F*ck it, I quit!’ Alaska reporter quits on air to support legal marijuana

http://twitter.com/#!/lisapalaska/status/514040095335149568

Now, is this really the best way to quit a job? Stick around for the priceless look on the other anchor’s face:

O_O – @ktva reporter quits live on air (NSFW): http://t.co/qMoD03SjRU @Independent http://t.co/aRjcK59mai

— Lizzuendo (@Lizzs_Lockeroom) September 22, 2014

Don’t worry, as Greene already has another gig. From the Alaska Dispatch News:

Reporter Charlo Greene quit on-air during KTVA-TV’s 10 p.m. newscast Sunday, revealing herself as the owner of the medical marijuana business Alaska Cannabis Club and telling viewers that she would be using all of her energy to fight for legalizing marijuana in Alaska.

Greene had reported on the Alaska Cannabis Club during Sunday night’s broadcast, without revealing her connection to it. At the end of the report, during a live shot, she announced that she was the club’s owner and would be quitting.

Verdict? A crass stunt as she knew her resignation would generate tons of free publicity for the Alaska Cannabis Club.

KTVA in Alaska has since apologized for the on-air f-bomb:

Viewers, we sincerely apologize for the inappropriate language used by a KTVA reporter on the air tonight. The employee has been terminated.

— KTVA 11 News (@ktva) September 22, 2014

Read more: http://twitchy.com/2014/09/22/fck-it-i-quit-alaska-reporter-quits-on-air-to-support-legal-marijuana-video/


The Sly Capitalist Seduction Of “Fifty Shades Of Grey”

Beneath the BDSM trappings of Fifty Shades lies the fantasy that wealth will set us free. Warning: Spoilers!

Universal Pictures

The most dramatic reveal of Fifty Shades of Grey isn’t the Red Room of Pain. It’s not Dakota Johnson’s pubic hair, or even Jamie Dornan’s abs. It’s Christian Grey’s penthouse: bathed in 50 shades of West Elm, with a panoramic view of Seattle. The proceeding scenes had functioned as capitalistic foreplay: We see his towering office buildings, with the crisp white and stainless steel that connote very important business going on here.

The women wear tight but super-formal suits with French twists, the actual embodiment of sexy fancy money. Grey’s suits are tightly fitted, and his repeated action of standing up, buttoning his suit jacket, and sitting down at his desk to unbutton is filmic shorthand for seven-figure income. Then there’s the matter of his driver and helicopter: two things that subtract all that’s unglamorous or uncomfortable about getting from one place to another. And more than fancy fabrics or expensive diamonds, that’s what signifies luxury today: freedom from inconvenience.

Grey’s apartment seems a natural extension of that luxury. He steps off the helicopter and directly into his home, where all manner of high-class goods — clothes, food, wine — magically appear. One look at the Focus Features website designed around it, complete with tours of each room, wine and food suggestions, and the opportunity to take a screenshot of the space and share it with your social network, and the actual fetish objects of the film become stunningly transparent.

In this way, the sexual fantasy that undergirds Fifty Shades of Grey is inextricable from the class fantasy: No one would be compelled by the fantasy of a man who gets off on restraining and whipping a woman in trailer park, or even a suburban split-level. The eroticism is rooted in desire, in lack, in curiosity: What would my life be like if I were sexually submissive? is just as a central question as What would my life be like if I never had to worry about money?

Christian even articulates as much. He conceives of control not as punishment, but the ultimate in liberation: to be oneself, to experience pleasure, to revel in the absence of choice.

In his “contract,” Grey outlines all the ways in which Ana must be submit to his demands: He’ll control her health, her drinking, her diet, her method of birth control; how many nights they’ll stay together; when and how she’ll respond to his sexual demands; how she’ll be treated if she disobeys him. We’re meant to understand that Ana doesn’t have taste (she can’t dress herself; she drinks cosmos) or means (she drives an old Volkswagen Beetle; her computer is dead), so someone controlling that taste and offering her means, however circumscribed, is something like freedom — freedom from thinking, from deciding, from choosing: all the things that characterize our exhausting and overstimulated existence within capitalism.

