I wouldn’t expect anything less from sanctuary California.
From SF Gate: California Governor Gavin Newsom wants to use $20 million of state funds to create an “Immigration Rapid Response Program” that provides aid to migrants who arrive at California’s border.
In his recently-released 2019-2020 budget, Newsom proposed giving $20 million to humanitarian organizations and non-profit entities that currently provide aid to migrants.
“These funds will be available over a three-year period to assist qualified community-based organizations and nonprofit entities in providing services during immigration or human trafficking emergency situations when federal funding is not available,” the budget reads. “These funds will also be available to support the redirection of state-level staff who directly assist in response efforts.”
In addition, Newsom calls for $5 million to be made available immediately for any “immigration-related emergencies” that arise in the 2018-2019 fiscal year. The three-year period in which the $20 million becomes available would begin in July 2019, if approved.
The Los Angeles Times reported that most of the funds would likely go to the San Diego Rapid Response Network, a coalition of human rights organizations, attorneys and community leaders that provides humanitarian aid to migrants near the border.
A recent surge in migrants attempting to seek asylum at the southern border has led many to declare the existence of a “humanitarian crisis.” In December 2018, two migrant children died in the custody of Customs and Border Protection shortly after making the dangerous trek to the US southern border.
Newsom toured an immigration detention facility in San Diego this past November, and said the state of California should do more in providing aid to migrants. “My job is to be constructive … to try to find ways to bring people to the table and to address what legitimately can be described as a humanitarian crisis,” he said at the time. “We’re all in this together … I think we need to humanize this issue, not politicize the issue.”
Newsom’s budget proposal calls only for assisting non-profit organizations in “providing services” to migrants. It is unclear what exactly those services might be or which organizations it will be funding.
Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!
From NY Post: A mother attempting to climb over a fence on the US-Mexico border fell and was impaled on a steel bar in front of her children, officials said.
The 26-year-old woman from Guatemala pierced her side and buttocks when she landed on pieces of rebar Friday night near the San Ysidro Port of Entry, a border crossing between San Diego, Ca., and Tijuana, Mexico, US Customs and Border Patrol officials said in a statement.
Border Patrol agents in San Diego rescued the woman and she was taken to a hospital with minor injuries, the statement said.
Her two children, ages 3 and 5, were also taken to the hospital and later released into Border Patrol custody, officials said.
San Diego Sector Chief Patrol Agent Rodney Scott blasted the woman’s actions as “not only dangerous, but also very foolish.”
“This woman placed her own life and her children’s lives in peril,” Scott said in the statement.
The woman told agents she wasn’t part of the migrant caravan that’s made its way from Central America to the Mexican border town of Tijuana. Some migrants traveling with the caravan tried to breach a border fence on Sunday and were fired at with tear gas by US agents.
Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!
Great job demorats!
From Fox News: An outbreak of hepatitis A is spreading through Los Angeles County after leaping from a large homeless contingent in San Diego, threatening thousands of people and fueling criticism that local officials have not done enough to contain the deadly liver disease. Hundreds of cases have turned up in southern California as well as Michigan — but conditions in Los Angeles, where roughly 50,000 people live on the streets, have prompted deeper concerns. Reports compiled by volunteer organizations have faulted city officials for not providing enough accessible toilets as the homeless population sharply increased by 23 percent this year.
In a prescient warning, a June 2017 report by a collection of nonprofits called the LA Central Providers Collaborative sounded the alarm about crowding and living conditions on Skid Row, citing the city’s own predictions about the increased risk for hepatitis A and other diseases. “One would think that Los Angeles, one of the greatest cities in the world, would exceed these minimal standards. However, this Audit finds that in Skid Row, Los Angeles fails to meet even the standards for a refugee camp,” the report said. “During overnight hours, there are only nine public toilets available for 1,777 unsheltered homeless people on Skid Row, and these toilets are largely inaccessible.”
The report noted that United Nations’ refugee camp standards are one toilet for every 20 people.
Fast-forward to September, and the county declared an outbreak affecting homeless people and illicit drug users. The disease also is rising among gay and bisexual men, the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health noted in a Nov. 2 advisory. Los Angeles currently has 31 hepatitis cases – 15 among the homeless and 16 gay men.
