Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Reason Morning Links: Poverty Goes Up, ACORN Workers Fall Down, Faith-Based Initiatives Stay Level
• America's poverty rate hits an 11-year high.
• Barack Obama makes Bush's Office of Faith-Based Initiatives his own.
• Cass Sunstein is confirmed as director of regulatory affairs.
• Gun prices skyrocket in Afghanistan as still more election irregularities emerge.
• ACORN fires the two Baltimore employees caught in BigGovernment.com's sting.
• Glenn Beck sics his lawyers on a satirical website.
|9.11.09 @ 9:11AM|#
Cass Sunstein: The Most Dangerous Man In America
Sunstein would ban the eating of meat, hunting, and the private
ownership of firearms. He would grant legal rights to animinals and
allow attorneys for them to file lawsuits.
Xeones|9.11.09 @ 9:16AM|#
• Barack Obama makes Bush's Office of Faith-Based
Initiatives his own.
When i said once that Barack Obama is pretty much just George Bush
with a tan and better PR, i was not kidding.
Tomcat1066|9.11.09 @ 9:17AM|#
Sunstein would ban the eating of meat,
hunting, and the private ownership of firearms.
I guess he'd expect me to get my protein through soy, huh?
It's just a damn shame I'm allergice to soybeans! These tyrannical
jackasses piss me off. They're OK with trying to kill me with
malnutrition (I can only eat so much of other protein sources and
still get the rest of my nutrition) so long as they get to save a
fucking cow? FUCK the cows!
Of course, thanks to my private ownership of guns,
this turdnugget wouldn't have the fucking guts to tell me I should
be allowed to survive because my food allergy is inconvenient to
his agenda.
I fucking hate people.
Aditya|9.11.09 @ 9:24AM|#
Another isolated incident!
http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/09
/11/2009-09-11_dea_storms_wrong_apt_rattles_family.html
|9.11.09 @ 9:25AM|#
Now that Mr. Bush is gone, however, no one seems particularly worried about the entanglement of the federal government with religious organizations.
Or the two unwinnable wars we are involved in.
Sports bar politics. Go team, go!
|9.11.09 @ 9:26AM|#
I guess he'd expect me to get my protein through soy,
huh?
If that's how he gets his, you can bet he has a nice set of
man
boobs.
Tomcat1066|9.11.09 @ 9:29AM|#
Yeah, but the intestinal distress and vomiting that will kick in after eating the soy would make me look more like Lindsey Lohan.
|9.11.09 @ 9:30AM|#
"For aiding and abetting tax evasion, for aiding and abetting child prostitution ... you need the actual crime," said Armstrong, an attorney for Jones Day in New York. "That's what's missing here."
Lots of "internet predators" caught up in stings by 40 year old
male LEOs will be glad to hear that.
|9.11.09 @ 9:43AM|#
For aiding and abetting tax evasion, for aiding and abetting
child prostitution ... you need the actual crime," said Armstrong,
an attorney for Jones Day in New York. "That's what's missing
here.
There's tons of law on the books that says that stings by cops get
around the "actual crime" requirement.
Why wouldn't that apply here?
|9.11.09 @ 9:49AM|#
From the Brickbats:
Massachusetts drivers challenged more than 250,000 traffic
tickets last year. That was apparently too many for the state
legislature, which imposed a $25 fee earlier this year on those who
take their case to court. That fee won't be waived if a driver wins
his case.
Is it wrong for me to be OK with this because it happened in
Massachusetts and they kinda deserve to get screwed by the
government they love so much?
Joe M|9.11.09 @ 9:50AM|#
There's tons of law on the books that says that stings by cops get around the "actual crime" requirement.
Why wouldn't that apply here?
Because cops didn't set up the sting. Only cops can fabricate
pretend crimes fit for prosecution, duh!
cracker|9.11.09 @ 9:55AM|#
ACORN | September 11, 2009, 9:19am | #
Nothing to see here. Move along. Crackers.