Here, Grey reproduces the rhetoric espoused by cultures past and present in which submission to patriarchy is figured as emancipation from vanity, worry, and self-consciousness. Every woman should be so lucky as to have someone to tell her how to live her life. It’s not difficult to see how this scenario, however seemingly regressive, morphs into fantasy: Sure, you surrender a modicum of free will, but free will is exhausting.

Universal Pictures

And even though we never get the sense that Ana is a gold digger, she’s absolutely awed by Christian’s bounty. When we see the view from the penthouse, or the 360 of “her room,” or even a beautifully poured glass of wine, it’s all shot with the wonder and beguilement as seen through Ana’s eyes. And Ana, like Twilight’s Bella Swan character with whom she shares significant DNA, is a classic cipher: a fairly undeveloped character onto whom female readers of the book can map themselves and, by extension, surrender more fully in the fantasy scenario.

You can feel Ana’s desire and apprehension when Christian first climbs on the bed and eats a bite of her toast; you feel her writhing anticipation as he binds and blindfolds and slips an ice cube down her chest. But you also feel the glee at having a fashionable and expensive outfit waiting for you every morning, and the revelry in a massive, open-design kitchen fully stocked with infinite breakfast items and beautiful kitchenware. And no need to clean up! It’s like a scene straight out of a harried, working mother’s daydream.

Unexpectedly, Fifty Shades, at least in its filmic version, does something fascinating with this fantasy space, examining just how hollow this vision really is once obtained. Christian, after all, is a hollow version of a capitalist: His wealth simply is; his “business” consists of one scene of yelling Get it done in 24 hours! into a phone. Only the appearance of business, no actual labor. And the capitalist fantasy — of the penthouse, of her own room — soon seems shabby, even seedy, once held up to closer scrutiny. It’s almost as if the last third of the film was shot through a different, darker lens as the luxuries reveal themselves, like Grey’s business, to be little more than a front to cover a gaping emotional and psychological abyss beneath.

Ana’s hesitancy to sign the contract — which would render her a component of his financial and emotional enterprise — signals her dubiousness toward the entire scenario. The fancy dresses are nice, and so are those early (assumed) orgasms, but she sees that even a fully furnished room of her designing is still a room in which she must spend her nights alone.

When Ana leaves Christian at film’s end, it’s ostensibly an indictment of his inability to open himself up to love and vulnerability. But she’s also grown disillusioned with the “freedom” of luxury: She returns the glossy MacBook he bought for her and asks him to return her VW, only to learn that it’s been sold. Instead of an actual mode of transportation, however old and clunky, she’ll be left with a barely enough to buy bus fare — literally stranded by her faith in the fantasy of wealth. Ana rejects Christian’s vision of control and subsequent liberation through sex, but she’s also saying fuck you to the theory that a life of luxury will inure a woman to the lack of true companionship, respect, communication.

For Fifty Shades to end as it does, with such a clear rejection of both Christian and the lifestyle he promises, is a radical act. The scene in which Christian whips Ana — and forces her to count along, complicit in her own abuse — is a searing commentary on what women are willing to endure for the promise of love. Ana is essentially rejecting the ideals (hot dudes, perfect body, endless privilege) to which popular culture has taught us to surrender and, in so doing, she explodes them. The hot dude is rotten inside; his version of BDSM isn’t about mutual pleasure, but using his capital to compel women to endure sex that they don’t like so that they can enjoy the lifestyle they do.

Universal Pictures

That’s an uncharitable understanding of any man’s intention, but the text, with its flimsy characterization and hackneyed psychology (childhood abuse yields adult perversion) gives us little reason to believe otherwise. Yet fully drawn character and cohesive plot has never been the point. People didn’t buy this book or see this movie merely because it’s erotica. It can, in a spare number of scenes, genuinely arouse, but what’s really compelling about Fifty Shades is the way in which it negotiates the knife-edge between control and release, freedom and submission, both sexual and financial. BDSM simply becomes the taboo playground on which those larger, enduring, and never more essential ideas are set out.