Toilet access is a chief concern, as the disease can be contracted by ingesting or touching anything contaminated with infected feces. Homeless individuals without bathroom access defecating on the streets spreads the disease.
Seventeen miles away is the community of Venice, a trendy beachside haven made famous by a young Arnold Schwarzenegger who once lifted weights in a makeshift gym set up along a boardwalk. The homeless liked the area, too, and the population has grown to about 1,000. The area has nine toilet stalls, none which are open at night. Los Angeles County, meanwhile, has 42,828 homeless living on the streets, which swells to more than 50,000 during the day when many leave overnight shelters. Most are within the city of Los Angeles, which has a total of 2,800 toilets and 800 urinals located in parks that are open during daylight hours.
Read the rest of the story here.
Chris (center) and his buddies flying a private jet…
Chris Hemsworth is an Australian actor who is probably best known for his role in Thor. He also claims to be an environmental warrior, especially for the oceans. From One Green Planet: Australian actor Chris Hemsworth recently posted a photo on Instagram while collecting plastic waste from a beach. The image was also captioned with an important message about the problem. Hemsworth is now the Ambassador of the #100Islandsprotected project by Corona X Parlay and is “thrilled to be a part of this program.” The actor stressed that he’s spent a great part of his life around the ocean. In the presence of this enormous natural body, he always felt calm, happy, and present. This proximity to the ocean and the big part it has played in Hemsworth’s life made him realize all the more our need to protect it. “My experience in the Maldives made it obvious how our short-term use of plastic has a long-term damaging effect on our oceans,” he wrote. As the Ambassador of the project, he will focus on educating people about the negative effects plastic waste has on the oceans. This is not, however, the first time the actor spoke up about the environmental issues. Earlier this year, he posted a picture with a member of the Sustainable Coastlines Hawaii who runs large-scale beach clean-ups. Before that, Hemsworth posted about vaquitas, a marine species that is now severely endangered due to illegal fishing and on the verge of total extinction. He also spoke against whaling back in 2015.
Guess what the ambassador of the oceans did on Saturday to get to the Comic Con festival in San Diego? He flew via private jet to the event. The picture above is from his Instagram account.
From the web site of the private jet company Chris was on, Zetta Jet: We at Zetta Jet are dedicated to putting the luxury back into private travel, to personalizing private flight again.
I know that plastic in the oceans is a big problem and commend him for supporting that issue.
Chris wants us to believe he understands the solution to protect the world’s oceans yet he flies a private gas-guzzling and –emitter jet which contributes to climate change (and he frequentlyflies via this mode). If you’re going to talk the talk, walk the walk (or fly commercial).
Course I’m sure Leo is proud of him.
Score one for the Second Amendment.
From ABC News: A federal judge on Thursday blocked a California law set to take effect Saturday that would have barred gun owners from possessing high-capacity ammunition magazines. The judge ruled that the ban approved by the Legislature and voters last year takes away gun owners’ Second Amendment rights and amounts to the government taking people’s private property without compensation.
California law has prohibited buying or selling the magazines since 2000, but until now allowed those who had them to keep them.
“Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of otherwise law-abiding citizens will have an untenable choice: become an outlaw or dispossess one’s self of lawfully acquired property,” San Diego-based U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez wrote. (Judge Benitez was appointed by George W. Bush.)
He issued a preliminary injunction blocking the law from taking effect while he considers the underlying lawsuit filed by the National Rifle Association-affiliated California Rifle & Pistol Association.
Meanwhile, a Sacramento-based judge on Thursday rejected a similar challenge by several other gun owners’ rights organizations, creating what Ari Freilich, staff attorney at the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, called “dueling opinions” that may be sorted out on appeal. “Unfortunately this law will be delayed but we are confident it will go into effect, and soon,” he said. He called the San Diego lawsuit and ruling part of an effort by the NRA “to delay and dismantle California’s law brick by brick.” Had the ban taken effect, owners would have been required to get rid of their magazines by sending them out of state, altering them to hold no more than 10 bullets, destroying them or turning them into law enforcement agencies. Possession could have been punished by $100 fines or up to a year in jail.
