Reason Morning Links: Postmillennial Edition

The latest from Reason.tv: "Alan Bock, rest in peace."

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • J[o]h[nn]y L[o][n]gt[o]rs[o]||

  • Mango Punch||

  • Eric Holder||

    We'll just see about that.

  • J[o]h[nn]y L[o][n]gt[o]rs[o]||

  • J[o]h[nn]y L[o][n]gt[o]rs[o]||

  • Grateful||

    Wow! Even more links. Thanks, Johnny!

  • J[o]h[nn]y L[o][n]gt[o]rs[o]||

    I live to serve.

  • Debby Boone||

    Fuck.

  • Susan Carpenter||

    This must be Monday. At least it's not raining.

  • Karen Carpenter||

    Stop trying to steal my songs, bitch.

  • Karen Carpenter's Brother||

    Get back in the box, bitch! I'd have been the famous one, if it hadn't been for those meddling kids....

  • Shaggy||

    Zoinks! Like, it's a bunch of ghosts, Scoob! Let's get the fuck outta here!

  • Scoob||

    Roh-Kay!

  • Amakudari||

    Wilkes states that the coverage of the [Mormon sex in chains] case "cheered Britain up no end."

    Nicely played, Britain. +1

  • Madison, WI||

    A rally protesting the [Indiana] decision is scheduled for Wednesday at the Statehouse.

    Meh.

  • ||

    Homemade dams on the Mississippi.

    That's gotta be against at least 5 regulations. TEAR EM DOWN, NOW.

  • proegg antichicken||

    fine the builders, put a lien on their wages, shoot their dogs. Business as usual.

  • ||

    No tear gas? How about some APC/Tank action?

  • Mango Punch||

    Does SWAT have Amphibious Assault Vehichles? Because they should.

  • free2booze||

    F that. This is the 21st century, it's about time that gets with the program

  • Warty||

    Maybe the tornado was the rapture. This is very possible, because none of my heathen family in Joplin got raptured up.

  • Nomic||

    Yep. The Rapture did happen. Nobody made the cut. Heaven's a ghost town with silver tumbleweeds rolling through the golden streets on the saffron breeze.
    Sea level rise? Jesus crying 'cuz he knew what was gonna happen.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Now that we got the Rapture out of the way and apparently none of us were worthy, any bets on the anti-Christ?

    Barack? Vladmir Putin? Katy Perry?

  • Platypus||

    Lady Gaga.
    It's gotta be. I can totally see her riding a 10-horned, seven-headed beast.

  • Restoras||

    Yes but what will she use for transportation?

  • Barely Suppressed Rage||

    Zing!!

  • JimBob||

    How did you know what I nicknamed my penis?

  • The Other Kevin||

    The rapture did happen for the Macho Man. RIP.

  • STEVE SMITH||

    DON'T MENTION RAPTURE. STEVE SMITH HAD SEX WITH EPI AND HE NOT SEEN SINCE AND RATHER'S FRIEND STILL IN TEARS

    http://rctlfy.wordpress.com/20.....id-you-do/

  • proegg antichicken||

    Huh? I thought epi and steve smith were roommates. Isn't it understood that Epi's gentle rape of Steve is what is keeping us safe?

  • STEVE SMITH||

    NOT AN ANIMAL. EPI HAVE NICE WARM MOUTH BUT STEVE SMITH NOT TURN BACK ON EPI. ME HORNY, NOT CRAZY

  • Warty||

    You do a terrible STEVE SMITH, rectal, you idiot whore.

  • STEVE SMITH||

    YES, RECTAL TERRIBLE WHEN STEVE SMITH DO RECTAL. STEVE SMITH RATHER STICK DICK OUT OF CAVE AND TRY TO RAPE WORLD THAN RAPE RECTAL FAT GAPING HOLE.

  • STEVE SMITH||

    STEVE SMITH LYING :-(
    HE DREAM OF RATHER'S TIGHT ASS HE SAW ON HER BLOG AND HE WORRIED EPI WILL CHARM RATHER WITH HIS KNOWLEDGE OF GOURMET FOOD HE LEARNED AS WAITER AT OLIVE GARDEN.

  • rather||

    princess warty, what part of incif do you not get?

  • Rich||

    [Professor Craig Bradley,] a Fourth Amendment expert at the IU Maurer School of Law in Bloomington said ... “The Supreme Court’s decision means that we can’t allow people to take the law into their own hands. The law should not allow people to assault police whenever they claim that they ‘thought’ the entry was illegal. If the defendant thought the police officer’s entry into his home was illegal, he has plenty of opportunities to raise that issue through the court system."

    Wow. Just wondering what a Fourth Amendment *non*-expert might say.

  • West Texas||

    Or the cops could just be sure that they're following the law themselves before barging in.

  • Blackstone||

    All this rolling over is getting painful.

  • Fluffy||

    The law should not allow people to assault police whenever they claim that they ‘thought’ the entry was illegal.

    Um, OK, that's fine, douchebag.

    It should only allow them to do so when the police conduct is actually illegal.

    So if you roll the dice on resistance and you're wrong, you lose. But if you're right, you win.

    The police "will have many chances to dispute your conduct" using the legal system. Right?

  • mr simple||

    Does the paper seek out the statist to apologize for state abuses of power or is this endemic to law academia?

  • Jozef||

    The rapture did happen. Jesus did come down, looked around and decided that we fully deserved each other and left without taking anybody with him.

  • Nomic||

    Sorry dude, didn't see your comment before posting mine.

  • MNG||

    After Obama's humbling at AIPAC we can look forward today to Congress laying on its back, showing Bibby their collective belly and promising more billions of aid and embarrasing Security Council vetoes to come regarding keeping the Palestinians in a proper refugee camp status for decades more.

    Has history ever seen a great power more in thrall to a tiny beneficiary as in this case?

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    And what, pray tell, is your solution?

  • ||

    Cut off all aid and tell the rest of the world that from now on we are minding our own business?

  • ||

    If only we would...*sigh*

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    As long as minding our own business includes keeping our mouths shut when Israel glasses enough of the desert to provide a buffer zone against being pushed into the sea, that seems pretty reasonable.

  • MNG||

    Make our aid and support contingent on them doing what we ask? Like stopping the settlements and returning to peace talks with the goal of a viable and autonomous Palestinian state beside a safe Israel (this will require going back to something like the internationally recognized 1967 pre-war grab borders).

  • free2booze||

    That's right. When it come to foreign aid, Uncle Sam is the pimp, and the recipient is the bitch.

    She needs to start shakin' that ass, and earn her keep.

  • ||

    And what would you do to force the Palestinians to actually agree to peace? It takes two sides to make peace. By your logic, why not just bomb Israel into submission. They seem to be entirely at fault for the situation. I never heard you once on here admit the Palestinians bear any responsibility for the conflict.

    We are bombing Libya, why not Israel? Aren't drastic measures worth it if they produce peace? And if that is not the proper course of action, why do anything if the Palestinians are going to keep making war no matter what the Israelis agree to?

  • Fluffy||

    By your logic, why not just bomb Israel into submission.

    So what you are saying is that if we don't want to give them aid, we should bomb them? Those are the two choices?

    I would be vastly less interested in what Israel does with its time if they got no aid and if we didn't strut around declaring them our bestest friends ever all the time.

  • proegg antichicken||

    Those are the two choices?

