Reason.tv: Cops Vs. Cameras: The Killing of Kelly Thomas & The Power of New Media

This video includes graphic images. Viewer discretion is advised.

The autopsy results from the death of Kelly Thomas, a schizophrenic drifter who was allegedy beaten to death by Fullerton, California police will be announced today by Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas. Rackauckas will also announce whether he will file charges against the officers involved in Thomas' death, following the office's investigation. The confrontation with police took place at a municipal bus station on July 5, with Thomas dying in the hospital five days later. This press conference comes weeks after the Fullerton police  refused to answer questions about the case.

Regardless of today's announcements, Thomas' death  is a case study of how ubiquitous phones with cameras and the Internet are transferring power from the government, police, and the media to the masses. Images and word of the beating spread not because of official communications but by viral cell phone video of the incident and a horrific hospital photo taken by his father of Thomas in a coma.

We already know how influential citizen video can be from the 1991 Rodney King beating in Los Angeles. Now that practically everyone has a camera with them on their cell phone or other device, says Michael German, policy counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, it is increasingly difficult for authorities to dictate the flow of information.

“Technology has changed so much that we now carry cameras and recorders on our very person everywhere we go so it is very easy to immediately pull them up and take a video of whatever is happening,” says German.

That is how the Kelly Thomas video was recorded, but it didn’t find its way to the nightly news right away like the Rodney King beating. Ron Thomas, Kelly Thomas’ father, told Reason.tv that after initial interest, the media stopped covering the story.

“Nothing was going on, I tried contacting everybody, nobody cared to do anything,” said Ron Thomas. “So, I released the picture of my son [in his hospital bed] and that got everybody’s attention. When the cell phone video came out, I released that. The audio had their attention again. You put together the picture with the sound of what’s happening is very, very compelling.”

Those images came after the Fullerton police department decided not to release any information, including the names of the officers or even whether Kelly Thomas had a Taser applied to him, a detail that is heard in the video.

Jarrett Lovell, a criminologist at California State University, Fullerton, says the fact Ron Thomas was able to release information before the Fullerton police department‘s public information officer, Sgt. Andrew Goodrich, underscores a shift in power away from authority to citizens. “That the victim’s father, Ron Thomas, was able to release public information before the public information officer from the Fullerton department shows this shift in political power at the local level from police to the citizenry," says Lovell. "Citizens can be the media themselves.”

Lovell has written about the role of public information in his book Good Cop/Bad Cop: Mass media and the cycle of police reform, and points out that the Kelly Thomas case seems to be a case study for what public information officers and what law enforcement agencies, “should not do.” He says that because the Fullerton police department has not gone public with the facts of the case or released the names of the officers, it looks like they have something to hide. “Public information is essential to keep check on government,” says Lovell.

After the photo and video were released, the Fullerton community reacted in outrage at city council meetings and at protests outside the Fullerton police department. Whatever charges are filed (or not) today, the death of Kelly Thomas will remain an example of how new media is changing the old guard.

Written and produced by Paul Detrick, who also narrates. Camera by Detrick, Alex Manning, and Zach Weissmueller. Special thanks to Ron Thomas.

About 8 minutes.

Go to Reason.tv for downloadable versions of this video. Subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel for automatic updates when new content is posted.

Related videos:

You're Killing Me: Was a police-related jailhouse death an accident or a homicide?, August 11, 2011

The Killing of Allen Kephart: How the police lost the trust of a law-and-order town, July 5, 2011.

The Government's War on Cameras, May 26, 2011.

UPDATE:

The Orange County District Attorney's Office has charged Officer Manuel Ramos with one felony count of second degree murder and one felony count of felony manslaughter.

Officer Jay Cicinelli faces one felony count of manslaughter and a felony count of excessive force.

For more on the charges against the officers, check out Mike Rigg's live blog of the press conference.

For developing news on the Kelly Thomas case, visit the Friends for Fullerton's Future blog.

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.

  • Restoras||

    I hope the cops that did this get charged with murder, are found guilty, and sent to prison with the same types of people who just happen to not be cops.

  • ||

    You're clearly a bigot, Restoras. How dare you expect convicted cops to be treated like little people?

    RULE OF LAW!!1!

  • anon||

    It's only really a crime when a black person is beat by the cops. White people beaten to death isn't a crime, it's 'social justice.'

  • ||

    Good point.

  • Mike M.||

    So much this. Outside of Reason, this case got basically no national media attention to speak of. If Thomas had been a black guy, it would have gotten Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman levels of coverage.