Owners can now keep the magazines until a final ruling by Benitez or if an appeals court overturns his injunction, said Chuck Michel, attorney for the NRA and the California Rifle & Pistol Association. “This court recognized that the Second Amendment is not a second-class right and that law-abiding gun owners have the right to own these magazines to defend themselves and their families,” Michel said.
State lawmakers approved the ban last year as part of a package of bills adding to what already were some of the nation’s strictest gun laws. Voters agreed in November when they approved Proposition 63, a measure that toughened the penalties by allowing violators to be fined or jailed.
Benitez said he was mindful of voters’ approval and government’s legitimate interest in protecting the public but added that the “Constitution is a shield from the tyranny of the majority.” Gun owner’s constitutional rights “are not eliminated simply because they possess ‘unpopular’ magazines holding more than 10 rounds,” he wrote in a 66-page decision.
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra criticized the decision but did not say what he will do next. “Proposition 63 was overwhelmingly approved by voters to increase public safety and enhance security in a sensible and constitutional way,” Becerra said in a statement. “I will defend the will of California voters because we cannot continue to lose innocent lives due to gun violence.” Supporters say that magazines often holding 30 or 100 bullets are typically used in mass shootings and aren’t needed by hunters or civilian owners. “Clearly it escalates the lethality in any mass shooting when high-capacity magazines are involved,” said Amanda Wilcox, a spokeswoman for the California chapters of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence whose daughter was fatally shot. Forcing assailants to change magazines more frequently gives victims time to flee or subdue the shooter, Becerra argued in court filings.
He listed as examples the shooting in Orlando, Florida, that killed 49 people and injured 53; the terrorist assault that killed 14 and injured 22 in San Bernardino; the massacre of children and teachers at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut; and the Arizona attack that killed six and wounded 13 including former U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. Moreover, the government wouldn’t own the magazines in the way it would property seized for a new highway or public building, he argued, since the magazines would be destroyed by law enforcement agencies.
Becerra said opponents’ Second Amendment challenge has repeatedly been rejected by other courts, allowing at least seven other states and 11 local governments to already restrict the possession or sale of large-capacity ammunition magazines.
Dean Erwin Chemerinsky: No right to have concealed weapons
If this does make it to the Supreme Court, I’m certainly hoping for an outcome which favors legal firearm owners.
From Fox News: The Second Amendment is only 27 words, but Americans have used millions of words arguing over what it means. It guarantees “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.” But which people, what arms, and under what circumstances?
Two milestone cases involving the Second Amendment that reached the Supreme Court are District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), declaring an individual has a right to own a firearm, and McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), affirming the Second Amendment applies to state law. Now, if the Supreme Court decides to hear it, there may be a third major case in a decade: Peruta v. California. At issue is the right to keep and bear arms outside the home. The Heller case specifically applies to situations within the home. Those who have petitioned the Supreme Court to hear the case are hoping the justices will see it as a logical extension of their earlier opinions.
The case arose when Edward Peruta and other gun owners who lived in or near San Diego, Calif., couldn’t get concealed-carry permits in their county. The Sheriff’s Department handles permit requests and requires “good cause” to carry a gun outside of the home. This does not mean a generalized concern for safety, but something specific, such as fear of domestic violence or a regular need to move large amounts of money.
There were two separate lawsuits challenging the interpretation of “good cause,” but the district courts found no violation of the Second Amendment.
Then, in 2014, a three-judge panel on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that the policy did indeed violate the right to bear arms for self-defense. The state, however, got a new hearing in front of 11 9th Circuit judges, who decided 7-4, the restrictions for concealed-carry permits were allowable.
The case has now been appealed to the Supreme Court and though the Justices have rescheduled its consideration several times, some experts feel the court is finally ready to hear Peruta.
“I suspect they’re going to grant it,” said John Eastman, former law dean at Chapman University and the director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence. Eastman told Fox News, “it’s percolating all across the country.”
He also feels the justices may have put it off while waiting for a full complement on the court, which they got when Neil Gorsuch was confirmed last month. Gorsuch, in fact, may be the justice to tip the opinion in one direction or the other, as previous Second Amendment cases were determined in a 5-4 ruling.