    Seems that way. Cutting Aid Israel = wiping them off the face of the Earth. If the response to Obama's '67 border comment is any metric he may as well have called for a second holocaust.

    What is with this country's rabid pro-Israel position? Is it just a political football or do we really support their belligerent pushing and shoving game?

  • MNG||

    The Right used to have an Anti-Semitic problem. It is also very anti-communist. Israel was seen as a Cold War ally. So combine that with wanting to get rid of the old anti-semite stink and throw in the Biblical connection and you can pretty much explain the fanatical support for Israel in the US.

  • ||

    You miss the point. We also give the Palestinians billions in aid. No one ever seems to want to force them to do anything.

    If you want to cut both of them off, you will get no argument from me. But when you do, please shut the fuck up about how Israel treats the Palestinians.

  • free2booze||

    Wait... if the United States and Hamas, both give aid to the Palestinians, doesn't that make the US a state sponsor of terror?

    Does this mean we get to freeze the bank accounts of the President, and every member of congress? We may have to use drones to take out their leaders.

  • ||

    I think our aid goes to FETA or whatever it is. Arafat's old outfit that is still running the West Bank. Hamas only runs Gaza.

  • Fluffy||

    That works for me, with two conditions.

    First, there is an active pro-Israel lobby in the US. If aid was stopped, that lobby would no doubt devote a lot of time and energy to getting aid started again.

    I would want to devote just enough time to keeping track of what Israel did to be able to oppose that lobby.

    Second [partially implied in #1], we all have to agree among ourselves that it's permissible to state the obvious fact that there IS an active pro-Israel lobby in the US. The complete and utter irrationality and gall of having public organizations that openly state that they are designed to influence US policy in a pro-Israel way, but having those same people lose their shit if anyone ever points the existence of these groups out, really cannot be borne. "It's antisemitic to claim that AIPAC influences US policy!" creates nearly as much rage-against-annoying-bullshit-statement in me as "You can't prove that the Bible didn't happen" and we can't possibly have rhetorical peace on the internet while people are still saying that.

  • ||

    Okay, as long as you say the same thing about CAIR and La Raza. The problem is not the standard. The problem is that some people only want to apply the standards when Israel is involved.

  • ||

    And no bitching and moaning when Israel does exactly what any other country whose existence is threatened would do. Americans complaining about Israel's actions is the height of hypocrisy. Just imagine what we would do if Mexico started rocketing San Diego and Mexicans started blowing themselves up in shopping malls. Our reaction would be far more severe than anything Israel has done. Yet, Israelis are supposed to die for peace and so people like you can feel better. I can't blame them for telling you to fuck off.

  • MNG||

    But they don't tell us to fuck off, they tell us to fuck off and keep asking for checks and diplomatic support.

  • Shorter MNG||

    Oh, yeah - JOOOS!!

  • Fluffy||

    Just imagine what we would do if Mexico started rocketing San Diego and Mexicans started blowing themselves up in shopping malls.

    ^No to this part.

    The standard shouldn't be "What would Americans do?" but "What would Fluffy do?"

    Because if Mexicans started blowing themselves up in shopping malls and Michelle Bachmann got herself named Chief Head Honcho Mexican Internment Camp Mistress, most Americans would cheer her wildly. But my reaction would be...different.

  • ||

    Yes, Fluffy, I know you would gladly let others die for your principles. Good for you. But rest of us would act pretty harshly under those circumstances.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Internment camp is relevant how?

  • MNG||

    So I can have no opinion on what Israel should do regarding the Palestinians? WTF? You have some strong opinions about world affairs, right?

    I want China to pull out of Tibet and afaik we don't give a cent to China.

  • Fluffy||

    You miss the point. We also give the Palestinians billions in aid. No one ever seems to want to force them to do anything.

    Actually, this brings up an interesting point, John.

    Part of the problem in the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians is that Israel is acting through the mechanism of a state and Palestinians are acting through non-state organizations.

    In the moral conflict between a state and a non-state, it's difficult to remain on the state's side, because the behavior of that state is always properly compared to the innocent among the non-state actors and not the guilty.

    Look at the discussions we have on police conduct in the US. There are lots of criminals out there, and lots of them have guns. But if the police in the US said, "We have this security problem, so we've decided to get in our little SWAT halftracks and go around shooting all gun owners," whose side would you be on, John?

    It would be easier for me to be on Israel's side if Israel was in a dispute with a Palestinian state. Because as long as they aren't - as long as their dispute is with individual Palestinians and non-state Palestinian associations, when they whine about their security problems I don't care. They have to account in a particularistic way for their conduct against every individual inhabitant of Gaza and the West Bank, and they can't do that.

  • MNG||

    The irony of seeing right-leaning anti-government types defend things like Israel's settlement schemes and detainment policies, which are essentially eminent domain and GITMO on steroids, is always darkly funny.

  • ||

    Fluffy, that is crazy. You honestly would side with people who blow themselves up in the middle of grade schools because they are a "non state actor"? And the Palestinians are a state. Hamas and Fetah are just as much of a government as any other state. If you don't believe me, look up sometime how they oppress the fuck out of their own population.

    How in the world can you conclude that they are not state actors? They have land and a government that has pretty much a monopoly of violence over that territory.

  • MNG||

    Perhaps he has troubling differentiating between a suicide bomber blowing himself up in the middle of a grade school and a jet dropping a bomb in the middle of one.

    "Palestinians are a state. Hamas and Fetah are just as much of a government as any other state."

    That's utterly laughable. A state that doesn't control its own borders, a state where the IDF regularly intrudes via raids, a state where its neighbors collects its border fees for it, etc.

    But if you think I'm going to defend Fatah or Hamas, I'm not. They are murderous thugs.

  • ||

    "But if you think I'm going to defend Fatah or Hamas, I'm not. They are murderous thugs."

    No you just think Israel should give away their security in hopes they somehow become something that they are not.

    How about this idea, we tell the Palestinians, we will force the Israelis to make peace the day they come up with a government that is not a bunch of murderous thugs bent on the destruction of Israel?

    And they are absolutely a government. How can they not be? They throw people in jail, the oppress their population. If you don't think they are a government, I would encourage you to go to Gaza sometime and break the law. Good luck with that. And isn't the whole point of your "land for peace" deal giving the Palestinians a state? How do you do that if you don't recognize their government?

  • MNG||

    I don't think Israel gives away its security by doing the right thing and giving the Palestinians their land back and a shot at an autonomous state. They've denied them this for decades and it hasn't exactly led to peace, why not try it?

    As for the Palestinains I'm not shocked that so many of them (but as I said, not a majority) support thugs like Hamas. If you keep smacking Martin Luther King around you get support for Malcom X.

    I'll ask you to do what I find is the hardest thing for a conservative to ever do: put yourself in someone else's shoes. If you were a twenty year old Palestinian who has been told that the IDF took your familial land away, that has to undergo the humiliation of check points, restricted movement, forced movement, being walled off, seeing thousands of people killed, and you see that people who try to negotiate in good faith with Israel like Abbas get regularly humiliated, you'd likely find Hamas attractive, wouldn't you? At least they seem to want to stand up and fight to some extent, and if that's all you have...It would be a better world if more Palestinians had other viable options than those thugs, but what have they now?

  • sevo||

    MNG|5.23.11 @ 10:40AM|#
    "I don't think Israel gives away its security by doing the right thing..."