  • amelia||

    I have wondered if Thomas will appear in anyone's manger scene next year at Christmas, and I kind of doubt it. I have some proggy friends that have posted about it at FB recently, though.

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    You realize you are replying to a comment that's over two years old?

  • Mike M.||

    It's still as true now as it was two years ago, and I'm not the guy who bumped a two year old post to the top of the Hit n Run blog.

  • Ted S.||

    Somebody needs to tell the H&R editors that it's bad form to bump up an article like this. Just re-embed the video into a new article.

  • SweatingGin||

    The time machine effect is kind of fun.

  • SIV||

    It's fuckin' great.. It would be better w/o threaded comments though.

  • Rhywun||

    What in holy hell...? I've seen them bump old stories up before but not the comments too. It's freaky.

  • BigT||

    Is it like déjà. Vu all over again, Yogi?

  • Sauce||

    You have one out of three anyway, for now.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44.....nd_courts/

  • Latoya07||

    Start working at home with GOOGLE!YAHOO. ABCNEWS AND MORE GLOBAL SITES... It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this - 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, .... http://www.Max47.com

  • Latoya07||

    Start working at home with GOOGLE!YAHOO. ABCNEWS AND MORE GLOBAL SITES... It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this - 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, .... http://www.Max47.com

  • Latoya07||

    Start working at home with GOOGLE!YAHOO. ABCNEWS AND MORE GLOBAL SITES... It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this - 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, .... http://www.Max47.com

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Video recordings of an outrageous incident can spark the appropriate outrage in a way no written or verbal description could possibly do.

    Police departments that are slow to recognize and adapt to increased visual scrutiny of their misdeeds are going to suffer slight annoyance at the fleeting public relations problems they will read about in the back pages of the local papers.

  • ||

    They'll have to adapt and learn to check for cameras before beating someone to death. Not hard at all to detail one officer to look for cameras before you drag a guy behind the car or building to beat him.

  • ||

    "This man clearly died of natural causes."

  • rst||

    Indeed. And Fullerton would be remiss were it not to award those officers medals.

  • ||

    Hey, batons are made of wood and shoes of leather. Completely natural.

  • Fluffy||

    In some ways, the police hatred of cell phone cameras is similar to my hatred of ubiquitous public surveillance:

    They really don't believe that the technical requirements of their jobs are reasonable. They rely on the fact that those requirements aren't routinely imposed on them. The more they are forced to stick to the letter of the requirements of their position, the less tolerable they find it.

    As an example: in almost all instances, 25 MPH speed limits are just too low. I can tolerate the presence of 25 MPH speed limit zones because they aren't actually enforced. I just drive through them at 40 and never get a ticket and never hit anything and everybody's happy. But if you designed a perfect speed surveillance system that always gave me a ticket every time I violated a 25 MPH posted limit, I'd be forced to slow down and actually obey. And that would be simply intolerable, because such limits aren't actually reasonable.

    To the police, always having to have probable cause, and having to limit your use of force, and only being able to apply more force if someone is "resisting", and not being able to use disorderly conduct laws to abuse people who just don't "respect" them enough, and not being able to subtly alter the facts of an incident when testifying in order to fit it into the statutory definition of a particular crime, aren't reasonable requirements. They've tolerated the existence of rules limiting their behavior and providing recourse to citizens only because it was extraordinarily difficult for anyone to actually apply those laws to them. They firmly believe that they won't be able to function if they can't beat up the schizophrenic guy who keeps coming back to commit more petty crimes and never goes away. Or pretend they had probable cause to do a search when they didn't. Or testilie. All these are as necessary to the police as driving 40 in a 25 zone is necessary to me, in their view.

  • ||

    I think that is probably about right. And in the police's defense, they may have somewhat of a point. But, too bad. Perhaps if they had to live by these rules and the public then had to live by those consequences of those rules, we would have a real debate about our criminal procedures and alter them. That is the proper way to do it, not having cops just ignore any rule they don't like.

  • Fluffy||

    Exactly.

    The drug war in particular has created entire categories of crime that require the police to routinely step outside the letter of the law.

    I'm sure if you let me drive around the slums of Baltimore for a couple of hours, I could rapidly figure out who the drug dealers were. But that's not the same as having probable cause that can stand up in court. So if I had to arrest someone by the end of the day, I might look up the most recent case law giving the current working definitions of probable cause, and pretend that I had it. Because in my mind I'd be thinking, "You fucks sent me out here to arrest someone, and I got the right guy, so who gives a shit?"

    But if I was absolutely forced by technology to not do that, the public might get the hint that some of their laws aren't really enforceable in a free society.