According to Eugene Volokh, professor of law at University of California at Los Angeles, this case is primed for the Supreme Court, as it deals with a basic constitutional right and “the lower courts are split on the issue.”
It would be a good time for the highest court to step in and settle the controversy. He also feels that while no one is sure how Gorsuch will vote, there is a “sense that he’s sympathetic to a broader view” of the Second Amendment.
The case may turn on how the court frames the issue. To Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California Irvine School of Law, the legal question to be settled is whether a state like California may determine its own rules on concealed-carry permits. “The Second Amendment isn’t an absolute right,” Chemerinsky notes. Throughout British and American history, “there’s never been a right to have concealed weapons.”
But Eugene Volokh believes there’s a bigger issue at stake. If the state of California, which essentially bans open carry of a gun, makes it next to impossible for a typical citizen to get a concealed-carry permit, this is “tantamount to banning” the right to bear arms “except for a few favored people.”
Experts agree on one point. As Chemerinsky puts it, if Peruta is taken up, “no matter what the Supreme Court says, it will be a landmark decision.”
From Q13Fox: A federal appeals court ruled on Thursday that there is no Second Amendment protection for concealed weapons — allowing states to prohibit or restrict the public from carrying concealed firearms.
The en banc opinion by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals could set up a new showdown on gun rights at the Supreme Court.
At issue was California’s law on concealed weapons, which requires citizens to prove they have “good cause” to carry concealed firearms to get a license. Plaintiffs challenged guidelines in San Diego and Yolo counties that did not consider general self-defense to be enough to obtain a license. The 9th Circuit held 7-4 in the case, Peruta v. County of San Diego, that the restrictions on concealed carry are constitutional, ruling that the Second Amendment right to bear arms does not provide a right to carry concealed arms.
Judge William Fletcher
“The historical materials bearing on the adoption of the Second and Fourteenth Amendments are remarkably consistent,” wrote Judge William Fletcher, going back to 16th century English law to find instances of restrictions on concealed weapons. “We therefore conclude that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms does not include, in any degree, the right of a member of the general public to carry concealed firearms in public.” Fletcher also cited the most recent Supreme Court cases on gun rights, District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago, which were major victories for gun rights activists, in making his case. The Heller decision, authored by Justice Antonin Scalia, solidified a Second Amendment right of the public to keep guns, but it specifically noted the right was not absolute, and Fletcher pointed out that Scalia cited restrictions on concealed weapons as a historical example.
The court was careful to make the ruling narrow. The opinion does not say concealed weapons are unconstitutional, nor does it make any decisions about openly carrying weapons in public.
The case was a blow for gun rights advocates, and sets up the fight on gun rights for the Supreme Court to consider, says UCLA law professor and gun law expert Adam Winkler.
“This case raises the next great question for the Supreme Court: Does the Second Amendment guarantee a right to carry guns in public? And if so, what kind of licensing can states use to permit people to carry concealed weapons?” Winkler said. The Supreme Court would not necessarily have to take up the case. The ruling does not create a substantive divide among different circuit courts in the U.S., one of the major factors the court considers in weighing which cases to take.
Judge Consuelo Callahan
Four judges dissented from the ruling, with the main dissent by Judge Consuelo Callahan (appointed by Bush) arguing that California’s laws taken together amount to a substantial restriction on citizens’ right to bear arms for self defense, as protected by the Second Amendment.
Whether the court does or does not take the case, the early 2016 death of Scalia looms large over it. Scalia authored Heller, the most substantial gun ruling in modern history of the court. And Republicans in the Senate have refused to consider President Barack Obama’s nominee for replacing Scalia on the court, meaning the eight justice panel can split 4-4. Without a ninth justice, Winkler said, it’s unlikely the court would take up the case, even with Scalia’s allies on the issue Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas still on the court.
Obama’s nominee to replace Scalia, Judge Merrick Garland, was chosen in large part for his moderate record. But one of the most substantial conservative arguments against Garland has been that his record on guns is too liberal, though his written record on the issue is limited.
The case was argued by Paul Clement, a former solicitor general under the George W. Bush administration and one of the top litigators for conservative causes at the Supreme Court in recent years. Ever since the Supreme Court decided the Heller decision and a follow up case two years later, the Supreme Court has declined to take another major second amendment case, a frustration Clement cited in a 2013 filing with the court.