    As if you'd have a clue as to what that was.

  • MNG||

    It's the right thing to keep land taken by force? Hm, I'll remember that in our future discussions, thanks sevo!

  • ||

    When have the Israelis ever engaged in the kind of indiscriminate targeting of civilians that the Palestinians do MNG? As you say "citation please"

    And the Gladstone report doesn't count. It has been renounced by its author. So don't bring that up. Show me where Israel has ever engaged in suicide bombing or the specific targeting and killing of unarmed civilians.

  • MNG||

    I don't know about specific targeting of civilians (unless you want to count some of the massacres in Lebanaon, but they seem to have more facilitated these), but their use of overwhelming force in, say, the last Gaza war certainly killed many, many schoolchildren.

  • sevo||

    MNG|5.23.11 @ 10:42AM|#
    ..."but their use of overwhelming force in, say, the last Gaza war certainly killed many, many schoolchildren"

    Cite missing.

  • MNG||

    Here you go Captian Pedant!

    http://www.independent.co.uk/n.....83877.html

    The first detailed casualty figures from an Israeli human rights organisation since the war ended puts the number of children under 16 killed in the offensive at 252 as opposed to the 89 cited by the military.

  • sevo||

    Cite provided.

  • Fluffy||

    You honestly would side with people who blow themselves up in the middle of grade schools because they are a "non state actor"?

    No, you don't get it at all.

    Because the Palestinians have no state, it doesn't matter how many Palestinians blow themselves up in elementary schools as long as there is one Palestinian who doesn't do that.

    Because as long as there is one Palestinian who doesn't do that, I can be on that guy's side against the state which is behaving tyrannically towards him.

    Since Israel is a state and that individual Palestinian is not, I get to evaluate the relationship between that state and that individual using the same methodology I would apply to any interaction between a state and an individual under its jurisdiction or quasi-jurisdiction.

  • Fluffy||

    They have land and a government that has pretty much a monopoly of violence over that territory.

    No they don't.

    Israel enters and leaves the territories at will.

    It's a lot closer to a state than it used to be, that's true. But it's still not a state.

  • ||

    We enter Pakistan at will and bomb the shit out of people Fluffy. Is Pakistan not a state? Just because a stronger neighbor violates your sovereinty doesn't mean you are not a state. Hamas and Gaza not being a state will come as a hell of surprise to not just Hamas but also the 1000s of people in jail there.

  • James C Bennett||

    This.

    The government is just the most powerful gang in a particular territory. Hamas and Fetah are the most powerful gangs in their portions of Palestinian territory. Ergo, they are the government.

  • proegg antichicken||

    God-king proegg would definitely cut off Israel and Palestine. Funding both sides of a conflict makes little sense. They need to learn how to share the sandbox.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Cut them both off. Then stop bitching when Israel acts like any other country would in the same situation.

  • Joe M||

    No, we can give aid AND bomb them; see Pakistan.

  • MNG||

    Certainly we have to have conditions on the Palestinian state as well, aid to them should be contingent on keeping the peace with Israel. Furthermore, I've long supported here proportionate military responses by Israel to attacks by militants. The US should continue to support that if it needed.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    Like stopping the settlements and returning to peace talks with the goal of a viable and autonomous Palestinian state beside a safe Israel (this will require going back to something like the internationally recognized 1967 pre-war grab borders).

    Ah. So your solution is to pretend the world is different than it really is. Fair enough.

  • MNG||

    The world is the way it is in some part because of our decisions and actions. Changing the latter can impact the world.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    Taking away land which would make it much easier to attack Israel and cut it in two would impact the world, that's for sure. As would forcing negotiations when the goal of one party is to eradicate the other party.

  • MNG||

    It's absurd to think given Israel's military might that some land switches are going to mean its demise. Further, are you advocating that Israel should, contrary to all international understanding on the topic, get to keep land it gained via force because it fings it strategic? WTF? And thirdly, I guess you are unaware that the leadership of the West Bank for example has accepted Israel's right to exist long ago. But hey, keep spinning!

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    Google "strategic depth" and do some reading.

    What you propose is likely to result in the opposite of what you claim to expect, but that's not surprising.

  • Anti-American||

    Please put MNG in charge of your next war. He has a fine strategic mind.

  • SIV||

    Something final no doubt.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    regarding keeping the Palestinians in a proper refugee camp status for decades more.

    As most of the refugee camps are outside of Israel, they have more to do with Jordan, Egypt, and Lebanon than they do with Israel.

    Oh, and JOOOOOOSSSSSSS!!!

  • ||

    The Jew are magical to the Western Leftist. They control everything and are responsible for all the world's suffering.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    They control everything and are responsible for all the world's suffering.

    This would usually be the part where I make a tasteless "solution with a measure of finality" joke. I don't feel up to it.

  • MNG||

    This is a funny meme. Historically the Right had a serious anti-Semitic problem. Now it's rabidly Israel in an overcompensation mode. When "Western Leftists" criticize Israeli policy the Right sees a chance to compensate some more by calling them anti-Semitic. This is funniest when they are attacking actual Jews for being anti-Semitic in criticizing Isreal.

  • ||

    Because communist and leftist states were never Anti-Semitic. It must be great being a liberal and just rewriting history to fit your fantasies.

  • MNG||

    I don't live in a communist or formerly communist state John. In the US it was the Right that traditionally had an anti-Semitic problem. Hell, even WFB would have agreed with such a statement.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    the US it was the Right that traditionally had an anti-Semitic problem.

    MNG: Because questions won't beg themselves.

  • ||

    Really? Can you point to Republican or right-wing anti-semetic actions?

    Please try to avoid tying those with national socialist or fascist aims to the right when you do this. While these philosophies can be said to to the right of communism/marxism, they are far to the left of any precept of the right.

  • Zeb||

    Funny. Most of the Jews I know are Western Leftists.

  • MNG||

    This is one of the most inconvienent facts for those running the whole "the Left hates Jews meme." Like I said, the bestest is when the Right attacks some Jewish person for being anti-Semitic.

  • proegg antichicken||

    Bullshit. I know plenty of Jews that hate Jews, well at least two. That's anecdotally significant. American Jews are not necessarily legion with Israel, or supportive of "the zionist state".

  • ||

    Exactly. The Arab world could have absorbed the Palestinians decades ago, but leave them to fester like an old wound as a weapon against Israel and the US.

    Israel should stop building settlements and pull back to the 1967 borders and let the Palestinian state arise. We can all pat ourselves on the back until a war breaks out again.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Yep. Let's partition Judea/Palestine.

    By the by, how's that partition over in Hindustan going? Everybody peaceful and happy over there?

  • Fluffy||

    I agree.

    Ethnic-based nationalism is a failure.

    The only model that ever works is a non-ethnic democratic republic on the US model.

    So let's unite all of "Judea/Palestine" and make it a democracy. WIN!

  • ||

    I'm on to your game, buddy. You just want all those hot IDF girls to emigrate to America.

  • Mr Whipple||

    You just want all those hot IDF girls....

    Damn, not much diesel there.

  • ||

    How is it a failure. Israel is by far the most successful country in the region. If do gooders like you would get your nose out of it, they would do just fine.

    You can't have it both ways fluffy. If you want to cut off aid to Israel, fine. But cut it off to the Arab states as well and shut the fuck up about Israel treats the Palestinians and let them work it out or fight it out or whatever they want to do. You can't just care when the Jews win.