    Of course, the danger is that the public will reach the opposite conclusion: that the limits currently placed on police have got to go. And that's a real possibility. If the police were subjected to panopticon surveillance, we might quickly reach a point of outrage fatigue - where video of police beatings and "Respect my authoritah!" behavior became so common that they ceased to shock and became the expected norm. We might not be too far from that post - reading the comments any time a newspaper puts one of these videos up on its site can show you that. There's a portion of the public that sees police beating some guy who's being held down, and says, "Good. Kick that nigger's ass."

  • ||

    I think we would get some outrage fatigue. But here is the thing. The public owns its rights. And it is up to the public to preserve its rights. Yeah, I know the courts are supposed to be above that and can push the envelope a bit beyond what the public wants. But in the end, the public, if it chose to could bring the Courts back in line to what it wants. In the end, the public needs to know and understand what is happening out there. It can then make its own decision. I have faith that the public would chose to put a stop to real abuses if it knew about them. But if they didn't, then tough luck. We get the government and the police force we deserve.

  • ||

    The whole system is designed to be hidden. Give one good reason why police interviews are not taped beginning to end in a black box that can only be opened by a judge?
    Because the public wants the convictions, and doesn't want to know how they were obtained.

  • Heroic Mullato||

    I'm sure if you let me drive around the slums of Baltimore for a couple of hours, I could rapidly figure out who the drug dealers were. But that's not the same as having probable cause that can stand up in court. So if I had to arrest someone by the end of the day, I might look up the most recent case law giving the current working definitions of probable cause, and pretend that I had it. Because in my mind I'd be thinking, "You fucks sent me out here to arrest someone, and I got the right guy, so who gives a shit?"

    This has been the predominate narrative fed to us by media since Dragnet. We've had a whole generation raised exposed to the message constructed by Jack "tough guy who couldn't make it in the military so went back home crying to Momma" Webb,:
    [who] had tremendous respect for those in law enforcement. He often said in interviews that he was angry about the "ridiculous amount" of abuse to which police were subjected by the press and the public. Webb was also impressed by the long hours, low pay, and injury rate among police investigators of the day, particularly in the LAPD, which was notorious for jettisoning officers who had become ill or injured in the line of duty.[9] In announcing his vision of Dragnet, Webb said he intended to perform a service for the police by showing them as low-key working class heroes. Dragnet moved away from earlier portrayals of the police in shows such as Jeff Regan and Pat Novak, which often showed them as brutal and even corrupt. According to one Dragnet technical advisor, when the advisor pointed out that several circumstances in an episode were extremely unlikely in real life, Webb responded, "You know that, and now I know that. But that little old lady in Kansas will never know the difference."

  • ||

    the danger is that the public will reach the opposite conclusion: that the limits currently placed on police have got to go.

    I think TV has already done that for us. Has there been a cop show in the last 20 years where the pure and righteous cop never ran up against a "bad" guy who is protected by those darn civil liberties? 99% of them go-around them to get that guy the audience has been told is guilty. And there's the implication that only the super-cops on TV have the guts to do it, the regular non-super-cops let themselves be restrained by the silly old constitution, written in a language not one understands and has no relevance to the modern world where everything is suddenly black and white.

    Hell, the causal "We need a warrent." "Oh, hey I think I hear someone calling for help. [KICK]" is so commonplace it's a groaning cliche.

    "But those are bad guys," the public thinks. I'm not a bad guy, so whatever happens to bad guys is OK by me."

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    As stated before, my glucose-avoiding friend, you can thank the odious Jack Webb for that.

  • SIV||

    "You're pretty high and far out, aren't you? What kind of kick are you on, son?"

  • SIV||

    Jack Webb, far from being a "square", was a real-life hepcat and used to bang Julie London.

  • SIV||

    Julie London was one of the hottest broads of the mid-20th century.

  • SIV||

  • Mainer||

    Absolutely agree about TV and movies. I literally have to leave the room when my wife is watching one of those cop dramas.

  • Invisible Finger||

    You make it sound like the job is an Amazon Warehouse job or something.

  • ||

    Well said Fluffy.

  • The Hamilton||

    or when they blow me in dark alleys until I spill copious amounts of seed.

  • ||

    In this day and age, why shouldn't every cop be equipped with a small video camera and recording device at all times on duty. You could easily make the camera the size of a lapel pin and the recording device the size of a stick drive. It is what we do with special OPS teams, why not cops? Forget dash cameras. We can have cop cameras. Then there would never be any doubt about what happens. It is very technologically feasible and not that expensive.