In the years since Heller had been decided many expected a “major consideration” or extant firearms laws, Clement wrote. “Instead, jurisdictions have engaged in massive resistance to the clear import of those landmark decisions, and the lower federal courts, long out of the habit of taking the Second Amendment seriously, have largely facilitated that resistance.” California state Attorney General Kamala Harris said the decision “is a victory for public safety and sensible gun safety laws. The ruling ensures that local law enforcement leaders have the tools they need to protect public safety by determining who can carry loaded, concealed weapons in our communities.”
You’re about to view really stupid people. No I mean Really stupid!!!
Public supports letting murderers, rapists and thieves back on the streets Steve Watson
Aug 9, 2013
Another stark reminder of how mind-numbingly slavish many Americans are was provided this week when activist Mark Dice managed to garner several signatures on a petition to release all illegal aliens from prisons, even if they are convicted rapists or murderers.
“Help get the illegals out of prisons and jails, and support Obama.” Dice asked one man, handing him the petition to sign while out on the street in San Diego.
“Yeah why not.” the man replied without question.
Dice then pushed even further by stating, “They deserve a second chance. Murderers, burglars, rapists.”
Still the man continued to fill in his details in support of the proposition, stating “Yeah I hear what you’re saying.”
“We want to release all the illegal aliens from prisons as part of the amnesty program, no matter what crime they have committed.” Dice told another passer by who signed the petition.
“We just need to give them amnesty and citizenship right?” he asked another man.
“mmm hmm” nodded the man, who then also blindly signed the petition.
A Mexican man hesitated at first then shrugged his shoulders and signed the petition without question when Dice explained he’d be “supporting his people”.
“What we figure is by releasing all the illegals from prison, we can help increase the economy and get these people back to work, no matter what they have been charged with; robbery, murder, we need to get these people back in the work force, don’t you agree?” Dice stated in a monosyllabic tone.
“Yeah, thank you.” the man replied.
“As part of the amnesty we’re going to get murderers back on the streets.” Dice told another woman while she signed the petition and said “alright.”
The immigration reform debate is currently raging in the House, with Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (D-Ill.)today saying that he is confident that enough Republican representatives will back legislation that provides a “pathway to citizenship” for an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants.
Critics have charged that the plan amounts to a blanket amnesty program and will compound the problem by encouraging more illegal immigration.
Dice’s faux petition shows that many Americans are numb to the problem, and will support anything that they believe to be politically correct, no matter how ludicrous it really is.
Dice’s faux petition shows that many Americans are numb to the problem, and will support anything that they believe to be politically correct, no matter how ludicrous it really is.
There’s a saying that when something happens once, it’s a fluke. Twice, we should start paying attention. Thrice, it’s no longer mere coincidence but is a definite pattern or trend. When it happens a FOURTH time, then we know something out of the ordinary definitely is going on!
This is the case with the Obama regime and zombies. Yes, zombies. The soul-less walking dead who inhabit the nightmarish world of horror movies. The walking dead who aren’t real, except to voodoo cultists like Obama’s mother-in-law Marian Robinson.
First, the U.S. federal government’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in the name of education, published a tongue-in-cheek graphic novel, titled Preparedness 101: Zombie Pandemic, in March 2011, advising Americans on how to deal with a zombie apocalypse.
In the graphic novel, a “zombie pandemic” has taken place in the southeast of the United States. This is how the CDC describes Zombie Pandemic: CDC has a fun new way of teaching about emergency preparedness. Our new graphic novel, “Preparedness 101: Zombie Pandemic” demonstrates the importance of being prepared in an entertaining way that people of all ages will enjoy. Readers follow Todd, Julie, and their dog Max as a strange new disease begins spreading, turning ordinary people into zombies. Stick around to the end for a surprising twist that will drive home the importance of being prepared for any emergency. Included in the novel is a Preparedness Checklist so that readers can get their family, workplace, or school ready before disaster strikes. Click on the image below to view the novella. A transcript can be found by clicking on the “accessible text” PDF. To order your own copy of the novella click here.
You can also read the comic on the CDC’s website.