  • Fluffy||

    It's a failure to the extent that in the long run ethnic-based states end up in perpetual petty conflicts with their neighbors and with internal minorities.

    As you point out elsewhere in the thread, EVEN EUROPE is still suspect in this regard.

    Ultimately, the real problem with the US concept of Manifest Destiny is that we stopped it at the Pacific. The US model is infinitely extendible and we really should have kept extending it.

  • ||

    Every state is a failure to the extent that they end up in perpetual petty conflicts with their neighbors and with internal minorities.

    Fixed it for you. The US has spent its entire history in conflict with its neighbors and working through problems with internal minorities. We have dealt with those problems true. But no state, not even the US, avoids them.

  • MNG||

    "But no state, not even the US, avoids them."

    Well, we could deal with them by putting our ethnic minorities behind a walled, embargoed area like some nations I can think of...

  • ||

    "Well, we could deal with them by putting our ethnic minorities behind a walled, embargoed area like some nations I can think of..."

    Actually now that you mention it, we did show up on land that wasn't ours and the natives were pissed off about it and refused to join our society and kept massacring our civilian population. And if I am not mistaken that is exactly what we did. They are called Indian reservations. Look it up sometime.

  • MNG||

    Yes, and it was horribly immoral, right? I'd like to think something has been learned in the past four centuries about taking land via force.

  • nekoxgirl||

    "They are called Indian reservations. Look it up sometime."

    So Indians aren't allowed to leave the reservations? Gee, and they seemed so happy making money off tourism the last time I was in Cherokee. Little did I know I could at any moment have been blown up by a suicide bomber determined to destroy me in the name of the Great Spirit.

  • nekoxgirl||

    "The US has spent its entire history in conflict with its neighbors and working through problems with internal minorities."

    Really, because I don't recall us ever having issues with Canada and last I checked, Latinos weren't firing missiles at us or strapping bombs to themselves and blowing up our buildings.

    Yeah, what's going on in Israel is totally normal.

  • T||

    Wait, Fluffy is arguing for the American Empire? Did I fall down the rabbit hole when I wasn't looking?

  • Fluffy||

    Not exactly.

    My problem with, say, the occupation of the Phillipines was that we took that territory over and tried to run it as a colony.

    If when we had taken it over we had run it the same way we ran the Louisiana Purchase territories and the land taken from Mexico, that would be a different kettle of fish.

  • T||

    Gotcha. In the Phillipines example, they become the 51st state and get reps and senators and taxation and all the rest. If you're going to take it over, integrate it in the existing polity using the existing structures.

    Probably still would have failed, but for different reasons.

  • guy in the back row||

    So we need to make Israel and Paletine the 51st and 52nd states. Problem solved!

  • Mike M.||

    Ultimately, the real problem with the US concept of Manifest Destiny is that we stopped it at the Pacific. The US model is infinitely extendible and we really should have kept extending it.

    Isn't that pretty much exactly what we're trying to do in Iraq? This sounds like the George W. Bush foreign policy to me.

  • MNG||

    Do the Palestinians want to be 'absorbed' into the Arab world?

  • ||

    Do the Palestinians want to 'stay' in refugee camps?

  • MNG||

    What they seem to want is to have control over the territory they had before the 1967 war.

  • ||

    Of course that's what they want. And so they manufacture a miasma of human misery to leverage sympathy for their cause, and Lebanon, Egypt, and Jordon are happy to help.

    Going on a hunger strike is not the same thing as a prison starving you.

  • MNG||

    Who manufactures the miasma? The Occupied Territories have their borders controlled by Israel. It's Israel that controls their export/import, Israel that builds in their people's fields demolishing their homes and businesses, Israel that regularly raids the area. This could largely explain the incredible poverty, unemployment and such, no?

  • ||

    I'm for giving them back the land. Let them have it. Let them build a state. Stop funding them both.

    Just don't whine when the war breaks out.

  • MNG||

    I agree with this. Once they have a viable state then they have to be grown ups.

  • Zeb||

    Isn't most of the Palestinian population under 30? For most of them, "they" had nothing before 1967.

  • MNG||

    Like most poor nations they are mostly kids. But of course they have relatives who can take them on a walk and point to an area across a barbed wire topped wall and say "that used to be where we lived, right there."

  • guy in the back row||

    Aren't there Jews who could say the same about places in Jordan? It was all partitioned and the groups were suppose to go to their prospect corners.

  • Mike M.||

    What they seem to want is to have control over the territory they had before the 1967 war.

    Do they want a pony to go along with that?

    Give it up already. Seriously, you lefties ought to fantasize about things that at least have a one or two percent chance of happening someday.

  • MNG||

    Like your fantasy of small government?

  • Mike M.||

    If you don't believe in small government, what the heck are you here for other than just to be a trollish asshole?

    And if that's the only reason that you're here, then why don't you just get the fuck on out of here.

  • MNG||

    Don't cry Mike, it's unbecoming in a woman.

  • Shorter MNG||

    Or my fantasy of a world without Jews?

  • Cytotoxic||

    When that territory was used to assault the only moral country in the region, they kind of lost that right.

  • Matrix||

    The only thing the Palestinians will accept is the complete and utter annihilation of Israel.

  • MNG||

    "The only thing the Palestinians will accept is the complete and utter annihilation of Israel."

    And you know this, how?

  • ||

    How dare we take them at their word. How. Dare. We.

  • proegg antichicken||

    So the problem is that they are all macho-blowhards who would rather be beaten and starved than lose their pride. People like that are asking for it.

  • MNG||

    Ah, now we get the collectivization. Hamas says this, but even in Gaza Hamas has never recieved a majority vote of support from the people.

  • ||

    Hamas is in charge and has the weapons you dumb bastard. How is Israel supposed to make peace with a group that wants to kill them?

  • MNG||

    Well, the leaders in the West Bank met this condition a long time ago and they didn't get a state for it...

    I think any plan should be conditioned on Hamas recognizing Israel btw.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Hamas says this, but even in Gaza Hamas has never recieved a majority vote of support from the people.

    You know who else didn't win 51% of the vote but got to run the government anyway?

  • ||

    That is what they keep saying. Why should we not believe them? And more importantly, why should the Israelis not believe them?

    Ultimately people like you and Fluffy expect the Israelis to risk their lives so you can feel better.

  • Fluffy||

    "Ultimately people like you and Fluffy expect the Israelis to risk their lives so you can feel better."

    "Ultimately, people like John want the residents of Philadelphia to risk their lives so that they can feel better."

  • JoshINHB||

    Because they say so.

  • MNG||

    I'm talking about those camps called the Occupied Territories.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    I'm talking about those camps called the Occupied Territories.

    No.

  • ||

    Engaging in a little realpolitik for a moment, the support for Israel makes strategic sense IF we simply must continue meddling in the Middle East.

    And, also, if there's anything embarrassing here, it's in the administration coming up with schemes without consulting with its ally in the region first.

    As long as we continue projecting power around the world, regional alliances are important. That may have the appearance of the tail wagging the dog, but, make no mistake, the dependency of these allies on the U.S. is tremendous. Especially in Israel's case.

  • Creech||

    "And, also, if there's anything embarrassing here, it's in the administration coming up with schemes without consulting with its ally in the region first."