  • rst||

    Your idea presumes that the authorities are averse to having doubt about what happens.

  • ||

    Of course they would have a fit over the idea. But tough luck. The idea makes sense.

  • rst||

    In that we certainly agree

  • St. V||

    As I sit here, eating my peanut butter crackers and drinking my mtn dew, I find this idea to be a good one.

  • ||

    Sunglasses, a spill of coffee, a readjusted lapel, a stick drive crushed by a "resisting" "civilian"... the only think that might work is a flying camera hovering right out of baton reach that is also impervious to bullets.

  • ||

    True enough. But it would at least make them take some effort to abuse people. You would only do those things if you really had a good reason to do something. So it would cut down on it some.

  • Joe M||

    Drone cameras! Perfect!

  • ||

    Without video to corroborate, po-po testimony would be inadmissable.

    Problem. Solved.

  • ||

    Stream the video up to a separate server while you are recording.

  • Jerry||

    I dont't think you can get this past the police unions.

  • ||

    Bingo.

  • St. V||

    I would thoroughly enjoy an open debate on the topic in the public sphere. Give me a governor who's willing to stand up to the police union and refuse to budge on the issue, just so I can see how said union tries to debate against it.

  • ||

    How worse could it be than the NYPD PBA President making excuse in a press conference on why it was ok for Loumia to be sodimized by a cop?

  • Lord Humungus||

    semi-related:

    I once worked for a company that had the idea of attaching GPS trackers to garbage trucks. It would allow the company to calculate the best route, confirm that loads have been picked up, and allow billing based on weight.

    The drivers (and union) freaked. From what we gathered, many drivers were basically picking up (commercial) trash for cash-under-the-table.

    btw, I thought the whole project was fairly pointless - IT'S ONLY GARBAGE! But hey, there's money to be made in strange ways.

  • ||

    But it is the company's truck and gas they are using to pick up trash under the table. It is not only garbage. It is the gas and the truck.

  • Cliché Bandit||

    I believe he was refering to the efficiencies not the graft.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    In this day and age, why shouldn't every cop be equipped with a small video camera and recording device at all times on duty.

    Holy shit, John, taxpayers aren't made of money, you know. We're in a recession.

  • Me||

    Some departments do. Even mo have dash cams. But they need to be more ubiquitous, and streamed live to the public.

  • ||

    I agree 100%
    So the interesting question is: Who believes government really believes in sunshine?

  • A nation of boiled frogs||

    Kelly Thomas was beaten to death by corrupt pigs ON SURVEILLANCE VIDEO AND AUDIO.

    The jury decided that the mere fact that the whole incident was recorded was of no significance.

    The mental giants sitting on the jury decided that cops should never have their actions questioned for any reason.

    If the whole incident was shot on 3D Hi-Def video by professional photographers it would not have mattered.

    The "Pigs Rule" rule trumps everything.

  • Christophe||

    The comment you replied to was from 2011. Believe me people here were shocked by the jury's decision.

    We foolishly believed this would be a level of aggression that even cops couldn't get away with.

  • ||

    Not only should we have the ability to monitor cops in real time, we should have the ability to punish them in real time. If we provide access to thecop-cam feeds on the internet, we can then allow the watchers to activate the shock collar in the event of misbehavior.

    BZZZZZZZT!

    BAD DOG. BAD BAD BAD!

  • Colin||

    I predict a slap on the wrist.

    Those boys are union men, after all.

  • ||

    Absent the video and publicity, I think you would be right.

    And that's exactly why I bust dunphy's chops about a double standard. There is no possibility that a non-LEO beating a man to death wouldn't be prosecuted. Especially if he did it in front of a bunch of LEOs.

    But, when an LEO does it, he has much better odds of walking or getting a light sentence.

  • ||

    I mean, seriously, the double standard is on full display here:

    Rackauckas will also announce whether he will file charges against the officers involved in Thomas' death, following the office's investigation.

    There would be absolutely no question whatsoever that someone who beat a man to death in full view of several witnesses, especially LEOs, would be charged. But if its a cop, well, maybe, maybe not. Tough call, in that case.

  • ||

    I've got nothing against Dunphy, but I can't help to think back to his comment that the "picture looks bad".

    What? Couldn't admit that was bad?

  • ||

    cameras, photons, pictures....how do they work?

  • ||

    Finally they are prosecuting the cops in the College Park case in Maryland. But the shennigans with the evidence - remember this is a totally police controlled environment....reminds me of Sherlock Holmes and the dog that didn't bark.

  • Mainer||

    ...and when you mention the double standard, I mention that the standard for cops is a lower standard. A private citizen is held to a higher standard than the so called professional.

  • ||

    Or it being excused, period.

    An important thing to keep in mind is this would have blown over if Ron Thomas didn't get it back into the media and the people getting pissed.

    It would have been some scumbag getting what he deserved. Case closed.

  • *||

    Will Reason.tv have people at the DA's press conference today?

  • ||

    much better odds of walking or getting a light sentence.

    Because EQUAL JUSTICE demands it. You wouldn't want to have that poor little lamb exposed to his prior victims on equal footing, you know. The baboon troop intimidation and bullying are not as effective, when the playing field is level.

  • A Few Good Men||

    Downey: What did we do wrong? We did nothing wrong.

    Dawson: Yeah, we did. We were supposed to fight for the people who couldn't fight for themselves. We were supposed to fight for Willie.

  • ||

    Police Motto:

    "To protect and serve."

  • Terr||

    "To protect and serve the State."

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    You realize you are replying to a comment that's over two years old?

  • ||

    All six officers should face charges or civil rights lawsuits for incompetent, lethal restraint.

    DOJ statement in 1995 on avoidable death in restraint or custody: Positional Asphyxia and Sudden Death http://bit.ly/fWyJKg


    Asphyxial Death During Prone Restraint Revisited: 21 Cases http://bit.ly/p86G5F


    Prone restraint, if used at all, should last only seconds. There should NOT be a "struggle" on the ground. People die very quickly in this position. The DAs investigate and prosecute these suffocation deaths all the time.

    Where are the constitutional challenges to lethal forms of restraint?

  • ||

    2 police officers charged in death of homeless man.

    At least the justice process is starting.

  • ||

    Cop says, "I better not find myself on Youtube" after beating some teenaged skateboarder. hahaha. Tough luck, sucker.

    I guess I can see why they don't want to be filmed.

  • ||

  • Irish||

    HuffPo: It's okay to out Aaron Schock even if it threatens him with physical violence because he's voted in ways I don't like.

    In the situation of someone like Aaron Schock, this consideration is rendered inconsequential. It wouldn't matter if outing Schock put him at risk of physical violence because he is a man who has made a career out of harming minority individuals. All of his votes are now very easily accessible by category thanks to Project Vote Smart.

    Progressives are basically fascists.

  • Notorious G.K.C.||

    Here is the head and front of his offending:

    "Schock voted against the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act on April 29, 2009. This act was to ammend federal hate crime laws to include LGBT individuals....

    "He then voted against the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell in 2010....

    "Despite his efforts to prevent the Employment Descrimination [sic] Law Ammendments from passing, the bill passed on January 9, 2009. As recently as July 19, 2012, Schock helped pass an ammendment to prevent funding to actions that would controvene the Defense of Marriage Act...

    "His actions against minorities aren't limited to issues of gender and sexual orientation. Schock also voted against the DREAM Act..."

  • ||

    Basically?

  • SusanM||

    So, you know what? Fuck him. If he's subject to the threat of violence that he encouraged then too damn bad.

    "Aaron Schock is not merely someone disaligned with the LGBT community, he is an active opponent earning a 0 percent approval rating from the HRC (NB: Human Rights Campaign). "

    (NB: Rand Paul gets a 47% approval from the HRC)
  • ||

    I would've expected the HRC to come up with reasons to give Paul a 0.

    I'm assuming their rating system includes a number of benchmarks that even openly gay and gay supportive conservatives or libertarians would do poorly?

  • Irish||

    I'm assuming their rating system includes a number of benchmarks that even openly gay and gay supportive conservatives or libertarians would do poorly?

    I'm going to assume that not voting to curtail someone else's rights in order to give something to a gay person gets you dinged from the HRC. Paul voting against bills that give money to gay organizations, for example, probably counts as 'anti-gay' to the sort of nitwits who keep track of such things.

  • Irish||

    I'm assuming their rating system includes a number of benchmarks that even openly gay and gay supportive conservatives or libertarians would do poorly?

    I'm going to assume that not voting to curtail someone else's rights in order to give something to a gay person gets you dinged from the HRC. Paul voting against bills that give money to gay organizations, for example, probably counts as 'anti-gay' to the sort of nitwits who keep track of such things.

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    I surmised the same. I imagine a 50% rating would be treating gays like everyone else. The 100% ratings are reserved for the affirmative action crowd.

  • SusanM||

    I think there's some truth to that. Paul has a reasonably good record about civil liberties in general and I think that helps his overall score.

  • Irish||

    What violence has Aaron Schock encouraged? Based on what I see from his legislative history, his grand sin is voting against gay marriage and against a functionally useless 'hate crime' act.

    Given that I'm generally opposed to hate crime acts since they essentially criminalize speech, or at least use speech as a reason to amplify a punishment, I agree with him on that vote. His vote against gay marriage is wrong but in no way can you argue that Schock encouraged violence with that vote.

    I'm not sure what your argument is here. Schock has never encouraged anything like violence against gay people, so arguing that it's totally okay for violence to be used against him seems completely immoral.

  • Sevo||

    Irish|1.18.14 @ 9:08PM|#
    "What violence has Aaron Schock encouraged? Based on what I see from his legislative history, his grand sin is voting against gay marriage and against a functionally useless 'hate crime' act."

    I make no claim that he's encouraged violence, but he's voted against the repeal of DADT, he's voted for peripherals supporting the DOMA.
    I agree he's voted against some idiocies, but that seems to be fortuitous to a so-con POV.

  • ||

    I'm not sure what your argument is here. Schock has never encouraged anything like violence against gay people, so arguing that it's totally okay for violence to be used against him seems completely immoral.

    I don't think anyone has said anything about going after him with a billyclub for how he's voted. I'm assuming (because huffpo brings my relatively powerful computer to a crawl) that they're referencing hypothetical anti-gay violence. I don't even know why it would come up because he's probably never going to experience a random beating outside a gay bar or being kidnapped by hooligans on a hookup.

  • Sevo||

    Jesse, think he might be the victim of violence from the fashion police for this outfit?:
    ..."included white jeans, a hot pink gingham shirt and a teal belt"...

  • Notorious G.K.C.||

    gingham style!

  • SusanM||

    You know, I may have to take that last bit back. I've had a dashed hard time finding any particular quotes of him saying anything. Still, if you're seen as worse than someone progressives believe wants to abolish the Civil Rights Act it stands to reason Schock isn't only acting on a small government principle. But yeah, I can't prove it so consider that particular statement withdrawn. :)

  • playa manhattan||

    *puts brass knuckles back into pocket*

  • ||

    Reading his wikipedia page and he seems like a puppy dog.

    A puppy dog that volunteers his medical skills in third world countries.

  • Sevo||

    Certainly not wishing physical violence on anyone, but I'm not sure that's really much of a threat anymore for being seen as gay.
    As far as his legislative votes, he's a so-con and seems to think it's the gov't's business to reward certain sexual preferences; I wish him the same sort of 'success' as I do lefty statists.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    I'm still waiting for actual proof that Schock is gay and this, "a friend of a friend of a friend says they saw a guy who looked like Aaron Schock coming out of a gay bar" or "TMZ has the footage but they refuse to air it" (because TMZ is a paragon of decency and respect for privacy).

  • Boisfeuras||

    Progressives are basically fascists.

    No, just socialists. That kind of behavior is to be expected of them as well.

  • Pompey||

    Holy weird date codes Batman!

  • playa manhattan||

    It's a reposted article from 2011.

  • Pompey||

    I thought Big O's reelection was just a terrible nightmare for a second there. Sad, has.

  • Pompey||

    I thought Big O's reelection was just a terrible nightmare for a second there. Sad, has.

  • Sevo||

    OT:
    "Why So Many Tech Founders Who Are Jerks Become Insanely Rich And Successful" ( http://www.sfgate.com/technolo.....155174.php )
    OK, yeah, Steve Jobs, right? Nope; focuses on Travis Kalanick. And his crime is not really being a jerk like Jobs, but his defense of his pricing structure based on (surprise!) supply and demand, rather than gov't regs. 'Free shit' writers are really pissed at him and his comments:
    ..."In short, without Surge Pricing, there would be no car available at all.”...
    See, we're all spoiled by gov't regulated 'cheap service' we can't get on a snowy night:
    ..."But paying a flat rate for a taxi is so deeply, deeply ingrained that it feels as if Uber is breaking the rules by suddenly charging more."...
    (Last two quotes from 'free shit' writer Annie Lowrey: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01......html?_r=0 )

  • Ted S.||

    When will we get the article "Why So Many Elected Officials Who Are Jerks Become Insanely Rich and Successful"?

  • SweatingGin||

    Some of the leftist journalists are really going all out against Uber on the surge pricing thing. Massive stories on Proletariat radio about it, complaining about saying they'd go out to hail a cab, and then seeing surge pricing.

    Throw in the Google busses to Mountain View (or whichever valley city it is).

    They're pissed. The progs are going Luddite, and they're pissed. Going to be fun the next couple of years.

  • Sevo||

    In one interview, he (actually!) quoted Ayn Rand.
    Now, THAT is gonna piss off most any hack who got a J-school degree in the last 50 years.

  • SweatingGin||

    Oh ,it's gonna be fun, don't get me wrong.

    It's just... Sooner or later, someone (Schumer?) will propose an anti-dog-eat-dog law.

    We can pretend it's an original idea.

  • MJGreen||

    "Is Uber's surge pricing an example of high tech gouging?"

    Yes. But you say that like it's a bad thing.

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    Anyone planning on watching Klondike on Monday?

  • playa manhattan||

    Que es esto?

  • Francisco d Anconia||

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    Whoa...check this Reason error message out.

    THERE WAS A PROBLEM POSTING YOUR COMMENT

    You are currently logged in as Francisco d Anconia. Not you? Sign out.
    Your comment does not appear to be written in an English script. Please comment in English.


    Y también aquí.

  • DK||

    Who knew the squirrels were xenophobic?

  • Agammamon||

    They don't wanna be but *everything's* run through E-verify nowadays.

  • SweatingGin||

    Hah, I'd bitch about the english commenting rule, but I'm 90% sure that was a Mary rule.

  • ||

    I don't have a DVR, so I won't be watching is it airs the same time as Archer.

    But if that's not the case I'll give it a look, but to be honest that kind or premise can't help but invite comparisons to 'Deadwood' and I doubt they'll let the King in the North call someone a cocksucker.

  • Sevo||

    Francisco d Anconia|1.18.14 @ 9:43PM|#
    "Anyone planning on watching Klondike on Monday?"

    Is this a new MNF? Who's the Klondike QB?

  • Francisco d Anconia||

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

    WHAT WOULD YOU DO FOR A KLONDIKE

  • RishJoMo||

    Sometimes man you jsut hafve to roll with it.

    www.AnonPlanet.tk

  • Sevo||

    Rish,
    Didn't you see the problems Frank had above?
    WIH are you doing posting in Danish?

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

    What a shitty week.
    What did I miss?

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

    Bill Murray is so awesome.

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

    14 Minutes of Pissed Off Goalies

  • SweatingGin||

    I made it to the shot of Lapointe getting sticked in the groin... just brutal.

    It's about time to post the Wings/Avalance brawl again, right?

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

    Is there ever a bad time for that

  • SweatingGin||

    "Hey Man Nice Shot

  • SweatingGin||

    Total fail previously, that's why I say Hey man, nice shot

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    Do you know what that song was written about?

  • SweatingGin||

    i'll play along, but if you say anything but a wings/eastern conference game, I'll be disappointed.

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    Warning...second link not for the squeamish.

    The song was written about the January 22, 1987, public suicide of Pennsylvania state treasurer R. Budd Dwyer. Dwyer had been convicted on bribery charges in December 1986, and was expected to receive a long sentence from U.S. District Court Judge Malcolm Muir. Professing his innocence and decrying the legal system, Dwyer shot himself with a .357 Magnum during a press conference.[1

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    Sorry, big paragraph should be blockquote...from wiki

  • SweatingGin||

    Help me out on lyrics?

    All that really matters is that Eddie Belfour is detained at the border crossing.

  • Francisco d Anconia||

  • SweatingGin||

    Maybe it's just not possible to be anti-wings. It's okay.

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

    That's a crazy story.

  • Rhywun||

    Warning...second link not for the squeamish.

    You can say that again, if it's what I think it is.

  • playa manhattan||

    It's exactly what you think it is.

  • Rhywun||

    I'm only moderately squeamish but that is one of the most disturbing things I have ever watched. Never again.

  • BigT||

    I would welcome seeing a few other politicians do that.

    "I've droned too many innocents" BLAM!!
    "I've used the IRS to fix the election" BLAM!!
    "I've played racial politics too much" BLAM!!

  • SweatingGin||

    I was lined up for winter classic tickets in '12/13, fucking lockout stopped it.

  • SweatingGin||

    EEEEEEEEEEEDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD ----- DDDDDDDDDDIIIIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!

    (The goaler Belfour, not our local hot-for-teacher commenter)

    Oh, this morning, saw a wings sign (Western Detroit subs) upside down. American flag above it was flown correctly, just the Wings flag showing distress.

    That bodes ill for the season.

  • ||

    So you have a stick that you can wield like a sword.

    you have a helmet

    you have armor

    All of which you have trained and played in for hours and hours and hours...

    and the first thing you do is throw away your weapon throw away your helm and throw away you armor and get in a fist fight.

    Fucking hockey players are dumbest people on the planet.

  • Cytotoxic||

    I just saw Lone Survivor-was good-and was researching it to check out how accurate it is (it takes some liberties). I found this interesting essay from Dana Rohrabacher. I did not read the whole thing, but there are some really interesting-as in astonishingly evil-tidbits. Most notably, Bill Clinton and Bill Richardson were stupid retard fucks who got thousands killed on 9/11 and more killed under Taliban rule. Let no libertarian praise these two assholes.

    What happened was this: In April of 1997 the Taliban launched a major offensive aimed at taking control over the northern third of Afghanistan, which to that point had remained free and under the control of regional leaders who were commonly referred to as warlords.

    One of those regional leaders, General Malick, tricked the Taliban and managed to capture almost all of their frontline troops, along with most of their heavy weaponry. It was an utter disaster for the Taliban. The road to the capital, Kabul, was wide open. The Taliban were totally vulnerable and could have easily been wiped out.

    ...but before the anti-Taliban forces could strike, Assistant Secretary of State Rick Indefurth and American U.N. Ambassador Bill Richardson flew to northern Afghanistan and convinced the anti-Taliban leadership that this was not the time for an offensive. Instead, they insisted this was the time for a cease-fire and an arms embargo.

    This actually happened.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Also interesting: Osama bin laden hated Americans more than the Soviets all the way back in the '80s, which is when he founded AQ. The Iraq war was NOT the impetus behind AQ, although it did make things worse.

    http://rohrabacher.house.gov/9.....and-people

    You might want to read Rohrbacher's experiences they are interesting. Some of what he says is silly-no, we should not have baby-sat post-Soviet Afghanistan-but he's right about a lot of things like what a mistake it was to use Pakistan to distribute American aid to anti-Soviet forces. Or otherwise trust Pakistan in any way possible.

  • Kyfho Myoba||

    Well, no shit. Unocal (and of course, the State dept.)was negotiating with the Taliban for the oil pipeline and they wanted to preserve the status of their negotiating counter-part. Would be a real pain in the ass to have to start all over with a new set of war lords. But, alas, it didn't work out anyway, and the US had operational plans to invade the 'Stan in the SUMMER of 2001 (reported in Germany and India).

    BTW, Rohrabacher was one of the co-founders (or early enthusiasts) of the Society for Individual Liberty with Don Ernsberger and Dave Walter (former LP Chair) - friends from boyhood.

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

    Serena in big trouble. Plus Ivanovic is super cute

  • Notorious G.K.C.||

    New Republic: Obamacare totally isn't a bailout of insurance companies

    http://www.newrepublic.com/art.....t-insurers

  • ||

    OT: Drinking linked to faster mental decline in men

    The study of about 5,000 British civil servants found that over a decade, the added decline was the equivalent of about two extra years of aging for a combined measure of mental abilities like reasoning, and about six years for memory.

    As one commenter astutely observed: "I guess drinking to forget really works!"

  • Rhywun||

    Yeah. ... What?

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

  • MJGreen||

    Similar experiment on Youtube. It gets pretty funny when they start copy/pasting men's responses between messages.

  • ||

  • Pinky||

    From an article in the LA Times this evening reporting on today's protests in Fullerton:

    "We have bent over backward today to allow them to protest, hoping to keep it peaceful," Sargent Jeff Stuart said.

    Fortunately no citizens were beaten to death today. The citizens of Fullerton appreciate the police department's forbearance.

  • ||

    Mountie daddy and his buddy are in trouble

    The two RCMP officers, whose names have not been released, were suspended pending a criminal investigation by Victoria police. Both officers are under investigation for allegedly trying to circumvent a court-ordered paternity test so that one officer could duck responsibility as the father of a woman’s baby.

    Sources told the Times Colonist one of the Mounties was having an affair with a woman who became pregnant. When she told the Mountie she was pregnant, he denied the baby was his.

    A court ordered a DNA test to prove paternity. Instead of taking the test himself, the officer allegedly had a fellow officer in the Regional Crime Unit to take the test for him.

    Aw shucks, he was just trying to help out a brother officer.

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

  • Rhywun||

    The President, in 2003 declared, "I happen to be a proponent of a single payer universal health care program. ..."

    Wut? I don't remember that.

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

    Yup

  • ||

    Enter the "Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act" (H.R. 676)

    But but but Suderman told me Obama would not lie about single payer?!?!

  • Archduke von Pantsfan||

    "I guess she's telling the truth when she says she arrived at the hospital unaware of the pregnancy."

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