Next, as reported by Christian Toto of Breitbart on Oct. 29, 2012, Hollyweird director Joss Wedon (“Avengers” and “Buffy the Vampire Slayer”) appeared in a video pimping for Obama. Whedon goes on the attack, saying a Romney administration will bring on “the zombie apocalypse”:
The same day, Oct. 29, 2012, the federal govt held a 5-day military exercise in San Diego to defend the United States against — you guessed it — a zombie apocalypse.
As reported by Julie Watson for the Associated Press, hundreds of Marines, Navy special ops, soldiers, police, firefighters and others participated in a counterterrorism summit, hosted by security firm Halo Corp, at a 44-acre Paradise Point Resort island in San Diego bay. The keynote speaker was former CIA Director Michael Hayden. The five-day summit was an approved training event by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Grant Program and the Urban Areas Security Initiative, which used precious taxpayer dollars to fund the $1,000 per person registration fee and coursework on everything from the battleground tactics to combat wounds to cybersecurity. Called “Zombie Apocalypse,” the Halo exercise followed the CDC’s campaign launched in March 2011. In the scenario, a VIP and his personal detail are trapped in a village, surrounded by zombies when a bomb explodes. The VIP is wounded and his team must move through the town while dodging bullets and shooting back at the invading zombies. At one point, some members of the team are bit by zombies and must be taken to a field medical facility for decontamination and treatment.
As described by Brad Barker, president of Halo Corp: “This is a very real exercise, this is not some type of big costume party. “Everything that will be simulated at this event has already happened, it just hasn’t happened all at once on the same night. But the training is very real, it just happens to be the bad guys we’re having a little fun with. No one knows what the zombies will do in our scenario, but quite frankly no one knows what a terrorist will do. If a law enforcement officer sees a zombie and says, `Freeze, get your hands in the air!’ What’s the zombie going to do? He’s going to moan at you. If someone on PCP or some other psychotic drug is told that, the truth is he’s not going to react to you. No doubt when a zombie apocalypse occurs, it’s going to be a federal incident, so we’re making it happen.”
According to a report compiled by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., who chairs the investigations subcommittee of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee:
The marquee event over the [San Diego] summit, however, was its highly-promoted “zombie apocalypse” demonstration. Strategic Operations, a tactical training firm, was hired to put on a “zombie-driven show” designed to simulate a real-life terrorism event. The firm performed two shows on Halloween, which featured 40 actors dressed as zombies getting gunned down by a military tactical unit. Conference attendees were invited to watch the shows as part of their education in emergency response training. […] According to the firm’s public relations manager, the exercise was brought about “utilizing Hollywood magic,” and setup in a “parking lot-sized movie set [with] state-of-the-art structures, pyrotechnic battlefield effects, medical special effects, vehicles and blank-firing weapons.”
Here’s a video of the Halo exercise (h/t The Examiner):
Why the zombie obsession?
Maybe “zombie” is a code word for something else?
Sure enough, on the eve of the Nov. 6, 2012 presidential election, after Obama exhorted his supporters to “vote for revenge,” a Democrat activist website, RepublicanZombieDefense.com, released a vile “Get Out the Vote” ad in which Obama supporters use machine guns, grenades, garden shears, and chainsaws to maim, behead, and explode — you guessed it — brain-dead zombies.
The zombies are Mitt Romney supporters, i.e., Republicans and conservatives.
And so, now we know why the Obama regime is obsessed with zombies.
The Nazis had dehumanized Jews as vermin and bacillus before exterminating them. Dehumanizing — regarding another as less than or not human — makes it easier to kill that person. After all, we have no qualms killing bugs or worms or chickens or pigs or cows….
Draw your own conclusions as to what it means that the Obama regime and its acolytes dehumanize their political opponents as zombies, and repeatedly fantasize about killing those zombies. ~Eowyn
According to data from the free dating site OKCupid, which The Boston Globe calls “the Google of online dating,” Portland, Oregon, has the distinction of being America’s sluttiest city.
Amy Rolph writes for the seattlepi, August 19, 2011, that OKCupid arrived at this determination by mapping where site users seeking “causal sex” are located. Those numbers were converted to percentages to determine which cities are the most promiscuous.
Here are the top 10 sluttiest cities in America: