Didn’t have to. You addressed your cheap shot at me. Where’s your proof that I either harassed or criminally threatened anyone, let alone that I would be unfamiliar with pc422a? lol! As far as the so called threats you quoted — did you verify that they were actually made as opposed to made-up by leftards? Nah, I didn’t think so.

http://www.spj.org/ethics_code.asp

See ya.

Maybe you didn’t read the link above:
You will pay for your seditious activities. It is only a matter of
time…We are retired military snipers & we are watching you…

We’re coming to get you and when we do we’ll hurt you..REAL BAD!

Project much? Uh, you are the one freaking out because you can’t control what people post about.

When you’re harassing those students you might want to skirt around this:

Ah, yes! People demand free speech but if any one dare talk back to them, it’s labeled harassment. Again, you project too much.

California Penal Code section 422: THREATS

What a waste of your time. Only leftards have to be told threatening people with death/bodily injury is against the law. I am not a leftard, thank God.

Jeeze, 2, you sound a little sensitive.

FYI-

When you’re harassing those students you might want to skirt around this:

California Penal Code section 422: THREATS
Any person who willfully threatens to commit a crime which will result in death or great bodily injury to another person, with the specific intent that the statement, made verbally, in writing, or by means of an electronic communication device, is to be taken as a threat, even if there is no intent of actually carrying it out, which, on its face and under the circumstances in which it is made, is so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to convey to the person threatened, a gravity of purpose and an immediate prospect of execution of the threat, and thereby causes that person reasonably to be in sustained fear for his or her own safety . . .

You do. Who made you the arbitrator of what will be discussed on this or Malkin’s blog or who determines what is relevant or not? You are either a 1) control freak; 2) a totalitarian; or 3) the one trying to obscure the issues by demanding people discuss what you want to discuss all the time.

The people criticizing Malkin are the jackasses. And yes, there is a difference between one who obtains personal info by hacking into computers and publishing it on the internet and those who by their own volition post information and invite people to contact them, but whine when people use it to criticize them.

Now excuse me while I send off some more emails to Sam, Dave, and Jan. lol!

Yes, it is a pretty irrelevant topic: while our country is at war and we’re running 400 billion dollar deficits among other issues we’re debating the actions of 3 students at a college you’d never heard of before. Who cares?

It’s the same technique the right uses constantly: war’s going badly? Whoa- look over there- there are some idiots in California doing something objectionable! Even though these individuals are accountable to no one but themselves. Michelle Malkin’s entire site seems to be dedicated to gawking at the stupid actions of private individuals rather than looking at the stupid actions of elected officials and people with power- it’s simply a technique to divert attention from issues that matter.

But I praise you for absorbing the techniques so well. For instance, Michelle Malkin is criticized for being a jackass by posting the addresses of private individuals and you counter with anonymous hackers who have done the same thing. Unfortunately, neither I or anyone else have the ability to hold anonymous hackers accountable for their actions- we can both complain about it but it won’t change a thing. However, when we complain about elected officials we might just get our way (pretending for a second that we found a topic on which we agreed).

And again, press releases are published to the internet. If they don’t want people reading them and using the contact information, they shouldn’t publish them to the internet. Luckly, I copied the names of Sam Aranke (714 458-2471 saranke@ucsc.edu), David Zlutnick (805 698-6228 dzlutnic@ucsc.edu) and Janine Ramona (707 496-3530 jgcarmon@ucsc.edu) because I haven’t yet had time to get a hold of them and tell them there actions are despicable and criminal and as a taxpayer, I am intend to urge the federal government to stop funding UCSC. Demonstrating is one thing but the students were committing criminal acts.

And if you truly thought this topic was irrelevant you wouldn’t have used so many sleezy arguments pretending to address it.

Across the entire labor force, the effect of illegal immigrants was zero, because the presence of uneducated immigrants actually increased the earnings of more educated workers, including high school graduates. For instance, higher-skilled workers could hire foreigners at low wages to mow their lawns and care for their children, freeing time for these workers to earn more. And businesses that exist because of the availability of cheap labor might also need to employ managers.

Mr. Katz agreed that the impact was modest, and it might fall further if changes in trade flows were taken into account — specifically, that without illegal immigrants, some products now made in the United States would likely be imported.
http://tinyurl.com/o92fg

That said, Congress sure does seem to vacation a lot.