    Why this would be "simpleminded cowboy" behavior which, a letter writer in a recent "Time" assured us was the hall-mark of the last president, not the "thoughtful leader" we have today.

  • ||

    He's emulating his favorite president and role model, George W. Bush.

  • Shorter MNG||

    JOOS!

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Indiana's attorney general pushes back against the state supreme court's recent ruling on unlawful police incursions.

    The Rapture might not have happened, but something did. A attorney general coming out against the creeping toward a police state? What's next, MADD claiming 0.08 is low enough?

  • ||

    I think the Indiana AG is just trying some soothing words following the shitstorm of massive blowback against the SSC decision. Probably won't mean anything. Remember, the police must be protected and served at all costs.

  • ||

    Yeah. I bet it is a dog and pony show and nothing changes. Although it is good that there was a shit storm about the decision. At least people care.

  • free2booze||

    Or he remembered that the next election for Governor of Indiana is in 2012, and Mitch Daniels is term limited.

  • Cytotoxic||

    I agree. I was confused when I read the story I just couldn't comprehend for a minute or two.

  • ||

    British courts try to censor social media.

    After reading this article, it seems clear that the British legal system is doing its best to take Kafka from fiction to reality.

  • George Orwell||

    That seems to be a popular motif these days.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    This story fits into a national pattern of law enforcement going to great lengths to prosecute people who are perceived as serious threats to national security, but who are (for the most part) just people with big mouths and weird lifestyles.

    Former Chicago Tribune reporter Will Potter, author of Green Is the New Red (just published by City Lights), says that after years of looking into these kinds of cases, he's never figured out exactly why the FBI is doing this: "The best explanation I ever heard was from a former FBI agent. She said: 'In the 1980s, it was drugs; in the '90s, it was gangs; and post-9/11, the institutional focus of law enforcement is terrorism.'"

    Potter says, "This case you're looking into sounds like one of the extremes among the extremes." The Bryan/Rick investigation isn't an anomaly—not just a couple of crazy cops on a tear—and Seattle isn't the only community where the FBI and local law enforcement have teamed up to investigate people for what DK Pan's attorney David Whedbee calls "their beliefs and expressive conduct."

    "This has happened quite a bit," Potter says. "I don't mean to be too glib, but if it can't find people committing so-called ecoterrorism, the FBI seems willing to create ecoterrorism and then arrest people for it. It sucks to put it in those terms because it sounds so conspiracy theorist, and I don't want it to sound that way. It's not the norm but it's increasing that the FBI is clamoring for these arrests and is willing to break the law in the process."

    http://www.thestranger.com/sea.....mode=print

    Surely there are green crazies, but I imagine that they are as large a boogieman to those on the right as the militia is to lefties.

  • ||

    I have found that the official PC line on terrorism is that the domestic threats are just as big as the foreign ones. I think people say that because they don't want to admit that the religion of peace may be a problem. I have found it to be generally bullshit. Neither the greenie radicals or the militia types seem to be much of a threat beyond creating a nuisance. Certainly not a threat for a 9-11 scale attack.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Agreed. I have seen FBI terrorist bulletins telling cops to beware those who have Gadsden Flag bumper stickers and to be extra diligent. I have a statist friend who insists that the militia is the biggest threat to America, and tries to interpret every violent event as perpetrated by the militia (including the Giffords shooting).

  • ||

    The only thing they can point to is McVeigh and Eric Rudolph. I am convinced McVeigh was in with the Muslim radicals. Him and the other dipshit couldn't get their bombs to go off until Terry Nichols visited the Philippines and then came back somehow with the knowledge of how to build a proper fertilizer bomb. I also think McVeigh was the designated fall guy for the group. You don't blow up a building and get away with it. Someone needs to go down. And it was awfully convenient that McVeigh's getaway car didn't have a license plate and there was a pistol stuck in the back seat ensuring that he would be arrested if stopped.

  • ||

    Careful John, you lean your head too far over, your tinfoil hijab might come off.

  • ||

    There have always been people uncounted for in that plot. And the circumstances of McVeigh's arrest never made sense. How the fuck do you not have a license plate on the getaway car? Why do you have a pistol and stick it in the back seat where it will get you arrested but is useless to shoot your way out of trouble?

    I think it is entirely possible that the people who were in with McVeigh figured they could do it and let the infidel take the fall. You just leave his getaway car without a license plate and with a pistol in the back seat. Like he is going to notice this after he just blew up a building. Then you make sure that he understands if he ever talks, you will kill his family. McVeigh was a fanatic and an idiot. I could see him figuring the safety of his family was worth taking the needle. And it is not like he was going to get off by talking. He gets pulled over and takes the fall. And the FBI, desperate to make a case, stops investigating once they have him and Nichols.

  • Fluffy||

    The problem with this theory is that these Keyser Sose superMuslims would surely have gone right on blowing shit up and manipulating dumbasses into taking the fall if it was all this easy to do.

  • ||

    Who says it was easy? Finding the right dumb ass is pretty hard. How many McVeigh are there really out there? It was kind of a one shot deal.

  • cynical||

    Didn't they go right on blowing shit up?

  • ||

    http://www.amazon.com/Third-Te.....932&sr=8-1

    John, this is a book by an OKC reporter who was working at the station when the bombing occurred. I couldn't finish the book to find out if she made any conclusions because the whitewash by the FBI was simply too infuriating. There was a "John Doe II" who was seen by several people. The FBI simply ignored it.

  • ||

    I was living in OKC when that happened. Half the damned city saw John Doe II. There were too many people who saw McVeigh with someone who was clearly not Nichols for it not to be true. And once the FBI had McVeigh they had no interest in doing any further investigation. And don't forget Clinton and the DOJ wanted to blame it on Rush Limbaugh. So the last thing they wanted was for their to be anyone else involved.

  • Matrix||

    I'm from OKC. I remember they were looking for a John Doe II that was middle eastern in appearance. Even appeared on some of the CCTV stuff recorded when McVeigh parked the truck. There was someone else with him. But after a few days, there was nothing else mentioned about John Doe II.

  • Creech||

    As I recall, a staffer for Cong. Rohrabacher did an investigation and concluded something wasn't right about the whole McVeigh bombing case. Wonder if that ever went anywhere?

  • The Deep End||

    Paging John.

  • ||

    Interesting counter point to inflation fears today in the WSJ. The guy is not some Krugabe leftist either. Worth reading and thinking about.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/.....TopOpinion

  • Mango Punch||

  • Mango Punch||

    If that doesn't work, a good trick if you don't have a WSJ subscription is to highlight some of the text in the locked article and google search it.

  • CaptainSmartass||

    Paywalls that are that easy to get through seem like they'd actually cost the newspaper money. They still have to pay for their design and upkeep, after all, while getting zero return out of them.

  • NY Times||

    Sounds good to us!

  • JoshINHB||

    That just the establishment creating support for more QE.

    It's just propaganda.

  • Jerry||

  • rather||

    Debbie Boone is already crying about it upthread. Way to maake a girl cry!

  • Slap the Enlightened!||

  • ||

    The Muslims are going to get their dumb asses kicked out of Europe or if their not lucky stuck in ovens. They are so stupid and drunk on their own macho propaganda that they seem not to realize who they are fucking with. The Europeans may seem like whinny, pains in the ass. But when it comes down to it they have perfected the method for and killed more people than anyone else on earth.

  • The European People™ ||

    E U! E U! E U!

  • Crackpot Watch||

    Wow.

  • ||

    YEah I mean it is not like Europe hasn't committed one of the worst genocides in history within living memory or anything. No chance of them ever doing something like that again. Are you really this stupid or do you just pretend to be on the internet?

  • Crackpot Watch||

    Wow again.

  • Crackpot Watch||

    I mean, I didn't know that Germany (you are talking about Germany, aren't you?) was all of Europe. Or that a ruling political party in one country of Europe for about one decade in the 20th century could be a predictor for all of Europe in the 21st. Nice theory, though. Should I invest in industrial incinerators?

  • ||

    Yeah because the Germans were the only ones responsible for the Holocaust. They didn't have any collaborators in Europe. It was just the evil Germans. It is not like every country in Europe, sans the Netherlands, didn't gleefully offer up their Jews for extermination.

    You really don't know much about history do you?

  • Crackpot Watch||

    "The" Holocaust™? I'd say you're the ignorant one. But I don't spend my time arguing with strangers on the internet. Good luck with your neurosis.

  • ||

    Sorry you are an ignorant fuck who can't win an argument and is too stupid to admit when you are wrong.

  • Platypus||

    Dude. Seriously. You can't even be bothered to Google "Vichy France" and you're going to call someone else ignorant?

  • Slap the Enlightened!||

    You forgot about the Soviet Union. Or more recently, Slobodan Milosevic. Or the Spanish Inquisition. Or the American Indians. Or any number of other examples. When it comes to ethnic cleansing, White Europeans wrote the book on it.

  • proegg antichicken||

    White people invented and perfected modern warfare and genocide. Now they just sell their perfected killing technology to the brown people so they can catch up.

  • free2booze||

    To put a positive spin on Muslim genocide at European hands - the Muslim's and the Jews would finally have something in common. It could be the perfect starting point for the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    I didn't think the Europeans had the stomach for mass slaughter anymore. Their primary concerns are state-sponsored vacations and austerity plans.

  • Slap the Enlightened!||

    Wait til they get sufficiently riled up. You'll find out what kind of stomach they have then.

  • Cytotoxic||

    John makes a good point. Europe is seeing a very disturbing rise in xenophobia and racism. It's anti-establishment right now-watch for EU technocrats to adopt a racism-lite immigration and assimilation agenda and then watch things get really ugly.

  • Restoras||

    Well, Europe was the most dangerous place in the history of the world in the 20th Century. They do love they're ethnic/nationalist fuedin'. Oh, yeah, and if you aren't one of them you're first to go.

  • sevo||

    Restoras|5.23.11 @ 9:54AM|#
    "Well, Europe was the most dangerous place in the history of the world in the 20th Century...."

    Not quite. Pretty sure Mao and his followers beat the Euros.

  • Yup||

    Don't tell John.

  • Restoras||

    Really? What was it, 50 million in WW2 alone? Plus however many dide in WW1? Plus Stalin's forced starvation of the Ukraine and his purges?

    Not saying that Mao didn't slaughter millions but I was under the impression that Stalin and Hitler killed more.

  • Almanian||

    Oh, let's not quibble about who killed who how many were killed by whom....this is a festive occasion!

  • SFC B||

    I dunno, the various flavors of Asian communists seem to give the Europeans a run for their money.

    Granted, they didn't go all assembly-line on the process.

    Also, how do you account for Russia in this? Are they European or Asian?

  • Max Stirner||

    Yeah, if we've learned anything from history, it's that at the first sign of economic or immigration trouble, we should elect a reactionary, racist and nationalistic candidate. I know I'm Godwinning and I don't even care. It disgusts me that people could even consider voting for this woman.

  • ||

    People like her succeed only when the political class fails. The ruling class of Europe has been giving the finger to the concerns of average Europeans for a long time. At some point they will turn to someone who will listen to them and promise to address their concerns even if that person if otherwise vile.

  • Fluffy||

    I think it's the opposite problem.

    The political class has been catering to every irrational desire of the average European for several decades.

    Now they can't pay for it, and they want scapegoats and/or think having a sleepover in a public square will magically make money fall from the sky to pay for their shit.

  • ||

    I am not so sure about that. I am not sure the average European benefited from the welfare state as much as leftists over here would like you believe. Welfare is welfare. It is paid for by screwing the productive. And the productive in Europe have been getting screwed worse than even the productive in America have. It is not like the laws of economics somehow work differently or don't apply in Europe. What if we had such a system in America? Would you as a productive person think "gee look at all these goodies" or would you think "look at the taxes I am paying so a bunch of bums cannot work"? Why would Europeans be any different.

  • sarcasmic||

    "It is not like the laws of economics somehow work differently or don't apply in Europe."

    The whole idea of the welfare state is to suspend and repeal the laws of economics.

    The laws of economics aren't fair. They reward success and punish failure. That just isn't fair because those who succeed never deserve it and those who fail do so by no fault of their own.
    This whole life thing just isn't fair.

    That's the purpose of the welfare state: to make life fair.

    The fact that legislation and government fiat cannot really repeal the laws of economics doesn't matter.
    That's results oriented thinking.

    Intentions are all that matter.

  • EscapedWestOfTheBigMuddy||

  • SFC B||

    The laws of economics are the same in America and Europe. But they're in metric in Europe so they look differently.

  • Montani Semper Liberi||

    This story must be a joke. Europeans are so enlightened! Only ignorant rednecks from America can be racist. That is what my liberal friends tell me.

  • Zeb||

    You don't have to spend much time in Europe to find out how racist many people are there.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    In fact, celebrity cover-ups appear to be the primary reason for super-injunctions lately. Earlier this month, an anonymous Twitter user listed a number of actors, TV personalities, athletes, and other celebrities who allegedly obtained super-injunctions in order to keep details about their lives secret.

    "If celebrities didn't want people pawing through their garbage and saying they're gay, they shouldn't have tried to express themselves creatively."

  • ||

  • Everette||

    HAVE TROUBLE FIGURING OUT THE FRONT FROM THE BACK?

    Aren't they basically interchangeable?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    I think I'll just stick with my jorts, if it's all the same to you.

  • ||

    What are you...a never nude?

  • ||

    "There are DOZENS of us!"

  • Atanarjuat||

    There is a toddler version out now too.

  • mr simple||

    Very white trash chic.

  • Platypus||

    Derelicte!

  • mad libertarian guy||

    You saw someone wearing a pair at the tractor pull too?

  • SIV||

    Lingerie fashion blogging is my turf librarian.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Excellent investigative journalism on the drug lord/police state war in Rio's favelas, mixed with the socio-politics of very high profile international sporting events.

    The favelas, Rio's guilty conscience, almost a thousand of them, overlook paradise but never, ever partake. Dense, urban slums with wretched educational opportunities, no social services, no police protection, they exist outside civilized society. Residents who live in the city don't go up the hill. It's possible to live a middle-class life without the violence of the slums affecting one's daily existence. But the violence is always there. In 2010, there were 4,798 murders in Rio. That's about a fourth the number of murders annually in the entire United States. (The U.S. population is about 300 million people. Rio has 6 million.) Favelas are desperate places, and they've been ignored since the first one popped up in 1897. Only now, some of them are close to venues for the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Olympic Games.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn.....110510/Rio

  • Gray Ghost||

    Considering L.A. held the Olympics in '84 and the World Cup in '94, despite the Colosseum being in one of the shittiest neighborhoods right next to gangland, I think Rio will be fine.