Like all fantasy, it’s less about actually submitting or dominating and more about thinking about it. We’re not meant to treat Fifty Shades as a how-to book, which is why most (but not all) debates over the way in which it might inculcate domestic abuse lack nuance. Such thinking harkens back to old, thoroughly disabused theories that a film, book, or song is a hypodermic needle that, once injected in its viewer, reproduced its values in its new host. Instead, women — and some men — are watching Fifty Shades and processing how that vision of surrender, and Ana’s ultimate rejection of it, meshes with their own ideas of freedom. That’s how we consume media: We digest it.

The problem, of course, is that the full Fifty Shades narrative doesn’t end with Ana’s rejection. It’s a momentary pause before the pair are reconciled at the beginning of the second movie. Love and communication “fix” Christian’s perversions, leaving the pair to marry, have children, and live out the bourgeois fantasy that soured so effectively at the end of the first movie. Indeed, the biggest spoiler of the Fifty Shades trilogy is that a potential deviant text so thoroughly and unproblematically reifies the status quo. On its own, however, this first Fifty Shades might just be an indictment not only of capitalism, but the exploitative sexual contracts, formal or implicit, that women submit to in its service.











Read more: http://www.buzzfeed.com/annehelenpetersen/submit-to-capitalism


NOT INTERESTED, WE DONT WANT ANY OF THAT BUSINESS………..CHEERS!

Read more: https://imgflip.com/i/1nfv0y


But Thats None Of My Business

But Thats None Of My Business

Read more: https://imgflip.com/i/awqzq


Washington DC Mayor Vincent Gray ‘deeply disappointed’ in Marion Barry’s comments

http://twitter.com/#!/mayorvincegray/status/187968204663029761

DC Council Chairman Kwame Brown also weighed in:

“I strongly disagree with the recent remarks made about Asian American business owners in the District.  Statements like that are divisive, destructive, and have absolutely no place in our city.  The District’s character is enriched by the wonderful diversity present throughout our communities. Our city takes great pride in the variety of people who live here; we value and regard all of our residents and welcome all visitors.  This respect includes recognition, consideration and incorporation of multiple voices and perspectives in our city’s policies and economy.  I remain committed to celebrating diversity, eliminating harassment, discrimination, and victimization, and promoting equality of opportunity for all people.”

Read more: http://twitchy.com/2012/04/05/washington-dc-mayor-vincent-gray-deeply-disappointed-in-marion-barrys-comments/


Sharyl Attkisson has a follow-up question about Hillary’s reliance on email

During Hillary Clinton’s testimony before the #BenghaziCommittee, Indiana Republican Rep. Susan Brooks produced printed copies of Hillary Clinton’s emails from the last two years of her time as secretary of state (of the emails that were turned over to State).

Hillary’s email from 2011 is on the right, and email from 2012, the year the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was attacked, are on the left in these photos:

During her testimony, Clinton claimed that most of her work was not done on email, but she certainly seemed to conduct more business on email in 2011 than in 2012.

Investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson is curious:

Another obvious question would be to wonder if Hillary really wrote that many more Libya-related emails in 2011 than in 2012, or if some from 2012 have magically disappeared.

Read more: http://twitchy.com/2015/10/22/benghazicommittee-sharyl-attkisson-has-a-follow-up-question-about-hillarys-reliance-on-email/


Chipotle, But For Cheeseburgers? Shake Shack IPO Sets Expectations High

The “fine casual” burger chain will hold its initial public offering Friday, with the buzz swelling to the point of cultish fanfare. But how much will Shake Shack have to grow to live up to the hype?

Keith Bedford / Reuters

It’s easy to see why the buzz around the initial public offering of Shake Shack, the New York-based upscale burger chain, is reaching the point of frenzy. Burgers have remained the most popular item ordered across all classes of restaurant in the United States, and in the booming fast-casual dining space where Chipotle is king, Shake Shack is the first to hit the public markets.

“It seems to be that our desire for and our love affair with burgers doesn’t end,” said Bonnie Riggs, a restaurant industry analyst at consultancy NPD Group. “We’re ordering burgers at all types of restaurants for different reasons.”

What’s more, Shake Shack burgers are good. Really good. Just ask the analysts and prospective early investors who, according to sources, salivated over celebrated Manhattan chef Danny Meyer’s masterpieces when Shake Shack served them on its road show to drum up potential interest in the IPO.

The strategy appears to have worked in charming the financial forces controlling investment in the earliest available shares of Shake Shack, those up for grabs before the company even begins its first public trade on the New York Stock Exchange Friday. The expected price range for the IPO has already increased by 50% from $14 to $16 per share to a price of $21 per share Thursday evening.

“This is going to be an extraordinarily well-attended IPO,” said John Gordon, a restaurant industry analyst and founder of the Pacific Management Consulting Group. “Five Guys and Smash Brothers did not get an IPO done, so they beat the other burger chains. Shake Shack is the first real fast-casual burger operation to come to market.”

Shake Shack’s Manhattan beginnings have also worked in its favor, both to attract early investors, many of whom are familiar with its storied product, and to command a high average ticket per customer.

“They’re based in New York City, and sales numbers per store are extremely large in Manhattan,” Gordon said. “But there’s only one Manhattan, and as you get further out, there’s no way you can hit those numbers. Stores in other parts of the country aren’t going to hit those sales numbers.”

Kathleen Smith, an IPO expert and principal at ETF manager Renaissance Capital, agrees, adding that Shake Shack may not be able to cultivate the kind of following it has from New York investment industry types outside of the city.

“When Fairway went public, a lot of New Yorkers were familiar with it and it reached great heights, then it came back down to earth,” Smith said. “They have high margins in their New York locations; the question is how do you hold up those margins, because it’s a different kind of economy. New Yorkers will pay for it. [Another] question is, when do you add stores and what do the stores look like that you’re adding?”

Shake Shack is already considering the answer to this question, and its filings surrounding the IPO, the company said it plans to have 450 locations across the U.S. in the long term. There are currently just 30 Shake Shacks in America.

According to Smith, the 450 figure doesn’t seem too extravagant.

“We didn’t question that number,” she told BuzzFeed News. “It passed our sanity test.”

Justine Zwiebel / BuzzFeed

But in Gordon’s estimation, the average Shake Shack ticket is roughly $15 per person, higher than the $10 per person figure the company has ascribed to the average check. This, he said, will potentially make it difficult to find enough locations for Shake Shack to be able to scale its business and an IPO valuation of around $745 million.

“Generally what happens is every restaurant that IPOs says they can get to a certain number of units,” Gordon said. “Whether restaurants work or not, it’s a very complex situation of finding enough people, pricing appropriately, and finding the right locations, which has been difficult for a decade. The average ticket is about $15 per person, that is going to mean that it’s not going to work for everyone everywhere. It will have to be in densely populated urban areas with a higher income bracket.”

Another potential hurdle for Shake Shack is the issue of the fast-casual bubble. Call it the Chipotle effect: Fast-casual chains like Noodles & Company, The Habit, Potbelly, and others have boomed in recent years, experiencing huge pops on IPO day and then slowly but surely coming back down to earth in the following weeks and months as interest dies down.

“These IPOs have really gotten kind of out of hand,” Gordon said. “There almost needs to be an asterisk that the first years, the price to earnings multiple is always high, because investors continue to chase the next Chipotle. Everyone wants to get in on the next Chipotle, but the world has changed a lot.”

Gordon adds that there remains a general shortage of publicly traded restaurants, as many were delisted or bought out by private equity from 2008 to 2011, and the industry is struggling to recover.

“So there is demand and interest for restaurant IPOs,” Gordon said, “but historically they IPO and then they cool off.”

Smith remembers this very theory manifesting itself in the form of Potbelly and Noodles & Company, shares of which are currently down 37% and 27% from their respective IPOs in the last two years. She believes Shake Shack could be setting investors up for a similar disappointing return once the IPO hysteria dies down.

“It’s going to be a hot deal on day one,” Smith said of Shake Shack. “It’s a bit of a cult stock. You could get a 50 times earnings multiple, which is a stress on the name. It’s starting to defy fundamental logic. They have some things working in their favor, like a high ticket value, [but] what they’re targeting is a huge jump from their current base.”

Still, other industry experts believe as long as Shake Shack is serving burgers — the kind that are so good they’re unlike anything else in this burger-loving nation — then it should be able to thrive.

“What fascinates me about Shake Shack is that when I started doing this 37 years ago, the most popular thing people ordered in a restaurant was a hamburger,” said Harry Balzer, chief food industry analyst and vice president at NPD Group. “And the most popular item people ordered yesterday was a hamburger. It can’t lose! As a consumer, we all have this desire to try new things we already know. In this case, I don’t have to go far to find people saying I’ll try a new hamburger.”

Read more: http://www.buzzfeed.com/mariahsummers/shack-attack


As Denny’s franchisee preps Obamacare surcharge, liberals promise boycott

http://twitter.com/#!/tracilaw/status/268876879086362626

If you’re in Florida and planning to join in on the Papa John’s “buycott” scheduled for this Friday, you might want to save some room for dessert and hit Denny’s afterward. A West Palm Beach restaurant owner is the latest target of a boycott campaign after floating the idea of adding a 5 percent “Obamacare surcharge” to customer checks starting in 2014.

You wanted Obamacare? You got it -> Denny’s And Hurricane Grill & Wings Imposes Surcharge For Obamacare huff.to/SNtUBK

— Jessica (@Miami_Jess) November 15, 2012

Franchisor John Metz told the Huffington Post that “although it may sound terrible that I’m doing this, it’s the only alternative. I’ve got to pass the cost on to the consumer.” In August, Papa John’s CEO John Schnatter was among the first to come under fire for suggesting that implementing Obamacare would entail costs that would have to be passed on to customers.

Applebee’s has also been targeted for a boycott, although the company was quick to point out via a Twitter post that comments about a possible hiring freeze were made by an independent franchisee. Do little details like that matter, though, when Obamacare is insulted? Is Denny’s in for a boycott nationwide?

“@huffingtonpost: Denny’s franchisee to add Obamacare surcharge to customer checks huff.to/ZvZRnB#boycott these naysayers!

— Donna Brazile (@donnabrazile) November 15, 2012

Obamacare “naysayers”? Are they the new “climate change deniers”?

@donnabrazile These links that you’re posting are truly eye-opening. Boycott is not even strong enough of a word to describe what comes next

— ROS (@SuperstarDJROS) November 15, 2012

Okey dokey…Another one to BOYCOTT RT @huffpostpolDenny’s franchisee to add Obamacare surcharge to customer checks huff.to/RDENrf

— Cos2mwiz2 (@Cos2mwiz2) November 14, 2012

A Denny’s franchisee is adding a Obamacare surcharge to customers, even though the law is proven to saveemployers $. huff.to/RDENrf

— Nate FromUsa (@NatefromUSA) November 14, 2012

Do you hear that? Obamacare have been proved to save employers money. False alarm, business owners nationwide.

They are TRIPPIN’! RT @huffingtonpost: Denny’s franchisee to add Obamacare surcharge to customer checks huff.to/ZvZRnB

— Freedom (@FreedomReeves) November 15, 2012

Wow!I won’t be eating there! “@huffingtonpost: Denny’s franchisee to add Obamacare surcharge to customer checks huff.to/ZvZRnB

— Ricky Appleseed (@RickyAppleseed) November 15, 2012

RT @huffingtonpost “Denny’s franchisee to add Obamacare surcharge to customer checks huff.to/ZvZRnB” Complete and utter douchebag.

— Chris J. Shadrick (@shadrackmang) November 15, 2012

Boycott Dennys! This dickhead is charging you more or he’ll take it out of servers tips, because Obama won. po.st/FrCl5l

— eeksta1 (@eeksta1) November 15, 2012

Glitch closing, Macy’s defending Trump, Denny’s instituting an “Obamacare surcharge”…what’s wrong with everything today?!

— Ancalime (@ancalime) November 15, 2012

Read more: http://twitchy.com/2012/11/14/as-dennys-franchisee-preps-obamacare-surcharge-liberals-promise-another-boycott/