Hey Acorn, how would you like your to get your nuts crunched?
John|9.11.09 @ 10:00AM|#
"• Barack Obama makes Bush's Office of Faith-Based Initiatives
his own."
It amazes me how people think the Republicans are the Jesus freak
party. What a crock. The Dems bible thump just as much or more than
the Republicans do.
Corduroy Rocks|9.11.09 @ 10:03AM|#
I find it interesting that Barry Lynn has proven himself to be a partisan hack, now that he has signed on to the OFI.
|9.11.09 @ 10:14AM|#
The head of OIRA is a pretty powerful bureaucrat and can do a
lot to affect policy in all of the administrative agencies.
In any event, I'd respect Sunstein more if he wanted to arm animals
rather than disarm people.
Odd how the left can appoint its wackos to these positions. I know
the right does some of the same, but I can't recall this many
people with extreme viewpoints getting appointed. Maybe the
occasional Creationist (or, just as likely,
unwilling-to-publicly-support-evolution-ist), but not anything
politically crazy, like, say, a libertarian.
Rich|9.11.09 @ 10:16AM|#
The government defines poverty as an annual income of
$22,025 for a family of four, $17,163 for a family of three and
$14,051 for a family of two.
The current calculation sets the poverty level at three times the
annual cost of groceries.
Interesting definition. No wonder they're looking to change it.
Jordan|9.11.09 @ 10:18AM|#
Barack Obama makes Bush's Office of Faith-Based Initiatives his own.
Paging shriek! Why aren't you here to lecture us about
Christfags?
|9.11.09 @ 10:20AM|#
By the way, Beck may have a legitimate defamation claim. I've
already seen an e-mail chain that suggests that Beck did rape and
murder some girl without reference to the site. If a court were to
find "actual malice" in spreading false information about Beck, I
think the author is in trouble.
Usually, parody is sufficiently over-the-top or so clearly parody
that this sort of claim won't go anywhere. Here, I suspect, there
may have been a real attempt to spread a false rumor. Not a good
idea, if true.
|9.11.09 @ 10:22AM|#
I remember seeing mention of the Beck thing on 4chan a few weeks ago. I figured it started there, not Fark.
TEA Party is tomorrow|9.11.09 @ 10:24AM|#
Are you becoming increasingly fed up and disgusted with our
insane, out of control, irresponsible, corrupt federal
government?
If so, attend the Taxpayer March on Washington tomorrow. Details
and agenda can be found at
http://912dc.org
|9.11.09 @ 10:25AM|#
• Barack Obama makes Bush's Office of Faith-Based
Initiatives his own.
Isn't that what his health care proposal is? It doesn't have any
basis in rational thought or objective reality.
Ranilen|9.11.09 @ 10:33AM|#
Saw a lot of the Glenn Beck thing on Reddit a few days back. I have to say, while I don't think going after them with a lawyer is the right answer (morally or legally), I have a hard time seeing the "satire" value of page after page of photoshopped arrest records etc. saying someone is a rapist and murderer.
Invisible Finger|9.11.09 @ 10:41AM|#
Isn't that what his health care proposal is? It doesn't have
any basis in rational thought or objective reality.
That's why his campaign message was "hope" (not unlike Bush I)
instead of "Intelligence" or "Reason".
|9.11.09 @ 10:52AM|#
I have to say, while I don't think going after them with a
lawyer is the right answer (morally or legally), I have a hard time
seeing the "satire" value of page after page of photoshopped arrest
records etc. saying someone is a rapist and murderer.
If someone is posting falsified documents claiming you are a rapist
and a murderer, why wouldn't suing them for libel and/or slander be
the right thing to do morally and legally? It strikes me as a
crystal clear example of when libel/slander law can and should be
used.
Ranilen|9.11.09 @ 10:57AM|#
If someone is posting falsified documents claiming you are a
rapist and a murderer, why wouldn't suing them for libel and/or
slander be the right thing to do morally and legally? It strikes me
as a crystal clear example of when libel/slander law can and should
be used.
I guess I'm just a little weirded out that they've forced me into a
position where I'm defending Glenn Beck ;p.
|9.11.09 @ 11:20AM|#
Can't speak for the chain letter but the name of the website is asking a question, not making an accusation.
|9.11.09 @ 11:27AM|#
TrickyVic,
I doubt that putting it in the form of a question will help. After
all, there is no question--this was made up out of whole cloth and
can be traced to a joke made about someone else. A joke or clear
parody would likely be protected, but if the intent was to spread
misinformation, then there's likely enough to justify a case.
Most likely, this will just get settled, of course.
|9.11.09 @ 11:31AM|#
Most likely, this will just get settled, of
course.
Don't forget the part where the site's creator rockets to stardom
and gets his own cable news show, handbag line, or both.
|9.11.09 @ 11:34AM|#
Fame. Nien! It's mine! Is just his line
To bind your time, it drives you to crime
|9.11.09 @ 11:46AM|#
the beck thing is completely stupid. First, the same people that think it is free speech now, would be perfectly happy to see the Secret Service jail someone who did the same thing to the Obamasiah. If such a site existed, it would be listed in the MSM as an example of right wing hate and why everyone not on board with the Obamasiah needs to be put in a reducation camp. And lastly, it is not funny. To use the defense of satire in defense of a libal suit, you ought to have to at least be kind of funny.
Michael Ejercito|9.11.09 @ 12:36PM|#
Or the two unwinnable wars we are involved in.
The war is unwinnable... for the Al Qaeda sand Nazi terrorist
nithings.
|9.11.09 @ 12:37PM|#
"""I doubt that putting it in the form of a question will
help."""
I would think accusation versus inqury would be a central issue at
trial. The guy who owns the website claims he's not accusing Beck
of anything but would like Beck to answer the question. His intent
is not to defame Beck, but to use Beck's own tactics against
him.
Besides Beck would have to prove how he is harmed, and didn't
SCOTUS just make that tougher to do not long ago. Beck could get a
boost in ratings ranting about this guy, if so, Beck's defamation
claim would be laughable.
|9.11.09 @ 12:41PM|#
"""The war is unwinnable... for the Al Qaeda sand Nazi terrorist
nithings."""
They don't need to win, they just need to keep us from winning.
Which is not real tough to do for the home team.
Mike M.|9.11.09 @ 1:33PM|#
By the way, where is that gosh diddly darn Osama Bin Laden,
anyway?
Lefties and media types used to love needling Bush by asking this
question. Oddly, it doesn't seem to get asked all that much these
days.
!|9.11.09 @ 2:06PM|#
By the way, where is that gosh diddly darn Osama Bin Laden,
anyway?
In the basement of the Alamo.
Jesse Walker|9.11.09 @ 2:57PM|#
Re: Glenn Beck: The purpose of the site is to mock the style of
argument that Beck has brought to his discussions of Obama's birth
certificate and similar issues. You may or may not find it funny
and you may or may not agree with the point being made, but I think
it's pretty clear that they're engaged in satire, and not actually
suggesting Beck committed such a crime.
Re: Cass Sunstein: I'm glad he's in, because I think anyone else
Obama would have nominated for the job would be far worse. See
Julian Sanchez's comments here.
Michael Ejercito|9.11.09 @ 3:41PM|#
They don't need to win, they just need to keep us from winning. Which is not real tough to do for the home team.
That must be what kept the Romans from conquering the Gauls.
|9.11.09 @ 3:52PM|#
If your point is that is was tougher for them as a home team, big deal. There are far more examples in recent history that proves my point.
|9.11.09 @ 3:58PM|#
Besides, Europe is not that big, the Romans were not that far
from home. They were in their neighbors yard.
The mighty British empire couldn't defeat the colonies back in the
late 1700s.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245