    If you're a student of Government's brutality to its citizens, the month prior to the Games though will be something to behold.

  • Barely Suppressed Rage||

    Meanwhile, a Fourth Amendment expert at the IU Maurer School of Law in Bloomington said the decision was sound.

    “The Supreme Court’s decision means that we can’t allow people to take the law into their own hands,” professor Craig Bradley said. “The law should not allow people to assault police whenever they claim that they ‘thought’ the entry was illegal.”

    He went on to say that “if the defendant thought the police officer’s entry into his home was illegal, he has plenty of opportunities to raise that issue through the court system. The risk of harm to both the police and the defendant is too great to allow people to take matters into their own hands.”

    Fuckity fuck fuck.

    What an idiot. So it's ok for the police to assault citizens whenever they claim that they ‘thought’ the entry was legal. I.e., for the police to take the law into their own hands, and be wrong, to the detriment and possibly physical harm to the citizen. But no worries! The citizen can spend a day or two in jail, pay to get bailed out, then file an administrative claim or civil suit (which again costs money) and then wait for justice to slowly take its course and hopefully reach the right decision. Or just get fucked in the ass again when the court find some other cooked-up reason to conclude that the cop acted reasonably and was within the law when he barged in - or that he made an honest mistake, acted in accordance with departmental procedures and we have to give the police the benefit of doubt.

    What if the police make an admittedly unlawful entry, the homeowner doesn't resist, and once inside, the cop shoots the family dog because he claim he ‘thought’ the dog was attacking him?

    Just remember: STOP RESISTING!!

  • ||

    Law professors and judges live in a different world. They have no idea what reality is. When that idiot says "they can get relief through the court system" he actually thinks that means something besides fuck off.

  • MNG||

    If we are to go that route we need to make it more of a reality to get such relief. For example we should make it easier to file false arrest and entry torts and charges against police. And, of course, tough civilian review boards. If we had such things then the Court's ruling wouldn't appear so awful. But we do not.

  • West Texas||

    They don't seem to realize that the risk of being injured or killed is SUPPOSED to be there for the cop and that it acts as an inherent check on the cop overstepping his authority. It's a feature, not a bug. If you eliminate that risk you enable the state to do whatever the fuck it wants to do in the first place, which is kind of the point of the bill of rights in first place: not allowing them to whatever the fuck they want.

    Statists suck. (and are naive)

  • Somalian Road Corporation||

    But if we pass the right laws, eat the right things, and think the right thoughts, we can live forever!

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Jesus. My son is headed to Maurer. But I suppose every law school is full of profs of Bradley's ilk.

  • sarcasmic||

    "What if the police make an admittedly unlawful entry, the homeowner doesn't resist, and once inside, the cop shoots the family dog because he claim he ‘thought’ the dog was attacking him?"

    The cop will get paid vacation leave without pay for several months while attorneys and judges figure out a way to justify the actions of the police.
    In the end the homeowner will be out not only a family pet, but thousands and thousands of dollars in legal bills, with no positive resolution.

    The lawyers always win.

  • Matrix||

    I wonder how they would respond if the cops were out to kill someone... guess they also wouldn't have the right to defend themselves. We'll just let their families settle it in court.

    No... better be judged by 12 than carried by 6 any day of the week!

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Reporter pretends to be a retard.
    (I really don't feel the need to add anything to this.)

  • ||

    Are we sure he's pretending?

  • Barely Suppressed Rage||

    Damn your nimble fingers, man!

  • Barely Suppressed Rage||

    Who says he's pretending? Based on what I've seen, most of them aren't.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    I was willing to participate, but would prefer a disability that didn't entirely wipe out my ability to function as a reporter.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Which, for those of you who don't RTFA, is why he chose retard instead of, for example, deaf guy.

  • proegg antichicken||

    Retards are funny, plus he really wants to lock down his spot in hell. Yeah, that's the stuff.

  • proegg antichicken||

    The article was a huge disappointment. Nothing to see here.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    I report. You decide.

  • evil||

    I report. You take me for ice cream!

  • Somalian Road Corporation||

    hyuk hyuk

  • Almanian||

    Deafness, for example, was clearly out.

    Sure. Cause how could anyone POSSIBLY be a "reporter" if they're deaf? Really, really sorry I wasted those minutes of my life reading this article. That guy is BORING.

    CURSE YOU, CITIZEN NOTHING!!!

    *shakes fist*

  • Citizen Nothing||

    You've been retard rolled.

  • ||

    Oh wow, Those guys clearly seem to know what the deal is.

    www.privacy-online.us.tc

  • Sacre Bleu!||

    In a wholly private education system, who is going to stop large corporations from interfering, or who is going to ensure that the schools are meeting a minimal curricular standard?

  • ||

    This stopped being funny before it even started.

  • T||

    The people paying the bills?

  • Almanian||

    Really? REALLY? Jesus Fucking Christ. Fuck you.

  • Almanian||

    And what I really meant to say was, "Fuck you, SLAVER."

    That is all.

  • Matrix||

    In a wholly public education system, who is going to stop nanny-statist pricks from interfering, or who is going to ensure that the system won't lower the minimal curricular standard because some kids are born losers?

  • prolefeed||

    In a wholly private education food distribution system, who is going to stop large corporations from interfering, or who is going to ensure that the schools food suppliers are meeting a minimal curricular nutritional standard?

    FTFYS (Fixed That For You, Slaver)

  • Sacre Bleu!||

    Food Distribution isn't Education. Although come to think of it, government does provide standards and oversight (labour laws, food safety, etc). Access isn't universal, but there is the means to provide the absolute basic necessities if people can't (or won't - unfortunately) work.

  • Barely Suppressed Rage||

    So I'm wondering whether Harold Camping is going to return all that money from the people who quit their jobs and sent their entire life savings to his Family Radio network.

    I also wonder how many of those people are going to commit suicide over their massive shock of having nothing happen, despite their firm beliefs that they were going to be Raptured.

    Seems to me that Camping creep has fucked up a lot of people's lives. Of course, those people suffer from a profound lack of critical thinking and skepticism. But that doesn't mean they deserve to be taken advantage of by this charlatan fraud.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    He just forgot to convert cubits into meters.

  • STEVE SMITH||

    "CAMPING CREEP" SOUND LIKE FUN PERSON FOR RAPE!! STEVE SMITH WANT MEET "CAMPING CREEP"!

  • T||

    Somebody in my twitter feed pointed out that if his network made business plans for this week, the possibility of a class-action lawsuit winning goes up considerably.

  • db||

    I read an interview with him where he explained there were a significant number of employees at the network who didn't believe the prediction, and so he made plans to continue operations for their sakes. Evidently they have up to a few weeks of material in the can. I think he was attempting to provide a distinction between his responsibility as the creator of the prediction and the network's role as broadcaster. I bet if you looked into it, the net has a corporate structure designed to insulate itself from him.

  • ||

    “We believe however that a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence,” David wrote. “Nowadays, an aggrieved arrestee has means unavailable at common law for redress against unlawful police action.”

    Tell that to Jose Guerena, you ignoramus.

  • Almanian||

    Ditto - what P Brooks said

  • OO||

    GOP frosh take care of districts in defense bill By DONNA CASSATA
    Associated Press
    WASHINGTON (AP) -- Hard-charging Republicans who rallied voters last year with cries of "Stop the spending, ban the earmarks" are quietly offering a more familiar Washington refrain now they're in Congress - not in my backyard.
    >The massive, $553 billion bill providing a budget for the Pentagon boasts millions of dollars that President Barack Obama didn't request for weapons programs, installations and other projects in districts from Illinois to Mississippi represented by House GOP freshmen.
    >The additions look suspiciously like the pet projects that Republicans prohibited when they took over the House and that the new class of lawmakers, many with tea party backing, swore off in a promise to change Washington's spending habits.
    >Heated campaign talk of reining in spending and barring earmarks often cools once candidates get to Congress and face the needs and demands of their districts, especially in times of wobbly economic recovery and a widespread shortage of jobs.

    http://ap.stripes.com/dynamic/.....3-06-28-24

  • sevo||

    OO|5.23.11 @ 10:42AM|#
    "GOP frosh take care of districts in defense bill By DONNA CASSATA
    Associated Press..."

    You're griping since the GOP is doing what you want?

  • WTF||

    You're griping since the GOP is doing what you want?

    No, he's griping because he's an idiot troll.

  • ||

    Meanwhile, a Fourth Amendment expert at the IU Maurer School of Law in Bloomington said the decision was sound.

    “The Supreme Court’s decision means that we can’t allow people to take the law into their own hands,” professor Craig Bradley said. “The law should not allow people to assault police whenever they claim that they ‘thought’ the entry was illegal.”

    He went on to say that “if the defendant thought the police officer’s entry into his home was illegal, he has plenty of opportunities to raise that issue through the court system. The risk of harm to both the police and the defendant is too great to allow people to take matters into their own hands.”

    "Expert" apparently doesn't mean what it used to.

    And we simply cannot allow the unwashed masses to judge for themselves what is or is not legitimate use of force by the police.

    OBEY

  • ||

    Well, it's sad to say... but the STEVE SMITH running joke is finally dead.

    STEVE SMITH is dead, long live STEVE SMITH.

  • proegg antichicken||

    Is it because rather touched it?

  • Amakudari||

    It is a sad day.

  • Yup||

    It died about five years ago.

  • ||

    So if you roll the dice on resistance and you're wrong, you lose. But if you're right, you win.

    And it's just a total coincidence that the "civilian's" judgement is ALWAYS WRONG.

    It's truly awe-inspiring to think a "legal scholar" (teaching at a large university law school) thinks the Fourth Amendment REQUIRES a civilian to allow the police to enter his home at any time for any reason.

  • ||

    Some Limey Keynesian is Bloomberg right now, ranting about how "austerity" is a failure; he apparently thinks the new IMF chief needs to shovel money to the Greeks and Portuguese and Spaniards.

  • ||

    who is going to ensure that the schools are meeting a minimal curricular standard?

    As opposed to *now*?

    Oddly enough, the education system was more successful *before* the imposition of top-down curriculum requirements. But don't let that stop you.

  • Sacre Bleu!||

    But of course you couldn't back that up with any actual evidence or you would have.

  • JimBob||

    Honestly, I think that "evidence" is the major problem when it comes to education.

    Most people seem to think that standardized testing is a woefully inadequate tool for measuring student or teacher performance-- cheating is widespread, lots of instructors "teach to the test", etc. And there's some validity to that.

    But the other extreme option that people seem to float is allowing principals the unfettered authority to fire any teacher at any time for any reason. Having met more than a few shitbag principals in my life, I think that's just a recipe for a school full of yes-men who follow whatever bullshit the principal decides to come up with.

    So how do we measure student and teacher performance? Seriously. I think that this is the big issue. Do we use peer ratings? Do we allow the students and parents some input on the issue for once? Do we use standardized tests-- but only as a portion of the overall measurement?

    Of course, I realize that privatization obviates a lot of these issues, but I'm asking about a solution that has a chance of actually being adopted somewhere.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    What's the downside of teaching to the test? That the test is too narrow?

    If someone is supposed to come put of the 3d grade knowing, say, 50 things about US history then teaching those 50 things doesn't seem so bad.

    I mean, yeah, it would be nice if some critical thinking could be layered on top of that -- as if most teachers want anything more than regurgitated answers anyway -- but it is my impression that the standardized tests are focused on those 50 things in order to test at least a minimal knowledge of the subject.

  • WTF||

    Having met more than a few shitbag principals in my life, I think that's just a recipe for a school full of yes-men who follow whatever bullshit the principal decides to come up with.

    Of course if the principal is also being held to showing effective results to maintain his job and get raises, like any supervisor in private industry, this problem would also be self-correcting.

  • Amakudari||

    As long as people have unfettered authority to remove their children and money from such a principal's incapable hands, I don't see where the problem lies.

  • Sacre Bleu!||

    I see. But if it's the only school some people can afford?

  • Joe M||

    Mitt Romney Leads Republican Pack, but One-Quarter of Republicans Not Sure Who Their Primary Pick Would Be

    Among Independents, a different person leads the pack - Ron Paul garners 10% of Independents' votes in the GOP primary

    But he's not a "serious" candidate.

  • Cyto||

    Too late in the day for anyone to see it, but here it is anyway: Based on a Freedom of Information Act request, the FAA has released information about the owners of private airplanes that allowed the Wall Street Journal to compile a 'jet setter's database' detailing the movements of private citizens.

    So, what is the difference between this airplane registration information and DMV registration information? Does this precedent lead to FOI requests for automobile registrations and toll road records?

  • Cyto||

    Privacy, how does that work? Article above via slashdot, where a reasonable libertarian technocratic minority goes to get abused by the progressive technorati. ReasonBot doesn't like a third link in a post, so I get the pleasure of responding to myself. Yippie!

  • ||

    What happened to The Old Mexican? Vacation or just tired of trying to explain economics over and over to the same people?

  • ||

    The Gobbler pointed out that Old Mexican disappeared the same time that bin Laden got SEALed!

  • WTF||

    Old Mexican posted a little while back he wouldn't be around so much due to extra work issues.

  • ||

    But of course you couldn't back that up with any actual evidence or you would have.

    Test scores have skyrocketed since the Department of Education took the field, right, Sacre Blow?

  • Sacre Bleu!||

    how were they measured before then?

  • Jordan||

    Irrelevant. Test scores haven't budged since the DoE was established, while per-pupil spending has skyrocketed.

  • Platypus||

    but, by all means, keep throwing money at it!

  • ||

    that's just a recipe for a school full of yes-men who follow whatever bullshit the principal decides to come up with.

  • ||

    Oh, for fuck's sake, squirrels.

    that's just a recipe for a school full of yes-men who follow whatever bullshit the principal decides to come up with.

    I may be crazy, but the remedy for this is having a school board which realizes it works for the taxpayers (and its primary responsibility is to the STUDENTS), rather than for the teachers and administrators.

  • ||

    how were they measured before then?

    In furlongs.

  • Vermont Gun Owner||

    Yes, but what do MNG and John think about Israel?

  • Scruffy Nerf Herder||

    They're obviously not interested in it

  • prolefeed||

    For all we know, the Rapture DID happen, but so few people were good enough to qualify to get killed by a benevolent god that it was indistinguishable from a random small blip up in the missing persons report.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement