Awful Obama Poll Numbers; New Penn State Charges; New Fannie/Freddie Charges; Barry Bonds Sentenced: PM Links

Obama Disapproved: A new AP/GFK poll finds majority of Americans do not want to see President Obama re-elected. Small minority of people who like Obamacare is getting even smaller. On the bright side, Obama still matches up well with most Republican frontrunners – though not with this hand-painted anti-Obama sign

Penn State perjury: Tim Curley and Gary Schultz charged with perjury and failing to report an alleged 2002 sexual assault in connection with the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse allegations.

Fannie and Freddie fraud: Former Fannie Mae CEO Daniel Mudd and former Freddie Mac CEO Richard Syron have been charged with fraud in connection with the GSEs’ creation of the mortgage crisis and concealment of questionable loans. 

Another Paul rises: The Clippers fan[s] I know are mad about how much the team traded for Chris Paul, but the deal has already paid off in sold-out season tickets

More signs the economy is faltering. Calculated Risk reports that incoming and outgoing traffic continues to decline at the Port of Los Angeles, the nation’s busiest container port. On the other side of the country, the busted Zynga IPO depresses hopes for a robust stock market in 2012. 

Barry Bonds railroading ends in light sentence. The performance-enhanced former Giant gets 30 days of home confinement and two years of probation. “The light sentence raises questions about the value of the investigation, the work of the prosecutors, and the effect of the outcome on Bonds' legacy,” says ESPN.

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.

  • RoboCain||

    Boy disciplined after waving gun-shaped pizza slice

    http://www.wkrn.com/story/1632.....izza-slice

  • A Secret Band of Robbers||

    One more story proving that if I were going to school today, I'd have been in juvenile before fifth grade.

  • Barack Obama||

    waving around a slice of pizza some say resembled a gun

    Let me be clear.

    There are some who say a slice of pizza resembles a gun.

  • ||

    Imagine trying to explain the social contract to that kid

  • Ezilie Dunn||

    Police Officer: Drop the pizza slice, young man!

    That Kid: No.

    Police Officer: (Shoots that kid)

  • Almanian||

    Kid's Dog: *runs away*

    Police Officer: *shoots kid's dog, too*

    THE END

  • ||

    Not so fast, Almanian...Part 2:

    Cop gets paid leave.

    Union-approved Review Board declares shooting "justified."

    Cop gets kick-ass retirement 12 years later.

    THE END

  • ||

    ah yes. more stupid bigotry

    here's a hint: the union did not stand behind that asshole in seattle who shot the guy with the knife.

    the union did not stand behind paul schene who had 2 hung juries after being tried for assault. iow, they realized he was a fucking thug and wanted nothing to do with him

    note that review boards (shooting ones) are not "union approved"

    here's another hint, unions job (ALL UNIONS) is to support their members and fight for their rights.

    apparently, cops are the one group on earth that do not deserve advocates for their interests.

    i get it. you are butthurt.

  • Rodney King||

    Can't we all just get along?

  • Burger King||

    Pizza!

  • The real question is....||

    ...why in the fuck do "Government Employees" need a union in the first place? They work for the GOVERNMENT -- how is that an adversarial position -- unless the adversary is the common citizenry?

  • Concerned Citizen||

    Why do you hate the middle class?

  • mad libertarian guy||

    When swindling taxpayers, it's easier to have one negotiator who's politically connected than individuals bargaining different levels of extortion.

  • ||

    "here's a hint: the union did not stand behind that asshole in seattle who shot the guy with the knife.

    the union did not stand behind paul schene who had 2 hung juries after being tried for assault."

    Outliers.

    Or, are you the only one who gets to claim that?

  • Coeus||

    . Outliers.

    Or, are you the only one who gets to claim that?

    I think he honestly thinks he is. We find out that the PD next door is routinely getting away with assault and battery (a PD he's claimed to work with, by the way). And he had no idea. Yet he will continually claim that every case shown where another cop gets away with criminal acts is an outlier.

    If he responds to this, it will most likely be by nitpicking the word outlier and with accusations of "butthurt". Like people getting beaten, sometimes to death, by police officers for no reason is a game on xbox live.

    Because for him, it is. He doesn't have to worry about it since he's a cop. How do you think the numbers stack up? Every 5th UOF in Seattle vs every prosecution of police misconduct in Washington state. He's not even right about cops not being above the law on his own state, yet he'll claim its not true for the whole country.

  • ||

    apparently, cops are the one group on earth that do not deserve advocates for their interests.

    When the policies they bargain for are designed to protect them from prosecution at the expense of justice, yeah, I'd say they don't deserve "advocacy."

    No other profession can argue for rights that are at the expense of rights of others. Like the right for justice to be served when their criminal acts result in death or serious injury.

    And when a union's job is to support their members and fight for their rights, I believe they have a place. But rights of union members are not greater than rights under the eyes of the law. Yet police unions consistently argue to have their members protected from prosecution. Again, that is not advocacy. That is an attempt to cover up a crime.

  • ||

    thank you. that pretty much clarifies it for me.

    cop unions are just like any other union. they advocate for their constituency.

    it's an adversarial system, just like our justice system

    neither side is necessarily right.

  • Coeus||

    here's another hint, unions job (ALL UNIONS) is to support their members and fight for their rights.

    That include the right to manufacture bullshit charges? Cause that's what the police union in Houston is doing. Called a fucking press conference cause the DA won't charge people with intent to distribute based on the weight of their bong water. Fuck off with that shit. Public sector unions are a cancer. And police unions are the worst.

  • Chatroom Crank||

    All the more reason why government employees (not just cops, I put firemen, teachers and all other tax feeders in the mix) should not be allowed to join a union.

  • Juice||

    apparently, cops are the one group on earth that do not deserve advocates for their interests.

    Not if their interest is abusing people's rights with impunity.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Guns don't kill people, empty calories do.

  • ||

    empty calories

    No Such Thing.

    http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH.....index.html

    His body mass index went from 28.8, considered overweight, to 24.9, which is normal. He now weighs 174 pounds.

    But you might expect other indicators of health would have suffered. Not so.

    Haub's "bad" cholesterol, or LDL, dropped 20 percent and his "good" cholesterol, or HDL, increased by 20 percent. He reduced the level of triglycerides, which are a form of fat, by 39 percent.

    Haub's body fat dropped from 33.4 to 24.9 percent. This posed the question: What matters more for weight loss, the quantity or quality of calories?

  • ||

  • ||

    Your article agrees with me.

    there is such a thing as too many calories...but empty? Not so much.

  • ||

    the very idea of the BMI is a hideous joke.

    the fact that it is used here instantly discredits the argument.

    you can have 10 % bf, be in phenomenal shape and be considered obese according to the BMI

    the BMI does not even distinguish between LBM and fat, nor does it account for bone density, or a host of other factors. it is not scientific, and it is not a useful metric whatsoever

  • ||

    dunphy, I agree BMI is ridiculous, but I don't see it mentioned. The prof lost 27 lbs of which 6 was muscle mass.

  • ||

    Actually i was kind of ignoring how much weight he lost and looking more at the good cholesterol vs bad cholesterol and his drop in blood pressure.

    In essence he had a good diet with lots of calories...then he changed his diet to a bad one with less calories and he got healthier...ie he substituted lots of "full" calories for a smaller amount of empty calories and got healthier.

  • ||

    In essence he had a good diet with lots of calories...then he changed his diet to a bad one with less calories and he got healthier...ie he substituted lots of "full" calories for a smaller amount of empty calories and got healthier.

    Except that's not what happened, did you look at what he was eating on his "bad" diet? You don't seem to have bothered to look at any of the facts, and are now backpedaling with the cholesterol thing.

    By losing fat, likely a lot of it visceral, he definitely made himself healthier. Adipose tissue can be composed up up to 40% M1 macrophages sending out pro-inflammatory cytokines (http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-physiol-021909-135846?journalCode=physiol) reducing fat, especially belly fat has a big impact on inflammation and the stress it can cause the body.

    And this isn't even getting into the issue of what is a 'healthy' lipoprotein or even how accurately they are measured.

  • ||

    Huh? Did you read what he ate? Protein shakes, steaks, moderate carbs (~175 grams/day), low calorie (~1500 kcal/day). Oh and a twinkie for breakfast and dinner.

    That's not a junk food diet.

    Of course food quality matters, are you seriously saying there's no difference between eating only flour and sugar and eating meat and vegetables? It's just about calories?

  • ||

    you are 100% correct. fwiw, nearly every day i eat either a 12-16 oz steak for breakfast OR about 5 eggs and a few pieces of bacon

    many "experts" would consider that "junk" vs. a bunch of whole grains, juice, and other stuff that would just raise my BF levels, contribute towards messed up insulin levels, and ultimately leave me winded in the gym

    i went to a party last night and chowed down on duck fat, pate, and all that good stuff.

    fruits, vegetables, meat and eggs.

    it's the processed crap, the flours, the sugars, etc. that i avoid. the fear of fat, or god forbid animal products is ridiculous and unscientific

    my cholesterol, blood pressure etc. all showed marked improvement when i cut out the flour and sugar and stuff and upped the saturated fats, fats in general, etc.

  • johnl||

    No sane person considers eggs junk food. Hatchlings are made entirely out of egg.

  • ||

    A lot of people swallowed the whole "fat is bad, grains are good" government BS - - they really do think eggs are a bad choice. My in-laws act like I'm heading full speed towards a heart attack when they watch me eat eggs and bacon for every breakfast. I say nothing but think the same of their breakfasts of cereals, bagels, pancakes, etc.

  • Juice||

    Empty calories means that no other nutrients came along for the ride with the calories. If you ingest nothing but glucose, but no vitamins and minerals, you'll eventually get sick and die. That's what empty calories means.

  • buddyglass||

    Yes, there are empty calories. No, they're not categorically bad for you so long as

    1) your diet isn't deficient in something you actually need and

    2) you aren't consuming so many calories overall that you get fat.

    Haub supplemented his empty calories with a protein shake, multivitamin and some green vegetables.

  • Robert||

    At the end of the news clip, they said that he was being sent by the school for training in gun safety. Because clearly that was what he needed, considering his unsafe use of pizza.

  • In Time Of War||

    I always keep my pizzas unloaded and securely locked in a steel safe bolted to the floor.

  • Juice||

    What about bananas? We haven't done bananas yet, have we?

  • PantsFan||

  • ||

    A century ago they would have "turned" to watching farm animals.

  • ||

    Porn was a great teacher...

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    All those pop quizzes.

  • Almanian||

    Hiyo!

  • ||

    For some.

  • Amakudari||

    And yet, porn is still a much more realistic picture of sex than anything you'd learn in a public school. That's quite the accomplishment.

  • Bam!||

    Really? Have you seen some of the porn on the Internet?

  • ||

    I've seen almost all of it, and Amakudari is absolutely right.

  • ||

    We have enter a rather manic phase.

    Set phasers to ignore.

  • ||

    Hate to burst your bubble, but a lot of married guys (and yes there are a good amount of us here) are porn experts. Porn does a better job of teaching positions and cunnilingus than any sex Ed I took in school. And surprise, surprise we don't necessarily treat our women like they are a coked out porn star.

    Just because that's been your experience with men doesn't make it applicable to all of us.

  • ||

    How the hell would you know? And for what it's worth, I've never had a woman complain about the things I've done for/with/to them sexually. I've had them say something we tried wasn't exactly pleasurable, and I didn't do it again.

    But if you think I expect every woman to enjoy getting a load blown in their face because I've seen it in a porno, you're sadly mistaken. Besides, I usually watch lesbian porn anyway. And I don't care how realistic it is if all I'm doing it for is to beat my meat to, something I do because I am a man and have needs that cannot always be readily fulfilled by a woman. Oh, and to pregame so my shit lasts longer when I'm pretty sure a date will end in sex with a chick for the first time.

  • El Commentariosa||

    Ever fist on the first date?

  • ||

    Not that I can recall.

  • ||

    What the fuck is the difference between porn film and porn? I am genuinely confused.

  • ||

    Watch Boogie Nights, DesigNate. Especially this scene. The future is videotape. Film is just too damn expensive.

    Not to mention "I like simple pleasures...like butter in my ass and lollipops in my mouth. That's just me. That's just something that I like. Call me crazy. Call me a pervert"

    I think that pretty much clears up the porn vs porn film conondrum.

  • Amakudari||

    Yes. I also took sex ed, and more recently than most here. It amounted to propaganda on abstinence, STDs and contraceptive failure rates.

    Most porn on the other hand (since we're talking about what most people are actually watching) is pretty vanilla. The stupid porn conventions are still there, of course. But they're nowhere near as stupid as things like putting condom failure rates in the mid-double digits without even bothering to say it's an annualized figure that relies on typical use (i.e. sometimes they're omitted) rather than per-use (side bonus: fewer teens using them).

  • ||

    And when as teenagers they fall in love and have sex for the first times, all the boys will wonder why the girls are hairy, and all the girls will wonder why the boys keep drilling their assholes.

  • Amakudari||

    http://badsexed.tumblr.com/ :

    Our sex ed teacher was in her 70’s. Someone asked her what a blow job was, and she said it was when a man spread a woman’s vagina opened and blew into it in little puffs.


    In my high school health class, my teacher told us that “women pee through the clitoris”.

    Then again, maybe even worse is that god-awful Cosmo:

    My sex ed teacher was Cosmo magazine. I remember reading in it once that men likes having their balls ‘gently bitten’. That didn’t work out so well … I guess Cosmo should have really emphasized the ‘gently’ part.

    http://26.media.tumblr.com/tum.....o1_400.jpg

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    PM LINKS ARE AN ABOMINATION.

  • ||

    Need another bib?

  • RoboCain||

    Would you like me to shoot Tim? I have taco in the shape of an AK-47.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    What's next? Monday Funnies?

  • PantsFan||

    You've fallen into bizarro world.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    But links are good. Funnies suck.

    Also, alt-text is good. Labels suck.

  • ||

    Satan is a libertarian and PM links are only meant to summon him to bring forth his reign of free market prosperity and cheap laser mounted monocles.

  • AlmightyJB||

    I can't wait! Hail Satan!

  • ||

    he said Hail Satan, not stale man-hatin'

  • ||

    laser mounted monocles

    Go on...

  • Terr||

    Does it by any chance crap ice cream?

  • ||

    Don't worry, Terr. Your South Park reference did not go completely unnoticed.

  • DJF||

    The Irrelevance of Money

    Using war as an example that great economist Matthew Yglesias proves that money is irrelevant. He leaves out some of the details but I will fill some in

    In war you can make your soldiers fight even without pay if you threaten to shoot them
    In war you can take your farmers food without pay if you threaten to shoot them
    In war you can take the factories goods and not pay the owner or workers if you threaten to shoot them.

    This proves that money is irrelevant since force and command from above is the route to prosperity. We don’t need any voluntary action since command from above is all that is needed. Now we just need to come up with a proper title for Matthew Yglesias Two that I can think of are

    Reichsführer Ygleias War Minister
    Commissar Ygleias People's Commissariat for Trade and Industry

    With this title and the willingness to shoot people in the back of the neck he can lead the country and even the world out of recession without any use of money. His top down, shoot the resisters plan of action will work to bring to the world the prosperity that wars and war economies have always brought

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/mon...../16/_.html

  • Xenocles||

    That summary is entirely just. Wow.

  • sasob||

    In war you can make your soldiers fight even without pay if you threaten to shoot them
    In war you can take your farmers food without pay if you threaten to shoot them
    In war you can take the factories goods and not pay the owner or workers if you threaten to shoot them.

    This proves that money is irrelevant since force and command from above is the route to prosperity.

    That only works as long as people desire to keep living. Whatcha gonna do if they don't - shoot 'em?

  • Sanity Clause||

    That only works as long as people desire to keep living. Whatcha gonna do if they don't - shoot 'em?

    That reminds me of the old jailhouse saying, "whatcha gonna do, lock me up?"

  • Scratch a NeoProgressive....||

    ....find a potential mass-killer (or someone who provides intellectual support for a mass-killer).

  • Juice||

    The comments below the article are so Friedmanesque it's scary. Now I see that there are actually people out there who developed an adult vocabulary but their thinking never progressed past the fifth grade.

  • RoboCain||

    "I think what needs to be said, more than "don't rape people" is to make men understand what rape really IS. Yes only means yes if she means it, and you didn't coerce her into it. Her saying nothing as you undress her is not silent consent, it's a silent no.

    If she says 'no, no, no' but then follows with "do you have a condom", she's protecting herself from further harm, and it is still rape! There are so many men who honestly think they've had consensual sex when it's been rape. I have known men like this, and I bet you anything they wouldn't have done it if the cultural message was "only an enthusiastic yes is yes" instead of "no means no" (which implies that the absence of a few "nos" is yes). These men don't see themselves as rapists, because they didn't jump at her from a bush. They think they honestly convinced her to have consensual sex, which is the attitude that needs to be changed."

    http://jezebel.com/5868781/rap.....im-blaming

  • ||

    You really must stop reading that trash, if only for your own sanity.

  • Almanian||

    Oh, come on - that's the first thing that made me laugh out loud all day! Priceless!

    Mrs. Almanian, your thoughts? Mmm hmm...yeah...

    Mrs. Almanian finds Jezebel less hilarious than I do, but she's still mad at me for giving money to Reason, so....

  • A fan||

    Is it rape if they don't wake up?

  • ||

    these "feminists" really believe that, for example, if a man verbally persuades a woman who is hesitant about having sex, into having it, that that = rape

    feminists are really the most paternalistic (note the word used) group of people on earth

    their mentality is consistent with the kind of mentality that justifies statism

    what they are saying is that women are such worthless confidence-less helpless creatures, that they cannot make up their own mind (except about having an abortion, which they should be able to do on their own at 14), about sex if an evil man is trying to persuade them.

    oh, and THOSE DUKE BOYS WERE GUILTY OF SOMETHING!!!

  • ||

    Thanks a lot. I just had an embolism trying to process that passage.

  • ||

    Fifty no's and one yes is a YES!

  • ||

    The Sandusky defense: if they're to young to spell "no," that means yes!

  • Doktor Kapitalism||

    That would be true, depending on the frequency of the "no"s. If she says no one a week, for fifty weeks, you stop bothering her for a year, and then ask and she say yes, it is a yes.

    I highly doubt that's what you meant.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Her saying nothing as you undress her is not silent consent, it's a silent no.

    That seems like something that would depend on the specific person. Why does jezebel hate female individuality?

  • ||

    I would give my opinion on the matter, but according to rather and her ilk, I am not a real women. As it turns out, they all think in some type of Borg collective that I am disconnected from.

  • ||

    Or...you are Locutus of Borg. Or possibly Alice Krige. Or this analogy is stupid. Probably the last.

    Wait: you're Hugh.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I'm offended you felt the need to link that.

  • ||

    Good.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    On a scale from 1 to -10, what do you think of the current options for scifi series?

  • ||

    i

  • ||

    Well, what qualifies as scifi? I'll also include some other stuff to widen the field.

    Terra Nova: -10

    Supernatural: 9 (start from the beginning, though)

    All the stuff on SyFy: 3-5

    New Futurama: 4

    American Horror Story: so far, it gets an 8

    Is there anything else on that fits this "category"?

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Is there anything else on that fits this "category"?

    This was largely the point I was making.

  • ||

    One problem is that Terra Nova sucked all the air out of the scifi room by being debuted in such a big way, and then sucking royally in such a big way. Is that thing even getting reasonable viewership?

    I fear a "yes" answer. God damn that show is a piece of shit. It's like it's from 1992 or something. Fuck you, Brannon Braga. You helped make ST:TNG suck in your particular ways, and you haven't changed.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I want me some space opera.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Falling Skies kept me interested through about half of the pilot.

  • ||

    I'm staying with it. It has flaws but it's not terrible, and I love me some alien invasion. I'd forgotten about it because it's between seasons.

  • ||

    "Falling Skies kept me interested through about half of the pilot."

    I quit after the third episode. Had potential.

  • Krampus Kristen||

    And again, I'm fucking pissed off that the P.O.S. that is Terra Nova took Lie to Me's time slot.

  • ||

    Lie to Me had pretty well jumped the shark.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    One problem is that Terra Nova sucked all the air out of the scifi room by being debuted in such a big way, and then sucking royally in such a big way. Is that thing even getting reasonable viewership?

    I knew that show was dead the minute I saw the previews. The whole premise of it was retarded. Human civilization finally gains the ability to go back in time, and what do the writers have them do? Why, go back to a time period when they are outnumbered by massive, carnivorous dinosaurs!! What can possibly go wrong?

    Shit, they could have set them up in roughly 15,000 BC, in California, and not had to deal with any of that.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Uh... the Terra Nova premise is fine, if they don't have a choice of what time they go to.

    The pilot was pretty good, which is why the show held its audience for the second episode. It started going down from there.

  • MlR||

    I've never thought of Supernatural as Sci-fi, though I love it. I guess it is though.

  • Devil's Advocate||

    Hrmm. I'd call it fantasy/ horror more than sci-fi per se.

  • robc||

    Terra Nova a 10? or it that a -10?

    I disagree with either, but the latter is defensible.

    I keep watching it, but Im not sure why.

  • ||

    On a scale from 1 to -10, what do you think of the current options for scifi series?

    On Netflix? 10. Fucking awesome.

    In reality? Meh. Falling Skies is OK, I haven't seen Supernatural, but the folks in i09 tell me that Dr. Who is THE MOST AWESOMEST SHOW EVAH!!1!1!ELEVENTY

  • Double D||

    You really really have suspend disbelief for Dr. Who. The Doctor survives through a great deal of fast talking or suddenly remembering a bullshit scientific principle that helps him get out of a dangerous situation (like reversing polarities in Star Trek. All of which would be completely useless if his enemies didn't wait to let him rant before shooting him.

  • Hugh Akston||

    He could have been referring to me. I am well know for the gulf of understanding between me an the women of the world. 50 yards at all times, to be precise.

  • ||

    Not seven of nine? I am dissapoint.

  • ||

    That would be rape.

  • Gojira||

    Banjos, I actually went to high school with her. She was a senior (I believe) when I was a freshman at this podunk high school in western Kentucky.

    I found out about it when I saw her on the Daily Show, and she referenced having the same biology teacher I did. So I went and dug out the year book, and viola! It's only remarkable because it's a shitty poor little town with like 400 kids in the school, all four grades.

  • Coeus||

    Just think. If you had sacked up and turned her kinky, no one would have ever heard of barak Obama.

  • ||

    Oh good, this was in 1986, so I was already born and won't be erased if he fucks with the timeline.

  • Chatroom Crank||

    Go Purple Flash

    Nah, not really, Heath Pirates all the way!

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I know that from my (male) perspective, if a woman starts undressing me I will say something if I don't consent.

    Also, the tone of that part RoboCain quoted makes me think that the message is if you bargain/convince her into it it's still rape. Apparently women aren't 1) allowed to change their mind 2) capable of withstanding debate.

  • ||

    It's confusing. It seems that the way to "empower" women is to consider them so fragile that they can't make their own decisions or withstand the slightest pressure. Who knew.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Sorta OT, but last month I got into an argument with a friend (Tory) about an incident involving another friend (Heather). In the original incident I insulted Heather and then she attacked me. First she threw a beer bottle at my head, which I dodged. Next she tripped to slap my face, which I blocked with my arm. Then she tried to kick me in the balls, which I managed to deflect into a kick to my shin. At this point Heather stomped off.

    Tory was arguing that I "verbally assaulted" Heather by saying that she "liked sleeping with cheaters" (which she was doing at the time). Apparently words are some sort of mystical force which women cannot respond rationally to.

  • ||

    Your friend Tory seems like an idiot, considering that Heather physically assaulted you.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Yeah, that was basically my entire argument.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    No offense, but maybe you need to find some new friends.

  • RoboCain||

    As much as I support women carrying guns, I'm reluctant to admit that might have a downside. Men are used to having thoughts of violence and not acting on them.

  • Devil's Advocate||

    So... are you still friends with Heather?

  • Chupacabra||

    Or, more importantly, did you later sleep with her and then cheat on her?

  • ||

    she "liked sleeping with cheaters"

    You do not deserve to be assaulted...still that was a stupid thing to say.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: rather,

    *you're*


    Librarian friend corrected you?

  • ||

    This is all the lead up to the Penthouse letter about your threesome, right?

  • Krampus Kristen||

    You have some crazy ass bitches for friends, mang.

  • PantsFan||

    It's important to use the D.E.N.N.I.S. system.

  • ||

    "I dropped my monster condom that I use for my magnum dong."

  • cynical||

    Most modern political feminism is about repackaging anti-feminist arguments from the 19th century so that they sound vaguely pro-woman.

  • ||

    "It's confusing. It seems that the way to "empower" women is to consider them so fragile that they can't make their own decisions or withstand the slightest pressure. Who knew."

    this. women are all powerful goddesses (blessed be) who can make their own decision at 14 about abortions...

    but if a man is involved with talking to them, they are helpless creatures.

  • Gojira||

    I get that vibe a lot from reading jezzie comments. It's like they peddle soft sexism. They believe women are so ignorant and helpless that massive public campaigns and extensive networks of laws must be implemented to protect them from everything.

  • ||

    the term is...

    THE SOFT BIGOTRY OF LOW EXPECTATIONS

    feminists (well , not paglia et al) but gender feminists live this creed

  • ||

    Same here. I will even go so far as to kick, scream, punch, stab and do anything in my fucking power to get the fuck away if someone is forcing himself on me. But again, I am not a real woman, so, you know.

  • Gojira||

    In real life, are you Linda Hamilton? I gotta figure she has a lot of free time these days, and so may be posting on here a lot.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    That sounds a lot like a real woman to me. Except for the Canadian accent.

  • RoboCain||

    Sarah Polley is carved from a solid block of adorable.

  • ||

    Go is a great movie.

    pre-cruise katie hawes and sarah polley

  • ||

    Yes, Go is one of my recent favorites. Very well done.

  • RoboCain||

    Go is original and very entertaining.

  • ||

    Unfortunately that block of adorable is pretty much a red one, unless Sarah's politics have changed recently. She probably hates this site.

  • MlR||

    Clearly you're not a libertarian either.

    No women allowed.

  • chris||

    I would give my opinion on the matter, but according to rather and her ilk, I am not a real women. As it turns out, they all think in some type of Borg collective that I am disconnected from.

    Rather is the female equivalent of a guy who goes through his life guided by a copy of Real Men Don't Eat Quiche because being a dude doesn't come naturally to him.

  • PermaLurker||

    Ha! Not saying anything is an integral part of super secret stealth sex....a very necessary skill set when one has many children.
    So hereabouts in the Lurker household not saying anything is yes, and getting up to lurk on the Reason board in the middle of the night is no.

  • Xenocles||

    If you post, can you still be called "PermaLurker?"

  • PermaLurker||

    You're right. I've been posting more and lurking less, but i can't think of a good handle...when I finally think of something I'll announce it.

  • Almanian||

    "Unfortunately...in my experience, trying to convey the concept of enthusiastic consent--not just the absence of "no"--leads to cries of, "Well do I have to get her to sign a contract or something before we have sex?!"

    The point. They're missing it."

    Uh, no, you are.

    Jezebel should have all these bitches post their names and addresses so good men can create a "don't fucking date under any circumstance" list.

  • ||

    Jezebel should have all these bitches post their names and addresses so good men can create a "don't fucking date under any circumstance" list.

    Not to worry. The natural perfume and armpit dreads should be the tip off.

  • Devil's Advocate||

    Apparently real women (ahem) do not have agency.

    (God I loathe the Jezzies.)

  • Kallipygian Kristen||

    Her saying nothing as you undress her means she's probably a dead fuck and you should hand her clothes back to her and leave.

  • Devil's Advocate||

    LOL. +100

  • ||

    ^This

  • Krampus Kristen||

    We libertarian chicks need to form our own Borg collective. Kind of like Lor's little independent Borg army, only without any Lor.

  • ||

    Ooh, ooh, me like! What should we call ourselves?

  • ||

    Her obvious hate of the other sex contributes to her obsession of trolling on male dominated websites. It is so clear now. Please e-mail me for an appointment, rather. We can work out those problems with therapy.

  • ||

    I am still waiting for your reply. I think that I can help you. Just come in for one session and I hope we can break down some barriers. If ever you feel like trolling my e-mail is always open to help you.
    As always, all sessions are private, but I would very much like to study your symptoms and, with your permission, of course present a case study to my class.

  • Atanarjuat||

    Some of us beggars can't be choosers. My hand's not always so enthusiastic either.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Some of us beggars can't be choosers. My hand's not always so enthusiastic either.

    C'mon, son! When making a statement like that, you need the appropriate sound effect.

  • Pedantic Savant||

  • ||

    eh...it is like you are judging reason on what tony posts.

    Roberta seems to be holding the ground at Jezebel:

    RobertaSandolva @Caralain

    What if she says "yes" but deep down inside she doesn't really mean it? What if a woman consents but she's somewhat ambivalent towards having sex? What if she's not sufficiently "enthusiastic?"

    So a woman's feelings decide whether or not a man is guilty of a felony, not the man's actions? You want to make rape an entirely subjective crime where no actual criminal conduct is required to be guilty?

    The reason the concept of enthusiastic consent isn't catching on is because it's simply not true. You say "rape is rape." I say "consent is consent." The law is only interested in whether or not someone has consented. Whether or not said consent was sufficiently "enthusiastic" is entirely besides the point.

  • ||

    what some of these feminist idiots have to understand is that : there is boorish behavior, or poor behavior... and there is rape

    there are all kinds of things a guy can say/do in regards to a woman (or vice versa) that are boorish or lame and might convince them to have sex

    being a dick isn't the same thing as committing a crime

    they want to (like most statists) enhance the legal system so that all these bullshit "rapes" are treated like "rape rape" (to borrow a whoopie-ism)

    the term is "defining deviancy up".

    this btw, is much like what the domestic violence industry does when they define "domestic violence" as including things like

    " he uses controlling language"

    "he belittles you if you don't want ot have sex, or the kind of sex he wants"

    etc.

    they call that DOMESTIC VIOLENCE and/or sexual asault

    it is not

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Her saying nothing as you undress her is not silent consent, it's a silent no.

    So mute girls don't deserve lovin'?

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Please, no Helen Keller jokes.

  • sasob||

    So basically it isn't a "yes" unless the chick jumps your bone...er, bones?

  • RoboCain||

    No, it still isn't a "yes" even if she jumps your bones. If she had a couple drinks, you "bribed" her with gifts, made insincere compliments or manipulated her with flattery, there is a power differential, if she had mixed feelings, regrets it later, or there was unusual sunspot activity, then it's rape.

  • Spoonman.||

    So you need to sign a fucking contract in triplicate before banging? Somehow I think that would kill the mood.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    It's called a marriage contract.

  • Barack Obama||

    A majority of adults say President Barack Obama does not deserve a second term

    Let me be clear.

    Fortunately, the majority of my base are not adults.

  • Almanian||

    All your base are belong to someone else

  • ||

    Some of them aren't even alive!

  • .||

    Duh bro gotta go!

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Zynga's stock fell 5 percent below its $10 initial public offering price to close at $9.50 on Nasdaq on Friday, dealing losses to IPO buyers used to racking up gains on a stock's first day of trading.

    It's because the government won't pay Farmville players not to plant crops. (Or some better crafted Farmville subsidies joke.)

  • CE||

    That one was pretty good.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    “The light sentence raises questions about the value of the investigation, the work of the prosecutors, and the effect of the outcome on Bonds' legacy,” says ESPN.

    Or whether anyone really gives a fuck anymore.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    No shit. After Game of Shadows came out, Bonds was effectively finished as a baseball icon. Everything since that point has just been journalistic masturbation.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    For the month of November, loaded inbound traffic was down 4% compared to November 2010, and loaded outbound traffic was down 2% compared to November 2010.

    The Occupiers are finally making a dent.

  • CE||

    The Clippers gave up a lot, but Chris Paul is more than worth it. They now have the best point guard in the game, the best young player (Blake Griffin), and some decent help (DeAndre Jordan, Caron Butler, Chauncey Billups, etc.)

  • pmains||

    Calculated Risk reports that incoming and outgoing traffic continues to decline at the Port of Los Angeles, the nation’s busiest container port.

    And Business Insider is peddling the laughable claim that US economic growth was 17.1% (annualized) in October. If it's not just a bogus number, my guess is that it's a reflection of how we're defining down inflation.

  • Maxxx||

    Economists at Macroeconomic Advisers, a consulting firm, estimate that the U.S. economy grew at a blazing 17.1 percent annualized rate in October, driven in large part by inventory investment and net exports. They expect annualized growth for the whole fourth quarter of 2011 to be a more moderate 3.7 percent.

    In other words, they expect the economy to shrink in November and December and think that's a good thing.

  • Binky||

    Any chance we can get congresscreatures to take (more) performance enhancing drugs?

  • free2booze||

    Mike McQueary gave his testimony today. Some of the highlights:

    "McQueary said he saw Sandusky was behind a boy he estimated to be 10 or 12 years old, with his hands wrapped around the boy's waist. He said the boy was facing a wall, with his hands on it."

    "Nine or 10 days later, McQueary said he met with Curley and Shultz and told them he'd seen Sandusky and a boy, both naked, in the shower after hearing skin on skin slapping sounds."

    And then he decided to leave the two of them alone, so he could run upstairs and phone his daddy.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    And waited 9 or 10 days to talk to people at the AD level.

  • Devil's Advocate||

    And then he decided to leave the two of them alone, so he could run upstairs and phone his daddy.

    This. I can't wrap my mind around this.

  • hazeeran||

    "Nine or 10 days later"

    FAIL.

  • ||

    http://www.wnyc.org/blogs/wnyc.....ing-death/

    "The Manhattan District Attorney spoke out against a proposal that would require New York to adopt conceal and carry laws — invoking the name of Officer Peter Figoski who died at the hands of an illegal gun this week." ...

    KABA Note: So what does H.R. 822 have to do with a convicted felon who should have been in custody?

    --------

    At the hands of an illegal gun? Roflmfao

  • RoboCain||

    If New York City was a Gun Free Zone he would still be alive.

  • Almanian||

    I'm envisioning rogue mobs of illegal guns roaming the streets of New York, killing cops and breaking windows.

    So I guess guns DO kill people. Who knew?

  • Anonymous Coward||

    the name of Officer Peter Figoski who died at the hands of an illegal gun this week.

    Guns have HANDS?

    My God....they're...evolving...

  • Megatron||

    Hey, fuck you pal.

  • ||

    +1000000000000!!!!!!

  • ||

    i really fucking hate when statist assholes use dead cops' names to try to push their bullshit agenda

    do i take it personally?

    yes.

    my best friend was killed by a fucking pos BGD gangster murderous thug.

    the gun was merely the tool that asshole used.

    it was not the gun's fault

    i had another friend and academy classmate killed by a drunk driver.

    it was not the car's fault

    it was the driver's fault

  • ||

    huh? dude Megatron is an evil transformer robot that transforms from a humanoid robot into a gun. (yes it was the weirdest fucking toy ever...i think nowadays the new Megatron toys have him change into a plane)

    my +100000000!!!! was to acknowledge this awesome pop culture reference.

  • ||

    http://www.examiner.com/gun-ri.....it-defense

    1 in 5 women sexually assaulted; IL state police still advise 'vomit defense'

    "A newly released survey indicates that rape and attempted rape are far more pervasive than previously thought. From the New York Times:"

    "'That almost one in five women have been raped in their lifetime is very striking and, I think, will be surprising to a lot of people,' said Linda C. Degutis, director of the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the [CDC], which conducted the survey." ...

    "This, obviously, is both horrifying and absolutely outrageous. The good news is that just across the river in Illinois, the State Police have some advice for women: vomit. ..." ...

    -------------------

    Words fail me.

  • Ray Pissed||

    I get really turned on when they vomit.

  • Max Hardcore||

    +1

  • ||

    http://open.salon.com/blog/lau.....looks_like

    "The Bill of Rights celebrates its 220th birthday today and it’s a mixed bag as to how she’s holding up." ...

    "The Second Amendment, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, is flourishing mightily. Any free person who wants a gun in the United States can get a gun, even those who really shouldn’t have a gun and can’t go through legal channels to get a gun. Concealed carry laws are springing up like dandelions, allowing people to legally bring firearms into churches and bars ... We do seem pretty adept at ignoring the 'well-regulated militia' part as the militias around here, like most militias, seem to be pretty unregulated." ...
    ---------------

    Not even worth a response, come to think of it

  • ||

    Ron Paul money bomb up to $2.3 million. Meanwhile, the blogoverse is going apeshit attacking him. Teh newsletters!@

  • ||

    He hates the Jews and the black kids! Lynch him!1!1111!!

  • RoboCain||

    Good, get the newsletter thing out of the way. The reality is that Paul is more pro-black than Obama.

  • Obama||

    He just wants to deny my lil' brethren their bed, board, and three square meals a day.

  • Almanian||

    Now that's racism, straight up

  • ||

    The fact that in the 20 years since the "newsletters" were published you can't find a single racist statement on the part of Ron Paul is clearly and indication of how diabolically evil he is at hiding is racism!

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Who is Ron Paul and why would he make a bomb out of money?

    If it's not in the New York Times, it's not worth knowing.

    Oh, and derpedy derp, derp.

  • ||

    http://www.thenation.com/artic.....bamas-desk

    The Dangerous Defense Bill Heading Toward Obama's Desk

    "You know these are interesting times when Glenn Beck, Dianne Feinstein, Rand Paul and the ACLU all stand on the same side of an issue. The issue in question is Subtitle D of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) ..." ...

    "And talk about iconic constitutional constructions: Glenn Beck’s online magazine, The Blaze, recently published a straightforwardly libertarian critique of the bill; the comments from his readers sizzle with Second Amendment belligerence from those 'patriots' who declare that they are running out to buy more ammo ... ('Want to see an army vet become a domestic terrorist?' reads the first comment. 'If they pass this law…I will adopt a strategy of asymmetric warfare against the US government.')" ...

  • Gojira||

    I'm torn between saying, "Good! More power to him, and if he needs to hide out at my place, I'll not turn him in!"

    and

    "Internet tuff gai sitting in his basement is going to wage war on the US gov't...next turn in Civilization IV".

  • ||

    Yeah -- these aren't the days of 1776. Sad, eh?

  • ||

    "Good! More power to him, and if he needs to hide out at my place, I'll not turn him in!"

    If you are going to wage asymmetrical war against the US government and you post your intentions on Glen Beck's blog you are an idiot and mostly likely to fail miserably and probably take out a bunch of innocents with you...

    best to assume your #2...or stay as far away from this idiot as possible.

  • chris||

    If you are going to wage asymmetrical war against the US government and you post your intentions on Glen Beck's blog you are an idiot and mostly likely to fail miserably and probably take out a bunch of innocents with you...

    best to assume your #2...or stay as far away from this idiot as possible.

    There's a third choice. You can always tell who the FBI informant is by whose yelling the loudest to blow shit up.

  • ||

    http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....oj16m.html

    "A federal civil-rights investigation into the Seattle Police Department has found routine and widespread use of excessive force by officers, and city and police officials were told at a stormy Thursday night meeting that they must fix the problems or face a federal lawsuit, according to two sources."

    "... One source said the language in the agency's report, to be officially released Friday, is 'astoundingly critical' of the department." ...
    -------

    Submitter's Note: So if I understand correctly, the DoJ just told the SPD: "Your officers have been breaking the law and violating peoples' civil rights on a regular basis, and if you don't stop, we're gonna do something about it." Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot?!?"

  • Yeah, sure...||

    ...the Holder/Obama DOJ? That gang of wholesale rights-violators? Yeah the SPD is in for a good scolding, for sure.

    More likely, they will recruit some of those SPD officers for DHS jobs.

  • ||

    Yo' Fist, you hear about Milbury? That cocksucking douchebag roughed up a 12 year old and has been suspended from NBC.

    Couldn't of happened to a nicer guy.

    If you're an Islanders fan, *cough* Fluffy, you can thank Milbury for your team being the armpit of the NHL.

  • PantsFan||

  • ||

    I don't even have to look, it's the shoe thing, isn't it? It's always the shoe thing.

    You beat a guy with his own shoe ONE TIME and that's the ONLY thing anybody remembers.

    Well that and trading away a generation's worth of talent for peanuts, people remember that too.

    BASTARDS SMASH, PIERRE LOVE ME!

  • ||

    Here's a link to the current story, and yes, they do bring up the shoe thing.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    If only this incident could be parlayed into forcing NBC from ever covering the NHL again.

  • Almanian||

    At least they don't have the glowing puck - that was Fox, wasn't it? Fucking. Horrific.

  • ||

    Didn't fox also do the glowing first down line?

    Assholes.

  • ||

    Why can't Pierre McGuire somehow be involved in the Penn State scandal?

    Perhaps a Sandbanana toadie that survives on sloppy seconds.

  • PantsFan||

    I am so glad Pierre McGuire is no longer on Canadian broadcasts.
    Too bad TSN still carries the Vs feed.

  • ||

    That's one thing you guys up there got that I'm jealous of PantsFan: excellent hockey coverage. I'll catch a streaming CBN broadcast every now and again and it's always top-notch.

  • insensitive monster||

    PantsFan|12.16.11 @ 8:10PM|#

    I am so glad Pierre McGuire is no longer on Canadian broadcasts.
    Too bad TSN still carries the Vs feed.

    Get ready dude, creepy Pierres favorite time of year is here, thats right World Jrs. His man crush on everything U-20 is just disturbing.

  • PantsFan||

    Thankfully, Pierre is no longer working for TSN.
    We will have Ray Ferrero to contend with. He's not annoying, just dumb.

  • ||

    At least Ryan Ellis is finally ineligible, so maybe Pierre will keep it in his pants this time

  • Almanian||

    *barf*

  • PantsFan||

    Well of course it was. It's part of hockey lore.
    It's like mentioning Wayne Gretzky and leaving out his tearful goodbye from Edmonton.

  • ||

    Hey don't get me wrong, I'm glad that that's all that asshole is remembered for, well that and single handily destroying the Islanders franchise. Oh, and now he's got assault and battery of a little kid to add to his impressive resume.

  • PantsFan||

    He traded Chara to the Sens for Yashin
    HILARITY

  • ||

    From his wiki:

    However, Milbury has also been criticized for the many decisions he made in which payroll or orders for upper management were not factors. Many young players and prospects that Milbury traded away went on to have distinguished careers, often eclipsing those of the players he received in return. He has traded away defensemen Zdeno Chara, Wade Redden, Bryan Berard, Eric Brewer, Darius Kasparaitis, and Bryan McCabe; goalies Roberto Luongo and Tommy Salo, as well as forwards Olli Jokinen, Todd Bertuzzi, Tim Connolly, and Raffi Torres. Milbury has also come under fire for his draft day decisions such as choosing Rick DiPietro first overall in 2000 over Dany Heatley and Marian Gaborik; as well as his decision to include the 2001 second overall draft pick (Jason Spezza) as part of the Alexei Yashin trade.

    Kasparaitis is local favorite (ot playoff gwg against buffalo ftw), who'll never have to buy his own beer in p-burgh.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    There's Mike Milbury, and there's TRUE monsters in broadcasting.

  • ||

    I heard that guy's kin to a bunch of them there loserdopian media elitists!

    He should fry for what he said about Hobey Baker. Shameful.

  • ||

    Here's one for PantsFan; #3 Slapshot Rioter.

  • PantsFan||

    Those rioters were nuts. I knew they'd go off win or lose.

  • Ted S.||

    such as choosing Rick DiPietro first overall in 2000 over Dany Heatley

    Heatley, of course, should be rotting in jail having committed vehicular homicide.

  • A Serious Man||

    Ron Paul (Crazy) vs Barack Obama (Evil), by the YouTube economic and political ignoramous the Amazing Atheist. I already miss Hitchens.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....ure=relmfu

  • Bingo||

    Dude made a video of himself poured brown stuff all over his tubby body, jerked off, and shoved a banana up his ass. Given the size of his dick it's no wonder he spends all day making smarmy videos on YouTube.

  • sunny black||

    Obama did this?

    :)

  • ||

    A new AP/GFK poll finds majority of Americans do not want to see President Obama re-elected.

    But since we don't elect presidents by popular vote, that's not the important number. Looking at the electoral map ( http://www.270towin.com/ ), it's almost certain that Obama is going to get the Kerry 19 states (select 2004 on the map) which means he's going to start out with 246 electoral votes. All he needs is FL to win. If he doesn't get FL, he can still win with OH and one of either IN, IA, VA or NV.
    If he doesn't win OH, he can still win with a combo of NV, VA and IA.

    Now there's always a possibility that the GOP can take WI and/or NH away from the Kerry 19, but none of the other states seem even remotely possible, even then Obama still has 232 sure EVs and many ways to get the other 38.

    The point is, I see more ways that he can win than I do for the GOP, especially since he's going to have a billion $ campaign chest, and the electorate is so gov't-dependent now.

  • ||

    Another way Obama can win: Kerry 19 plus VA and IN.

  • ||

    A way Obama loses: there truly IS a God and Obama gets hit by a dump truck.

  • chris||

    Whatabout the country goes broke broke (as opposed to just broke) and can't afford an election. He is welcome to stay in the White House, but Michelle will need to get a real job and pay the electric bill.

  • Hugh Akston||

    That would be awesome. I would love to wake up in a world where creditors treat the US government as they would a retail customer who was mortgaged to the hilt and using credit cards to pay off gambling debts.

  • sasob||

    Ain't gonna happen as long as the Dollar remains the world's reserve currency. And let's face it - none of the other countries' currencies are any better. They're all just a bunch of promises to pay, the value of which is constantly manipulated by said countries' central banks.

  • chris||

    The Ultimate Black Swan -- sovereign debt is risk free.

  • Ted S.||

    Just put Michelle on a treadmill to supply the electricity.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Obama gets hit by a dump truck.

    Michelle will probably be doing a lot more than hitting him if he loses.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I'm sure if Obama won the EC but not the popular vote we will hear how he wasn't really elected.

  • chris||

    Racist!

  • Xenocles||

    I don't agree at all that NH is a given for Obama this time. I also see WI as at least in play given their 2010 senate race and the subsequent failure of the Democrats to win any of the recall or judicial battles that should have motivated them.

    Ditto for PA.

  • ||

    Yeah, as X said, PA is 20 electoral votes of that total and going to be very tough for BO to win in 2012. We just elected a new GOP governor and a new GOP senator in 2010. It's not a reliable blue state.

  • ||

    never going to happen

    http://www.politico.com/2010/maps/#/Governor/2010

    Still I would pay good money to watch Obama win without the popular vote. With the republicans controlling the house and senate.

    That would be the best 4 years worth of entertainment possible in my lifetime.

  • buddyglass||

    FWIW, after the census, the Kerry 19 are worth 242 EV.

    Floria has 29, Ohio 18, Nevada 6, Virginia 13, and Iowa 6. Colorado (9) and New Hampshire (4) are also very much in play.

    It seems fairly unlikely that Obama will win Indiana again. Romney also has a very decent of winning New Hampshire if he manages to win the nomination. Obama can win without Florida and he can (technically) win without Ohio so long as he takes Virginia. Thing is, if he loses both Florida and Ohio then how likely is he to win Virginia plus enough of the smaller states to hit 270?

    My feeling is that if he wins Ohio or Florida then odds are he wins the election, but if he loses both then he's cooked.

  • Gojira||

    More importantly than any of that crap, is this ongoing debate which directly affects the future of the Republic.

  • Almanian||

    LEAVE BARRY BONDS ALONE!

    Seriously. What a fucking waste of time.

  • ||

    i would have loved if he had said to congress "yea, i did them. so fucking what? i hit more home runs, and entertained people. lots of baseball players use them, get your head out of the sand. and why is this CONGRESS' concern?"

  • Almanian||

    Also, much as Michigan already sucks, it cannot truly depart "Territory" status and enter the land of the "Civilised States" until Chik-Fil-A gets some stores there.

    C'mon, CFA! Two sammiches and waffle fries for dinner for the WIN! Although I am in South Hell (Cleveland), which offsets the joy a great deal.

  • PantsFan||

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: rather,

    you're a freak


    Yes, she's not a librarian. Shocking.

  • A fan||

    Amge is every bit an 18-year-old woman

    Hit it?

    I would.

  • Jerry Sandusky||

    Does she have a brother?

  • Appalachian Australian||

    O'Reilly gives Ron Paul his "dumbest thing said this week" award for stating we shouldn't invade Iran (paraphrased).

  • ||

    My friend just met a lover on this site --casualchats.com. It's where for men or women to find intimate encounters.It's a nice place for people who wanna start a short-term relationship .No hesitation to find your true love.

  • PantsFan||

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com.....le2274666/
    Dates on a plane? Airline offers “Meet & Seat” dating service

  • Arf?||

    Internet selection. Date in an uncomfortable confined, inescapable space. I'm sure this will attract the highest quality people.

  • Coeus||

    I HAVE HAD IT WITH THESE MUTHAFUCKIN DATES ON THIS MUTHAFUCKIN PLANE!

  • ||

    Most of the attractive women I know already bring as many distractions as possible on flights to keep their male seatmates from talking their captive ears off.

  • Apatheist||

    I was too busy at work to watch the RP debate clips but holy shit, how is Bachmann's "without a shadow of a doubt Iran will nuke somebody" not being treated has the crazy comment.

  • El Commentariosa||

    THIS IS WHAT THE GOP REALLY BELIEVE

  • ||

    My friend just met a lover on this site --casualchats.com. It's where for men or women to find intimate encounters.It's a nice place for people who wanna start a short-term relationship .No hesitation to find your true love.

  • ||

    My friend just met a lover on this site --casualchats.com. It's where for men or women to find intimate encounters.It's a nice place for people who wanna start a short-term relationship .No hesitation to find your true love.

  • Apatheist||

    There are these places called bars, check them out sometime.

  • Cereal Monogymnast||

    Pshaw. I'm not going to find my true love in a bar. And I don't want anything longer than a short-term relationship. casualchits.com solves both needs!

  • Apatheist||

    Pretty retarded right? Then again there are some pathetic people out there.

  • ||

    I have better luck at lamaze classes.

  • Arf?||

  • ||

    Science damnit I have an unprovoked hatred of that song!

  • El Commentariosa||

    I tried responding to snow and got marked as spam. But snow doesn't.
    F U squirrels.

  • PantsFan||

    Boo Teemu? No Way.

  • insensitive monster||

    I still have one of his aluminum sticks. Dude can still bring it at 41.

  • Realist||

    On the bright side, Obama still matches up well with most Republican frontrunners"
    That stupid fuck Tim still supports Obama.

  • PantsFan||

    After having caught up on Burn Notice Season 5, which just ended, I can safely say it makes much more sense if you think of Anson as existing only in Michael's head.

  • Brett L||

    Shark jumped. I am disappoint.

  • Colonel_Angus||

    Sesame Pork from this place taste like fried pork and rice covered in log cabin. Which is not delicious. I have a stomach ache.

  • SIV||

    Don't eat Chinese in the hinterlands. Sometimes you get lucky (a takeout joint where the cooks head disappears in a plume of flames every few seconds is usually a very good sign) more often you don't.
    Other things to look for: default steamed white rice (only roundeyes bak gwai eat the fried shit).
    Protip: Pay no attention to low or failing "health scores" in big international cities.Customer count, percentage of ethnic Chinese customers (preferably with great class diversity) are key indicators.

  • Viscount Auh20||

    Wait, did the squirrels eat my posts?

  • Old Mexican||

    Klueless Klown Krugman Says Paul Knows Krap About Krugerrands

    Just Who Is Ignorant About Money?


    Bill Anderson

    "Ron Paul, writes Krugman:

    ...(ignores) reality, clinging to his ideology even as the facts have demonstrated that ideology’s wrongness. And, even more unfortunately, Paulist ideology now dominates a Republican Party that used to know better.


    Given the open opposition that Republican stalwarts have exhibited toward Dr. Paul, the idea that his "ideology" is dominating the GOP is a very sick joke, but Krugman seems to be full of humor these days. Unfortunately, he totally misstates the position that Austrians have on money, and he further writes that all Austrians believe that the monetary base is exactly the same as money that is circulating.

    [...]

    Second, Krugman continues in that insistence:

    Austrians, and for that matter many right-leaning economists, were sure about what would happen as a result: There would be devastating inflation. One popular Austrian commentator who has advised Mr. Paul, Peter Schiff, even warned (on Glenn Beck’s TV show) of the possibility of Zimbabwe-style hyperinflation in the near future.

    So here we are, three years later. How’s it going? Inflation has fluctuated, but, at the end of the day, consumer prices have risen just 4.5 percent, meaning an average annual inflation rate of only 1.5 percent [Really, Mr. Krugnutz?] Who could have predicted that printing so much money would cause so little inflation? Well, I could. And did. And so did others who understood the Keynesian economics Mr. Paul reviles. But Mr. Paul’s supporters continue to claim, somehow, that he has been right about everything.


    Austrians are not shocked at what has transpired. The economy, thanks to the bailouts, explosion of regulations, and incendiary rhetoric from the White House, is mired in depression, just as Austrians predicted it would be if the policies of the past four years were followed. As long as the monetary base remains just that – a base – and the money does not circulate, the official rate of inflation will be low. What I do find interesting, however, is Krugman's insistence that commodity prices have nothing to do with inflation, that the only reason they rise and fall is because of demand from "emerging economies" and "volatility." (Of course, "volatility" is an effect, not a cause, but since Keynesians regularly confuse cause and effect, we should not be surprised at Krugman's conclusions.)"

  • chris||

    Robert Wenzel has been on the case showing where Krugman is internationally distorting the charts. From his post on economicjournaldotcom

    Yesterday, Paul Krugman ran this chart of headline price inflation:

    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Pv-I.....log480.jpg

    He argued for such this way:


    One thing that becomes obvious when you look at inflation data is that the numbers bounce around a lot, not just from month to month but from year to year. One way to try to get past the noise is to use one or another definition of core inflation, which I think is necessary if you want to catch underlying inflation trends early. But to get a historical picture, it’s good enough just to use longish averages.

    Since Fed policy can change from day to day, or at least from policy meeting to policy meeting, a three year or four year average is an odd choice. If Fed policy has been relatively stable over a part of that period and only has become more erratic in recent years, you would have to look at a shorter period, say year-over-year inflation rate changes to get a sense as to what is going on . Let's see what has gone on with a Krugman favorite CPI "core inflation" and also CPI "all items" (headline) over recent years:

    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-8kAB.....0/core.jpg

    When you look at the year-over-year change in CPI, it's pretty obvious why Krugman had to reach out to four year smoothing, as you would expect according to Austrian economic theory, when the Fed slowed monetary growth in 2008, (which I warned about: See here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here.) it was followed by the expected dip in prices in 2009 that you would expect with a tight money policy. Bernanke has since then opened up the monetary floodgates in erratic fashion from time to time, and you can see the expected, according to Austrian theory, climb in price inflation.

    What is also instructive is that in early 2008, CPI (all items) was soaring well above 4%, could that be why Bernanke slammed the breaks on money printing in mid-2008?

    Bottom line: The Fed is not able to keep price inflation in check the way Krugman suggests via his misleading "smoothed" four year chart . Further, all items CPI is flirting with 4% annualized rate again. What's Bernanke going to do from here? Print more and skyrocket price inflation or slow the money printing and crash the economy again? Money manipulation always gets you in this bind. Right now, Bernanke has chosen the printing money route, if he continues on this route, those green and red lines are going to continue to climb and Krugman won't even be able to hide the climb in inflation with his trickster 4 year "smoothed" charts. What is he going to tell the Krugmanites then?

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: Chris,

    I read that. Great article by Bob. I never miss his blog.

  • chris||

    Internationally? Jeez, spell check. Last time I'll leave it up to you to slap the proper number of 'l's on the ending of a word. Sadly, no it wont.

  • ||

    The trouble is, the official government inflation doesn't count food or energy costs.

    Food in particular has gone up about 10% or more in the last few years.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: Jeremy,

    Indeed, but Krugman neglects to mention it. He simply uses the figure the government releases as if it came from the Bible itself.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    This is why whenever I see left-wing goobs on here yapping about CLINTON HAD A SURPLUS UGH, revenues as a percentage of GDP, and "OBAMA CREATED MORE JOBS THAN BUSH!" I always cite the government figures. They end up looking like fools since they can't come up with a coherent rebuttal against what they consider to believe to be gospel.

  • ||

    I used IPCC numbers to show that drought and floods were not a concern of global warming...but then New Mex said I was being a hypocrite for using the IPCC.

    You can never win using logic with moon bats their basic facts are constantly shifting.

  • PantsFan||

  • ||

  • ||

  • Montani Semper Liberi||

    I haven't listened to Op Ivy in like 15 years. I forgot how great they were. Thanks for the link. I'll have to go find where I put Energy now.

  • ||

    My pleasure.

  • RoboCain||

    I was friends with those guys bitd.

  • Arf?||

    Awesome! But were you friends with P?

  • ||

    Dang Banjos, for a while I was worried that in the song posting extravaganza I'd never see a band that I liked. But today some OpIvy and you linked Cold Concrete the other day, so things are looking up.

    You should of linked Officer for our in-house cop, Mr. Dunphy.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    She's still under probation for bringing up Papa Roach.

  • ||

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Forgive, not forget!!

    :)

    It's all good. To you I impart the musical genius of Steven Wilson.

  • Old Mexican||

    The Jay Leno Show with guest Ron Paul

    http://ronpaulflix.com/2011/12.....c-16-2011/

  • A Serious Man||

    He'll just answers some softball questions and tell a couple of amusing anecdotes I'm sure. It's an oasis in a desert of dickhead pundits like Hannity, O'Reilly, and Stephanapolous that condescendingly treat Paul like shit when he's on their shows.

  • A Serious Man||

    But I'm digging this RonPauFlix site. Good way to escape the copywrite labryinth at YouTube.

  • ||

    "Bachmann hates Muslims."

    I can't wait to see this blow up the blogosphere tomorrow.

  • RyanXXX||

    I loved that. And his line about Santorum - "Gays and Muslims" made me LOL

    It was a good interview for getting his overall message out in a way people can (mostly) follow

  • RoboCain||

  • ||

  • ||

    If Paul gets to be President, I hope he sends the National Guard to shut down all those federal agencies, at least the ones he's been specifically promising to abolish, if he gets blowback. That would be an awesome sight.

    "It's no sweet when you're on the other side of the APC, is it, mother-fuckers?

  • ||

    Sounds like ap lan bro.
    www.RealPrivacy.tk

  • ||

    The Dems apparently caved on the big Canadian pipeline in the budget deal. Hey environmentalist, here comes the Obama re-election bus.

  • ||

    I don't know why they even want to build the damn thing. It'll be clogged with hockey pucks and TimBits within a month, mark my words.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    I'm not sure that's true.

  • Fluffy||

    Bachmann hates Muslims?

    Damn.

    I guess Paul figures this is his last rodeo, so he may as well throw all his bombs now.

    He never would have said shit like that in 2008.

    I be impressed.

    BTW -

    Upon further reflection, I was pretty wrong in the Rush Limbaugh dispute last night and Blue Moon was (about 3/4) right and John was completely right.

    My bad.

    I crawled out on that limb and got pissed out there and wouldn't crawl back.

  • ||

    Thanks. And it happens. Admitting it just means you are not Joe Boyle or MNG.

  • The Other Kevin||

    Saw Paul on Leno last night. It was a long segment, lots of good questions and answers, tons of applause. I thought it went great.

    I was pretty shocked that he said that about Michelle Bachmann. I expect quite a backlash from Bachmann and her six supporters.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: The Other Kevin,

    I was pretty shocked that he said that about Michelle Bachmann.


    That she hates Mulsims?

    Ah, he's only saying that because it's true. Don't mind him too much.

  • Rev. Blue Moon ||

    Thanks man. I still respect the hell out of you, FWIW.

  • Fluffy||

    I think the Paul attacks are probably a strategy.

    He seems to be bringing out a new attack every couple of days.

    There are a finite number of days between now and the Iowa caucus. If he throws one bomb a day, that fills up the time when the newsletters could come out.

    If (say) Bachmann makes a stink about the newsletters on Monday (for example) it just sounds like "You said I hate Muslims? Well Na Na Boo Boo you're a racist too!"

    The guy throwing punches is harder to punch.

  • ||

    I am not sure why he did that with Bachman. Bachman is not a threat. And it just makes Paul look mean. Maybe he figured Bachmann will come back now that the titties is crashing and burning.

  • Fluffy||

    I think they looked at the papers the morning after the last debate (and watched the Today Show) and saw that all everybody was talking about was that he fought with Bachmann.

    If he goes a few rounds with Bachmann and Santorum this week, that takes oxygen away from Newt. Or that at least could be their hope.

    As this sinks in I'm starting to get a little stunned. The sheer balls of making this kind of attack amazes me a little. I mean, can you see Obama just out-and-out saying a Republican member of Congress hates Muslims? Of course not. Frickin' CHARLES SCHUMER wouldn't go on Leno and say a major Republican figure hates Muslims. It's just not done.

    And Paul threw the bomb and laughed. It's like there's no tomorrow.

  • ||

    But is it really a fair attack? I don't think Bachmann actually hates Muslims. It is the kind of attack Al Sharpton uses on Republicans. I don't like it. I think people should be above that. And if Paul wants to through hyperbole bombs, those bombs go both ways. Bachmann could come back and call Paul a surrender monkey. Neither side wins that confrontation.

  • Fluffy||

    But is it really a fair attack? I don't think Bachmann actually hates Muslims.

    I think her lukewarm-Christian-Dominionist, "Clash of Civilizations" views are so close to "Muslim hate" that it would be hard to find the daylight between them. I think there's a very slight amount of daylight there, personally, but it's close enough for the Tonight Show.

    Certainly if the things Bachmann says about the Christian essentialism of the US mean that Muslims can never "really" be a part of "America".

    And her paranoia about a Global Caliphate and whatnot means that there are only two kinds of Muslims internationally: those who are our domestic animals, and those we kill because you can't trust 'em when they're running loose.

    When you're dealing with someone like Krauthammer, you can look at his desire to smash Muslim countries and say, "Well, he's just playing a particularly bloody game of realpolitik. It's not really personal to him." But with Bachmann, her over-the-top Christian warrior woman pose pretty much forces you to at least suspect there is some religious animus motivating her.

  • ||

    You may suspect it. But you give people the benefit of the doubt. A liberal could just as easily say that Paul's over the top anti fed small government warrior pose pretty much forces you to think that he doesn't like minorities and those who need government the most. Doesn't sound so fair in that context does it?

  • mad libertarian guy||

    They already believe that, John. And for exactly that reason.

  • ||

    "A liberal could just as easily say that Paul's over the top anti fed small government warrior..."

    The difference, John, is that one of them is right in their views and the other is dead wrong.

  • ||

    It's possible that she's just too stupid to see the implications of the crap she says. See, you're a smart fellow who takes what you say seriously and thinks it through (except when you disagree with me :) ). But to most politicians, it's just reading off lines like an actor, they don't believe what they're saying. Combine that with the fact that most of them would be stocking the shelves at Walmart if they hadn't gotten a fruitful connection early in their career and you have justification for assuming incompetence rather than malice.

  • ||

    "But is it really a fair attack?"

    Sure is. I've been saying the same thing for months. Truth hurts.

    To be fair she probably doesn't HATE Muslims, but she is willing to use the issue to garner votes from those who do. I see little difference between them.

  • ||

    And don't forget, a lot of voters hate Muslims. So I am not sure it really convinces many people to vote for Paul. Why say it?

  • Fluffy||

    I think Paul saw that not only did his attacks make Gingrich wither a bit, they also pulled Paul up.

    Paul can either be a meek surrender monkey Frenchie or a bomb-throwing surrender Ninja. I think he gets more votes as the latter.

  • ||

    But that is the wrong bomb to throw at the wrong person. Attack Mitt. Call him a crony capitalist and tax collector for the welfare state. This attack doesn't resonate with anyone other than liberals who won't vote for Paul anyway.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    I wish he hadn't said it. He was abusing the h-word like too many people in politics. And the bombthrowers who use the h-word are themselves manifesting some hate.

    One part of me, however, likes seeing him reply in kind to the attacks against him. In the Darwinian world of campaigns, despite all the handwringing about "negativity," attacking your opponents is a proof of seriousness. The media deplores negative campaigns while covering the heck out of political attacks, because conflict sells.

    And who exactly has the standing to cast stones at Paul? The members of this comment board, of course, it goes without saying, have that standing. But what about the other candidates? Do Newt and Bachmann have the standing to complaint about attacks? Newt build his career on it. Obama, too, bases much of his campaign on spewing hate in the name of anti-hate.

  • Fluffy||

    I guess we'll see how it plays out.

    It's funny, Paul went out of his way to NOT attack Romney. Called him a nice guy.

    Maybe he figures he's got the whole period of time between IA and NH to attack Romney.

  • ||

    Maybe Romney offered him a veep spot. My head would explode if that were to transpire, but anything's possible.

  • ||

    Maybe he's come to the same conclusion I have, that Romney is the next best candidate for liberty after RP (and I'm not counting GJ in this analysis).

  • ||

    Ron Paul's a little kookie, but he ain't dumb, or delusional for that matter.

  • ||

    Bravely typed. Which candidate do you think is better for liberty (other than RP and GJ)?

  • ||

    Over Obama, I'd vote for Paul, Johnson, Huntsman, Cain; otherwise I'm voting LP. If Paul or Johnson are third party I'll vote for them. If either of those two is offered a veep spot I'll vote for the head of that ticket.

    No chance in hell voting for: Obama, Romney, Gingrich. (unless a veep spot for the chosen ones)

    Sorry, but movements are built upon: emotion, propaganda, and a to the stoopid power pigheadedness. Realism and compromise won't, and haven't, advance the cause of liberty.

  • ||

    Except in very rare circumstances, politicians don't advance the cause of liberty, they just either impede it or ignore it. Romney is more ignore than impede imho. The advancement of liberty must come from private sector quarters.

    A second BO term would be disastrous for liberty on pretty much every front, except perhaps the pelvic issues.

  • ||

    Note that Paul also said nice things about Huntsman. Other than that they're both Mormon ex-governors, the other thing they have in common is that they've never attacked Ron Paul like the others have. Mitt didn't even tussle with him in 2008 when giving the isolationist what-for was a spectator sport among the GOP candidates.

  • Maxxx||

    This attack doesn't resonate with anyone other than liberals who won't vote for Paul anyway.

    Yeah, it was really dumb.

    No one in Iowa is going to vote for Paul because that statement, that would not have anyway, but some people will vote for Bachman out of sympathy.

  • ||

    Paul knows he's not going to win Iowa at this point thanks to his Iran position, so he's just out to take down the more dangerous people like Newt and the people who attacked him personally like Michelle.

  • ||

    And of course, I am referring in the above to Michelle Malkin, who I would totally fuck.

  • ||

    Someone is going to take the rather large national security I won't vote for Romney block. That was Cain for a while and then Gingrich. Now where do they go? Maybe Bachmann comes back a bit.

  • ||

    Santorum. I'm telling you, he's on the rise.

  • Maxxx||

    No fucking way.

    Libertarians would love to get that boogie man back but it ain't gonna happen.

  • ||

    Santorum is a closet disco freak?

    Oh, you mean bogeyman.

  • Arf?||

  • The Other Kevin||

    I think it was just an honest comment based on their exchange in the last debate.

  • ||

    ^this^

  • Atanarjuat||

    U.S. stands by California bullet train project despite critics

    Nunes said the California High-Speed Rail Authority has spent $800 million over the last 15 years on studies, salaries and consultants without laying "a single inch of track." He noted that the authority pays its chief executive $375,000 annually, more than Amtrak pays its top executive.

    "The high-speed rail authority has bankrolled a vast array of political consultants to curry favor with elected officials," Nunes said. "If the high-speed rail were widely supported, a multimillion-dollar PR campaign would not be necessary."

    In case you were wondering where all the money you've ever paid into the federal government went, it was stolen in an incredibly corrupt fashion.

  • ||

    Here's a little anecdotal tidbit: Of the dozens of people I've asked so far out of interest, Republican block-voters and hardcore Democrats and libertarians, only two said they'd consider using trains at all. Cars are convenient and they like them more. I wonder if Californian voters are like that, too.

  • Maxxx||

    Big government progressives don't sell chu chu trains by saying that you would want to ride them.

    The sales pitch is that other people will ride them, making the roads that you travel less congested.

  • ||

    Does Reason plan on putting an end to its Hitchens' Hagiography?

  • ||

    Once February starts and they get into Abe Lincoln Appreciation Month the Hitchens stories will start to fade.

    I can't wait!

  • ||

    I've heard that for Valentine's day Episiarch is buying you a barn to go with your Christmas pony!

    Heller's going to get you a still beating baboon heart, but only because he cares that much.

  • ||

    Don't slander me

  • ||

    You must be neo-Confederate. Where's the black kid you're keeping on a chain, Klansman? In your basement, or in the death chamber?

  • ||

    I love Honest Abe, he's a goddamn American Hero.

  • ||

    If the South's secession was valid, then they were a foreign country with absolutely no constitutional rights. Thus the feds could attack them, burn their crops, rape their women, and dash their infants against rocks with no constitutional issues whatsoever.

  • ||

    And that's if you buy all of the, "Sherman was a baby killing WARCRIMINALOMG".

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Sherman always gets a bad rap. His cardinal sin was destroying property instead of killing the populace. Grant was a far harsher commander.

  • Heartless Baboon||

    Giving you two seconds to prepare for a swift kick in the nuts for dredging that shit back up.

  • ||

    Next question: what size polity has the right to secede from the US?

    Can NYC secede? How about Brooklyn? Greenwich Village? The 800 block of West 81st Street?

    If you're basing it on natural law, I don't see how you can distinguish between these situations.

  • ||

    It gets very thorny in these areas.

    When it comes to natural law and sovereignty validity is more based upon well informed opinion than a logical conclusion to correct premises. These type of discussions always lead to reductio arguments on both sides.

  • ||

    I think to a large extent it's a question of might makes right, particularly when the region in question has self-government. The test of their "right" to secede is whether they can defend their territory from the retaliation.

  • ||

    Oh get over it; your glorious slave-nation lost. Federal overreach and dictatorial power is acceptable as long as it's being used to end something as pernicious as chattel slavery.

  • ||

    I've yet to witness anything suggesting Capitol is at all neo-Confederate, so "your glorious nation" came from where, dude?

    You're just a meanie. :(

  • ||

    If the South's secession was valid, then they were a foreign country with absolutely no constitutional rights. Thus the feds could attack them, burn their crops, rape their women, and dash their infants against rocks with no constitutional issues whatsoever.

    Oh get over it; your glorious slave-nation lost. Federal overreach and dictatorial power is acceptable as long as it's being used to end something as pernicious as chattel slavery.

    Ok what the fuck is going on here?

  • ||

    Spoof?

  • ||

    If you are going to spoof please refrain from using peoples email addresses.

  • ||

    cap-L wasn't expressing an opinion on that topic; above he was defending Sherman, too, so probably not a neoconf. But we'll keep him under surveillance.

  • ||

    What the hell's going on? I leave for a couple hours and people's minds turn to fucking mush. Jesus.

    All the posts that are mine are mine and those ones only.

  • ||

    Some libertarians don't believe that governments should have monopolies over arbitrary geographic areas.

  • ||

    Yes, of course. In an ancap situation secession would be not a relevant concept.

  • ||

    If you are going to spoof please refrain from using peoples email address.

  • ||

    It wasn't a spoof.

    Moral problem != constitutional problem

  • ||

    Tulpa|12.17.11 @ 3:39PM|#

    It wasn't a spoof.

    Screw it all to hell.

    I have no idea what is real anymore.

    Have a good weekend folks. I am out.

  • tarran||

    Next question: what size polity has the right to secede from the US?

    Any size has the right - down to a guy living in Quahog RI.

  • ||

    I love Honest Abe, he's a goddamn American Hero.

    Saved the Union, he did.

  • ||

    How many divisions does the Pope of Greenwich Village have?

  • Sanity Clause||

    How many thumbs does Paulie have?

  • Sanity Clause||

    I'll tell you what, I had to watch that movie a few times before I really appreciated the Paulie character.

  • ||

    And now, News From the World of the Butthurt.

    BURLINGTON, Vt. – A University of Vermont fraternity whose members are accused of circulating a survey that asked who they would like to rape has been closed indefinitely.

    The national Sigma Phi Epsilon made the announcement Friday after an internal investigation and lengthy discussions with the university in Burlington.

    "Without suggesting that every member had knowledge of this questionnaire, the questions asked in the document are deplorable and absolutely inconsistent with our values," said Brian Warren, executive director of the national fraternity organization based in Richmond, Va.

    --------

    UVM Interim President John Bramley said Friday that national representatives of Sigma Phi Epsilon have been thorough, respectful and serious in its investigation. UVM's investigation will continue.

    "We respect and support their decision, and appreciate their interest in maintaining a dialogue going forward to identify lessons learned from all of this, as well as exploring educational strategies and opportunities to address pervasive cultural issues that contributed to this egregious situation," Bramley said.

    Bramley went on to state, in no uncertain terms, "Elephant sky chortling grebe fauna terrarium stardust menial whither trumpeting modicum. Thank you, and God bless Woodrow Wilson."

  • Atanarjuat||

    Gawd, I know someone who reads entire books like that last paragraph. "Sustainability issues in the post-agricultural paradigm blah blah..."

  • Sanity Clause||

    Somebody needs to really bitchslap David Frum, really, really hard. I just saw him on CNN with Ali Velshi (or whatever the fuck his name is), saying that Ron Paul is "an ignoramus", and that we need to bail out Europe to avoid a global Depression. And the asshole pundits on CNN were all giggling. What the fuck is wrong with these people?

    Fuck these people. They deserve the shitstorm that is coming. I'm voting for Obama just to help bring it about faster. Sorry Ron, I don't want you to "save" us. I want this fucking country to die, and all of these assholes to be destitute, vagrant street beggars so I can spit on them when I walk by and taunt them with all of my shiny gold coins.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Does anyone get the feeling that even if Paul does win the primary, we'd see one of the loser candidates (Gingrich, Romney, etc) run as an independent (either in an outright attempt to win the election - see FL governor's race - or hijack it just enough to cull votes away from Paul.

    It appears to me that they legitimately would rather see Obama win again than have Paul come out on top.

  • Obvious||

    Humongous monied interest are going to run Bloomberg as an independent.

  • Obvious||

    Lynn Forester de Rothschild
    in her own words.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....28640.html

  • mad libertarian guy||

    This is not the same sentiment, however.

    Her sentiment is that the American people are ripe for a 3rd party run. I don't agree with her on that. There are just too many dedicated team voters who will vote their team no matter what.

    My scenario involves Paul winning the GOP nomination, but one of the losers running with the intent of throwing the election to Obama specifically to keep Paul from winning. They'd rather see Obama win again than Paul expose Team RED as statist douchebags.

  • Obvious||

    Didn't mean to imply she wants a second Obama term. Her circle (other articles I'm brainfarting over go into organizational detail) really does think Bloomberg is the best man for the job.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Her circle (other articles I'm brainfarting over go into organizational detail) really does think Bloomberg is the best man for the job.

    Let us hope that her circle is small and without broader influence. Bloomberg is an authoritarian thug.

  • RoboCain||

    They're children. That's what's wrong with them.

  • chris||

    Laughing my hairy ass off.

    Democrats: Concession to GOP on Keystone will force Obama to kill pipeline

    http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wi.....he-project

    And the reason the administration gives, put down any beverage you are drinking and swallow before reading:

    A senior Obama administration official noted that the president said he would not accept an attempt by Congress to mandate construction before adequate review of health and safety regulations
    The officials said the House-passed Keystone language merely speeds up the decision process but does not determine whether the project would be approved.

  • ||

    There's nothing finer than having a vagina.

  • ||

    So Rather....you now are spoofing women...(using their email address even)....does this mean that you no longer hate only men and now hate everyone equally?

  • ||

    That is not a spoof, Josh.

  • A Serious Man||

    Hard to believe that Jay Leno of all people did the most serious, polite, and thoughtful Ron Paul interview.

    Unlike the dickhead pundits on the various cable networks, Leno seemed genuninely interested in what Paul had to say, never asked him a loaded question, and gave him enough time to articulate his views. The result was that Paul absolutely killed, as evident by the applause he got after every response.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    To be fair, John Stewart does well with RP too.

  • ||

    Just wanted to let everybody out there know, I enjoy eating women's feces (but not men's, because that is gross and gay).

  • ||

    Oh good, rather has been leaving her droppings all over the thread.

  • ||

    huh? this and your vagina link is why i thought it was rather....then i found up above a bunch of flaccid civil war arguments.

    What the fuck is going on here?

  • ||

    I'm so confused by these events. What could have caused them?

  • ||

    At first I thought it was rather...but some of those civil war spoofs are almost funny...

    Which makes me think something else is afoot.

  • ||

    Show me in the constitution where it says the federal government can't incinerate foreigners in foreign countries.

  • ||

    Dude i am having some sort of epiphany/aneurism going on here in which all the reason comments seem like parodies of themselves...

    I am not going to waste it discussing the civil war with you.

    I am off to read slashdot.com...that should be a hoot.

  • Obvious||

    all the reason comments seem like parodies of themselves

    Why won't anyone take "libertarianism" seriously?

  • ||

    Calm down JayCee, you big baby. The civil war stuff started 'cause LibertMike posted and I take every opportunity to tweek him on the issue.

    He pretty much figured out that I was just fucking around so he won't respond anymore.

  • 150 years ago||

    Let it fucking go, Sharpton.

  • ||

    The same reason people go on about food trucks and red light cameras and snowball fights when I post.

  • ||

    Saturday.

  • DEATH KNELL OF AMERICAN EMPIRE||

    So the Yanks are going home. Apart from the thousands of their servicemen and women whose lifeblood they are leaving in the sands of Iraq, and the tens of thousands too maimed or otherwise damaged to make it back to home and hearth. And minus the trillion-plus of dollars in treasure they have expended on destroying an Arab country (which may have lost a million souls and seen three millions off into exile), fanning the flames of fanaticism, making Iran more powerful, and unleashing a wave of sectarianism throughout the Muslim world. Nice work, but hardly "Mission Accomplished", as the melancholy valediction delivered by President Obama at Fort Bragg this week made clear to the discerning.

    The more he talked about what he once called the "dumb war", the more obvious it was that his was the task of holding the dipped banner of defeat. And the crew of thick-necked servicemen straight out of central casting roaring their approval at his description of their success could not quite drown out the sound of the Last Post. This is the death knell of American empire, the end of the brief unipolar world in the ashes of whose hubris the lone bugler now stands playing the retreat. Like Ozymandias, history – which hasn't ended after all – will invite us to gaze upon its ruined works and tremble. But instead we will rejoice, rejoice. For the Project for the New American Century it will be never glad confident morning again.

    The war that was waged – yes, for oil, and yes, also for Israel – was waged above all to terrify the world (especially China) with American power. It turned into the largest boomerang in history. For what has been demonstrated instead are the limits of near-bankrupt America's power. Far from being cowed, America's adversaries – and its enemies – have been emboldened. With shock and awe the empire soon dominated the skies over Iraq to be sure. But they never controlled a single street in the country from the day they invaded until this day of retreat. One street alone – Haifa Street in Baghdad – became the graveyard of scores, maybe hundreds of Americans.

    Fortresses like Fallujah entered history alongside Stalingrad as symbols of the unvanquishable power of popular resistance to foreign invasion. Crimes like Abu Ghraib prison – where Iraqis were stripped naked and humiliated, forced to perform indecent acts upon each other and videotaped doing so for the entertainment of their torturers in the barracks afterwards – entered the lexicon of the barbarism of those who invade others, flying the colours of their "civilising" mission. As Chairman Mao once put it: "Sometimes the enemy struggles mightily to lift a huge stone; only to drop it on its own foot." In an America where a third of the population are living in poverty or terrifyingly near it, and where imperial hubris met its nemesis on Haifa Street, China now knows it has nothing to fear from this paper tiger.

    I wrote at the time that the invasion of Iraq would be worse than a crime: it would be the Mother of All Blunders. I told Tony Blair – outside the men's lavatory in the library corridor of the House of Commons, to be precise – that the fall of Baghdad would be not the beginning of the end, but merely the end of the beginning. And that the Iraqis would fight them, with their teeth if necessary, until they had driven them from their land. I told Blair that there was no al-Qaida in Iraq, but that if he and Bush were to invade there would be thousands of them.

    But two things, as George Bush would put it, I "mis-underestimated". First, that when the tower of lies on which the case for the Iraq war had been constructed was exposed, the credibility of the political systems of the two main liars would collapse under the weight. And second, that the example of the Iraqi resistance would trigger seismic changes in the Arabian landscape from Marrakesh to Bahrain.

    Almost nobody in Britain or America any longer believes a word their politicians say. This profound change is not wholly the result of the Iraq war, but it moved into top gear following the war and the militarised mendacity that paved the way to it. In America this malaise has fuelled both the Tea Party phenomenon and the Occupy movement alike, even if the word Iraq seldom crosses their lips. And from the Atlantic Ocean to the Persian Gulf the plates are moving still ...

  • ||

    No, it's not that big of a deal. Jesus man show some goddamn perspective.

  • Mike M.||

    You know that it's considered plagiarism to reprint someone else's work without giving that person the proper credit for it, right?

  • Sevo||

    "In an America where a third of the population are living in poverty or terrifyingly near it,"

    Uh, no.

  • ||

    I always laugh at that shit because that's where I'm at financially and life is okay. I have all the shit I need and am careful with my limited funds. Of course, I didn't go out and have a bunch of fucking rugrats to feed so I'm copacetic.

  • Al DeWeigh||

    "In an America where a third of the population are living in poverty or terrifyingly near it,"

    Emphasis added. That can be taken in more than one way. So, maybe.

  • ||

    Exactly. I'm sure an overextended overleveraged pharmacist feels terrifingly near poverty, but that don't make it so.

  • Sevo||

    "Emphasis added. That can be taken in more than one way. So, maybe."

    Yeah, so long as one of those ways means 'I have to ski at Tahoe instead of Aspen this year'.
    This is the lefty meme that 'you're only one pay check away from being homeless!'
    Well, maybe you are, but you probably should have made coffee at home instead of buying the double frappy-wappie-frizzie for the last ten years.
    I need to see a believable cite before that's anything other than hyperbole.
    See, for example:
    "September 13th, 2011, the nation's poverty rate rose to 15.1% (46.2 million) in 2010"
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P.....ted_States
    And that's reported by the government agencies charged with fudging numbers.

  • Amakudari||

    The poverty rate is all but meaningless -- except for its use to advocate for more additional welfare (which, of course, is not counted in the statistic). It estimates someone's class and perceptions perhaps, not their absolute material, physical or intellectual well-being. As we acquire a better overall quality of life, the poverty threshold adjusts likewise.

    Goods are cheaper, more diverse and often unprecedented in history, we're living longer than ever before thanks to medical advances, and receiving more years of education than before. We own bigger houses and better stuff than many people in Europe/Japan. (In my experience, an upper-middle class Japanese has as much as a lower-middle class American ten years ago.)

    Plus, much of the increase in poverty is due to not counting welfare. To compare poverty in the US in 2011 to poverty in 1971 and say it's "higher" is profoundly disingenuous.

  • ||

    Concur.

    I've said it before...this nation has no poor (at least not statistically relevant) when compared to the third world. Being a poor American means you can only afford one flat-screen.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Well, Death, you should take your grievances up with the Republicans and Democrats who got us into Iraq in the first goddamn place.

  • ||

    Reason H&R College Bowl Pick-em News

    Sloopy, Brett L, Amakudari, Pro Lib and others start the Bowl right with their baffling choice to choose Wyoming over Temple.

    If this is any indication of their predictive abilities, this is going to be an easy win for Sandusky's Sexual Fantasy Pick.

  • PantsFan||

    Fools.

  • ||

    Villanova FTW!!!

  • Brett L||

    I can't believe that Ohio screwed me. Ohio.

  • ||

    I know.

  • Amakudari||

    Nope. I just don't like the one douche I know from Temple, and align my picks with how I'd prefer things to happen.

    But Ohio? What? Ragin' Cajuns are up by 9 with 10 minutes to go after blowing every little thing in the game?

    I'm not worried, though. I'll eventually win on my 3-0 tiebreaker (this assumes overtime, of course) for Bama-LSU.

  • Sanity Clause||

    Fucking spam filter

  • Increase your length and girth||

    ....you have to make friends with the filter!

  • RoboCain||

    "Unfortunately, this remains the state of affairs in New York, despite F.O.P.A. and the Safe Passage Provision. Going back almost a decade, the District Attorneys in several New York jurisdictions have flat out stated that they are not going to obey federal law"

    http://www.thetruthaboutguns.c.....more-87899

  • RoboCain||

    Ron Paul on Bachmann: ‘She hates Muslims. She hates them. She wants to go get them’

    http://dailycaller.com/2011/12.....-get-them/

  • Jerry||

    Nice of him, she for sure will pick up some additional support from Iowa evangelicals.

  • Sanity Clause||

  • SIV||

    The BUSH LEGACY is slowly torn apart.

  • Sevo||

    "The spending bill doesn’t actually amend the 2007 law, but does prohibit the administration from spending any money to carry out the light bulb standards — which amounts to at least a temporary reprieve."

    Probably not. Most mfgrs are likely re-tooled by now.
    Repeal the damn thing and you might see positive results. All this does is add uncertainly.

  • RoboCain||

  • Obvious||

    This is like the worst chat room ever.

  • ||

    HAHAHA, Oh man did you just think of that?

  • Anthony Weiner||

    How ya doin'?

  • danny||

    ?

  • ||

    OT: Why doesn't anybody know about Grover Cleveland? Do YOU guys know/have any opinions of him?

  • ||

    "Bourbon Democrat was a term used in the United States from 1876 to 1904 to refer to a member of the Democratic Party, conservative or classical liberal, especially one who supported President Grover Cleveland in 1884–1888/1892–1896 and Alton B. Parker in 1904. After 1904, the Bourbons faded away. Woodrow Wilson, who had been a Bourbon, made a deal in 1912 with the leading opponent of the Bourbons, William Jennings Bryan; Bryan endorsed Wilson for the Democratic nomination, and Wilson named Bryan Secretary of State. The term "Bourbon" was mostly used disparagingly, by critics complaining of old-fashioned viewpoints.[1]

    Bourbon Democrats represented business interests, generally supporting the goals of banking and railroads but opposed to subsidies for them and unwilling to protect them from competition. Bourbon Democrats were promoters of laissez-faire capitalism (which included opposition to the protectionism that the Republicans were then advocating). They opposed imperialism and U.S. overseas expansion, fought for the gold standard, and opposed bimetallism. Strong supporters of reform movements such as the Civil Service Reform and opponents of the corrupt city bosses, Bourbons led the fight against the Tweed Ring. The anticorruption theme earned the votes of many Republican Mugwumps in 1884."

    Might Ron Paul garner a few votes if he expands on his support for the Bourbon DEMOCRATS?

  • ||

    Just perused the wiki page and this Cleveland fellow seems like a good candidate. I don't remember him at the debates though. Well, if he gets the nod he'll have my vote.

  • ||

    I meant if he pandered to Cleveland and the Bourbon Democrats because it wouldn't make him look like a sell-out on ideology and might attract Democrats because Cleveland and the Bourbon Democrats were, well, Democrats

  • ||

    With the red/blue team political nature of things, all you got to do is get that d or r after your name and you got a coin's flip chance of winning.

    ELECT! Cleveland's Corpse (D) 2012 YEAAAAAAH!!!!

  • ||

    Antoninus Pius 2012!

  • ||

    Trivia question: name the other people who won the presidential election twice and lost it once. I think there are two others, though there may be more.

  • Juice||

    Nixon and Jefferson?

  • ||

    Oh, forgot about TJ. I believe Andy Jackson lost in 1828, won in 1832 and 1836 also.

  • Xenocles||

    Depending on how you look at it Jefferson lost twice; 1796 was obvious but he also received 4 electoral votes in 1792.

  • Clevelandite||

    I'd love to see Paul talk on this. As my handle indicates, I'm rather fond of our 22nd and 24th president. I even, on occassion, self-identify as a Bourbon Democrat, usually when some TEAM RED moron equates my classical liberalism with his own detestable brand of conservatism. Leaving aside my personal prejudices on the matter, it offers Paul the perfect opportunity for cross-party outreach without compromising on principles.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Wow. Don't see too many old-school Dems around these days.

  • ||

    Article about Mohamed Bouazizi, the guy who set himself aflame in Tunisia after repeated humiliation from government officials.

  • Rhet Orical||

    If this day-old "links" thread were the very last posting on H&R, would the chat room comment thread go on forever, regardless? What would it look like? What would it become? Would the living envy the dead? Discuss.

  • ||

    If you were already in the know, I'd let you in on a place that is just as you describe it. A secret place where a captive moose thinks his thoughts.

  • PantsFan||

    Don't you dare.

  • ||

    Dude, I've seen people link to the blackhole in responses to those whom shall not be named. I would never do such a thing. Some things are sacred.

  • John Wiley Price ||

    That's racist!

  • ||

    http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/1374/772n.jpg

    Does that secret place have chicks like these?

  • Apatheist||

    AMERICA, FUCK YEAH!

  • ||

    I think there's something wrong with their pants.

  • Ice Nine||

    Wrong dryer setting.

  • ||

    "What would it look like? What would it become?"

    I think it would become self aware and attack mankind.

  • ||

    An excerpt:

    Bouazizi wanted two things: to earn a living for his family and to accumulate capital (ras el mel). He was a young man, only 26, of no other discernible interests. His life was consumed by his role as the primary breadwinner for his family of seven -- a role he had played, according to his mother, ever since he started working in the market at age 12. His father died when Bouazizi was 3. He had five siblings. His mother later remarried, but his stepfather, also his uncle, plagued by health problems, was unable to support the family.

    As those who knew Bouazizi tell it, he was the very opposite of an activist. "He never even watched the news," his mother told us. "People like Mohamed are concerned with doing business. They don't understand anything about politics." The $73 he earned each week was the family's main source of income.

    Goddamn, I think I got something in my eye. Fucking guy just wanted to sell enough vegetables to support his family, and the goddamn bureaucrats couldn't let him just do his thing. Didn't want anything for free, or any handouts; just to be left alone to work.

  • ||

    I hope those Tunisian cops and officials get malignant tumors in their vital organ and die painfully. Fuck them.

  • ||

    Dude, read the entire article. Your blood will fucking boil.

    If I hear some college occupying asshole making demands on this man's sacrifice I might be tempted to break my pacifism and smack a bitch up.

  • ||

    That was a fucking God-awful nutpunch. Statism, eh?

  • ||

    It's so heartbreaking because this guy didn't want anything great or extravagant. Mohamed just wanted to work and support his family, maybe move up in the world a little bit. And they fucking broke him for it.

    I read stuff on Kelo, or Brooklyn Yards and I could totally see something like that happening here.

  • ||

    Reminds me of what so many unions do to genuine hard-workers.

  • Juice||

    I might be tempted to break my pacifism and smack a bitch up.

    You're going to inject them with heroin?

  • Occupidiest||

    NOW you understand what we feel.

  • ||

    Oh, just in time. Fuck off charlatan.

    Y'all want a free pass to rob the working people of this country blind, you rich entitled little fucks.

  • Occupidiest||

    Go on the Web site "We are the 99 percent" and you will see the Mohamed Bouazizis of the United States, page after page of testimonials from members of the middle class who took out loans to pay for education, took out mortgages to buy their houses and a piece of the American dream, worked hard at the jobs they could find, and ended up unemployed or radically underemployed and on the precipice of financial and social ruin.

  • ||

    You have any idea why that sort of thing happens in the first place? Hint: it has nothing to do with capitalism, princess.

  • ||

    "Radically underemployed"? Cry me a fucking river. I've had to do part-time household chore routines and burger-flipping for money, and my life's going just fine, maybe because I didn't major in Jewish Studies with a minor in Dingaling-dynasty Chinese literature, or blow my loan on parties.

    A job is a job.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    I didn't major in Grievance Studies, and I'm just fine.

    Take your sob tales elsewhere, Occutard.

  • ||

    I've had to do part-time household chore routines and burger-flipping for money,

    Looking back to my teens and 20s and the work i did, pick cherries and apples, work in a fruit shed, flip burgers, clean dishes, bus tables, worked at a convenience store (late shift some times) dug ditches, glued pvc pipes, pizza delivery...it is kind of weird...

    it is all low class work (much of it where i live is now done by Mexicans)...yet i don't remember feeling low class when i was doing it.....

    and it is the OWS jerks who are calling me low class for doing it...it is not the rich...hell the rich admire that i did it...in fact most of them did it as well. In fact it would not surprise me that most OWSers never did that sort of work in their lives....and a larger % of the 1% have done that kind of work.

  • ||

    Go on the Web site "We are the 99 percent"

    *barf*

  • ||

    "We are the 99 percent of dumbasses -- the other 1 percent are the commies and fascists"? That website about Occupy-ers? Awesome!

    Oh, wait -- the actual 99 Percent site? No, thanks.

  • ||

    I heard what you were saying. You know nothing of my work.

  • ||

    Umm, look here man, I come straight out of the rust belt appalachian trash heap and have no sympathy for the fat overextended American middle class. Their kids laughed at my Salvation Army clothes when I was a kid. Fuck 'em, if they can't tighten the the belt a little.

    Why shouldn't people pay back their loans? Do you realize that if no one pays back their loans that one day people with capital will stop giving loans. This means that people like me who have saved and lived frugally will not be able to buy a home, or start a business.

  • ||

    people like me who have saved and lived frugally

    In other words, the 1%. ;)

  • Sevo||

    Occupidiest|12.17.11 @ 8:23PM|#
    "who took out loans to pay for education, took out mortgages to buy their houses and a piece of the American dream,"

    Uh, part of the American Dream, as I understand it is *NOT* borrowing what you can't pay back.
    -----------
    "radically underemployed"
    Pretty sure that translates to:
    "Paid what they are worth"

  • ||

    Dingaling-dynasty Chinese literature majors deserve six-figure salaries at Ivy League schools, you tea-bagging capitalist! How DARE you!

  • Sevo||

    It was, oh, last spring in a thread about how extended UE benes drove UE numbers.
    A (one time) poster swore s/he was 'looking for work' but couldn't find it. Took some prodding from some regulars until it became clear that s/he was 'looking for work' that paid at least as much as his/her *last* job.
    Sorry, your pay is *not* determined by what you want or what you were paid; it's determined by what the market says you're worth.

  • ||

    One problem is, a lot of lower-paying jobs won't hire someone who used to make more money because they know that person is going to bail on them as soon as they find a job doing what they did before.

  • Sevo||

    "One problem is, a lot of lower-paying jobs won't hire someone who used to make more money because they know that person is going to bail on them as soon as they find a job doing what they did before."

    Yes, an applicant may have to apply in a several places.

  • ||

    No one is stopping you from selling fruit to pay your student loans, fucktard.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    page after page of testimonials from members of the middle class who took out loans to pay for education, took out mortgages to buy their houses and a piece of the American dream

    Well, therein lies the fucking problem, n'est-ce pas?

    There's a reason that even the ancients recognized that "the borrower is servant to the lender."

  • ||

    Retarded pinko moron is retarded. You want reds? Go join the CPUSA and fuck off.

  • ||

    *barf*

  • PantsFan||

    Dallas -7.5, I took Tampa to cover.

  • ||

    Reason H&R College Bowl Pick-em News

    sloopy's about to go 0 for 2 when Utah wins.

  • PantsFan||

    so it's not a TD?

  • PantsFan||

    now it is.

  • PantsFan||

    now it's not

  • ||

    Game highlight: Tyler Tettleton throws 44-yards to LaVon Brazill

    http://assets.sbnation.com/ass.....own_ou.gif

  • Sevo||

    You didn't change your screen-name back.
    Tsk, tsk.

  • ||

    Only fags are into college ball anyway. NFL FTW!

  • Juice||

    College football has more variety. Different offenses, wacky play calls. NFL is faster and more intense, but college can be more interesting sometimes.

  • ||

    Nice fuck-up on my email, cheesedick -- next time you spoof, try harder

  • ||

    The NFL sucks donkey balls.

  • Apatheist||

    How the fuck did USt. lose that shit?!? Oh, well at least I was one of the few who picked the University of Slow Learning to win.

  • ||

    sloopy's about to go 0 for 2 when Utah wins.

    The who did the what now? Sloopy's 2-1. But the big news is Banjos starting off a strong 3-0 after she feigned ignorance on college ball.

    Banjos, we don't take kindly to sandbaggin' around here. I may have to discipline you...

  • ||

    Ooh, I love it when I am disciplined.

  • ||

  • PantsFan||

    I *still* don't get the Blue Man Group.

  • Sevo||

    Well, some Intel marketing folks saw them while they were at Comdex in Vegas, oh, '90 or so.
    Given that marketing is pretty much a herd activity, and that Intel was the 'big thing' at the time, that meme propagated through SV pretty quickly.
    I never got it either, but all of my clients wanted BMG or some connection to them.

  • ||

    Reason H&R College Bowl Pick-em News:

    Banjos is mother fucking super rad!

  • ||

    Are we doinf elementals tonight? OK, here comes the other three...Earth, Wind and Fire FTW!!!

  • ||

    Love ya sloop ;-)

  • ||

  • ||

    I was never kicked out of the Webelos, but I was kicked out of Brownies.

  • .||

    Res Publica Americana|12.17.11 @ 8:15PM|#
    http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/1374/772n.jpg

    Does that secret place have chicks like these?

    reply to this
    Apatheist|12.18.11 @ 12:05AM|#
    AMERICA, FUCK YEAH!

    reply to this
    sloopyinca|12.18.11 @ 1:04AM|#
    I think there's something wrong with their pants.

    reply to this
    capitol l |12.17.11 @ 8:06PM|#
    An excerpt:

    Bouazizi wanted two things: to earn a living for his family and to accumulate capital (ras el mel). He was a young man, only 26, of no other discernible interests. His life was consumed by his role as the primary breadwinner for his family of seven -- a role he had played, according to his mother, ever since he started working in the market at age 12. His father died when Bouazizi was 3. He had five siblings. His mother later remarried, but his stepfather, also his uncle, plagued by health problems, was unable to support the family.

    As those who knew Bouazizi tell it, he was the very opposite of an activist. "He never even watched the news," his mother told us. "People like Mohamed are concerned with doing business. They don't understand anything about politics." The $73 he earned each week was the family's main source of income.
    Goddamn, I think I got something in my eye. Fucking guy just wanted to sell enough vegetables to support his family, and the goddamn bureaucrats couldn't let him just do his thing. Didn't want anything for free, or any handouts; just to be left alone to work.

    reply to this
    Res Publica Americana|12.17.11 @ 8:10PM|#
    I hope those Tunisian cops and officials get malignant tumors in their vital organ and die painfully. Fuck them.

    reply to this
    capitol l |12.17.11 @ 8:14PM|#
    Dude, read the entire article. Your blood will fucking boil.

    If I hear some college occupying asshole making demands on this man's sacrifice I might be tempted to break my pacifism and smack a bitch up.

    reply to this
    Res Publica Americana|12.17.11 @ 8:21PM|#
    That was a fucking God-awful nutpunch. Statism, eh?

    reply to this
    capitol l |12.17.11 @ 8:29PM|#
    It's so heartbreaking because this guy didn't want anything great or extravagant. Mohamed just wanted to work and support his family, maybe move up in the world a little bit. And they fucking broke him for it.

    I read stuff on Kelo, or Brooklyn Yards and I could totally see something like that happening here.

    reply to this
    Res Publica Americana|12.17.11 @ 8:42PM|#
    Reminds me of what so many unions do to genuine hard-workers.

    reply to this
    Occupidiest|12.17.11 @ 8:12PM|#
    NOW you understand what we feel.

    reply to this
    capitol l |12.17.11 @ 8:15PM|#
    Oh, just in time. Fuck off charlatan.

    Y'all want a free pass to rob the working people of this country blind, you rich entitled little fucks.

    reply to this
    Occupidiest|12.17.11 @ 8:23PM|#
    Go on the Web site "We are the 99 percent" and you will see the Mohamed Bouazizis of the United States, page after page of testimonials from members of the middle class who took out loans to pay for education, took out mortgages to buy their houses and a piece of the American dream, worked hard at the jobs they could find, and ended up unemployed or radically underemployed and on the precipice of financial and social ruin.

    reply to this
    Res Publica Americana|12.17.11 @ 8:26PM|#
    You have any idea why that sort of thing happens in the first place? Hint: it has nothing to do with capitalism, princess.

    reply to this
    Res Publica Americana|12.17.11 @ 8:28PM|#
    "Radically underemployed"? Cry me a fucking river. I've had to do part-time household chore routines and burger-flipping for money, and my life's going just fine, maybe because I didn't major in Jewish Studies with a minor in Dingaling-dynasty Chinese literature, or blow my loan on parties.

    A job is a job.

    reply to this
    Mr. FIFY|12.18.11 @ 12:08AM|#
    I didn't major in Grievance Studies, and I'm just fine.

    Take your sob tales elsewhere, Occutard.

    reply to this
    Joshua Corning|12.18.11 @ 1:09AM|#
    I've had to do part-time household chore routines and burger-flipping for money,

    Looking back to my teens and 20s and the work i did, pick cherries and apples, work in a fruit shed, flip burgers, clean dishes, bus tables, worked at a convenience store (late shift some times) dug ditches, glued pvc pipes, pizza delivery...it is kind of weird...

    it is all low class work (much of it where i live is now done by Mexicans)...yet i don't remember feeling low class when i was doing it.....

    and it is the OWS jerks who are calling me low class for doing it...it is not the rich...hell the rich admire that i did it...in fact most of them did it as well. In fact it would not surprise me that most OWSers never did that sort of work in their lives....and a larger % of the 1% have done that kind of work.

    reply to this
    rather|12.18.11 @ 1:13AM|#
    Joshua Corning|12.17.11 @ 3:25PM|#
    So Rather....you now are spoofing women...(using their email address even)....does this mean that you no longer hate only men and now hate everyone equally?

    reply to this
    Banjos|12.17.11 @ 3:28PM|#
    That is not a spoof, Josh.

    reply to this
    rather|12.17.11 @ 5:47PM|#
    I'm not sure if you are as susceptible to suggestion as as Manchurian Candidate John, but I don't use anyone's handle -ever

    I always use my own link

    Fuck off, and stop accusing me of shit

    reply to this
    Barfman|12.17.11 @ 8:39PM|#
    Go on the Web site "We are the 99 percent"
    *barf*

    reply to this
    Res Publica Americana|12.17.11 @ 8:41PM|#
    "We are the 99 percent of dumbasses -- the other 1 percent are the commies and fascists"? That website about Occupy-ers? Awesome!

    Oh, wait -- the actual 99 Percent site? No, thanks.

    reply to this
    Mohamed Bouazizis|12.17.11 @ 8:42PM|#
    I heard what you were saying. You know nothing of my work.

    reply to this
    capitol l |12.17.11 @ 8:46PM|#
    Umm, look here man, I come straight out of the rust belt appalachian trash heap and have no sympathy for the fat overextended American middle class. Their kids laughed at my Salvation Army clothes when I was a kid. Fuck 'em, if they can't tighten the the belt a little.

    Why shouldn't people pay back their loans? Do you realize that if no one pays back their loans that one day people with capital will stop giving loans. This means that people like me who have saved and lived frugally will not be able to buy a home, or start a business.

    reply to this
    Tulpa|12.17.11 @ 11:13PM|#
    people like me who have saved and lived frugally

    In other words, the 1%. ;)

    reply to this
    Sevo|12.17.11 @ 8:50PM|#
    Occupidiest|12.17.11 @ 8:23PM|#
    "who took out loans to pay for education, took out mortgages to buy their houses and a piece of the American dream,"

    Uh, part of the American Dream, as I understand it is *NOT* borrowing what you can't pay back.
    -----------
    "radically underemployed"
    Pretty sure that translates to:
    "Paid what they are worth"

    reply to this
    Res Publica Americana|12.17.11 @ 8:56PM|#
    Dingaling-dynasty Chinese literature majors deserve six-figure salaries at Ivy League schools, you tea-bagging capitalist! How DARE you!

    reply to this
    Sevo|12.17.11 @ 9:29PM|#
    It was, oh, last spring in a thread about how extended UE benes drove UE numbers.
    A (one time) poster swore s/he was 'looking for work' but couldn't find it. Took some prodding from some regulars until it became clear that s/he was 'looking for work' that paid at least as much as his/her *last* job.
    Sorry, your pay is *not* determined by what you want or what you were paid; it's determined by what the market says you're worth.

    reply to this
    Tulpa|12.18.11 @ 12:46AM|#
    One problem is, a lot of lower-paying jobs won't hire someone who used to make more money because they know that person is going to bail on them as soon as they find a job doing what they did before.

    reply to this

  • ||

    Wow!

    You're a loser!

  • Maxxx||

    John?

  • ||

  • ||

  • ||

    If you're a brat...I'm gonna have to hit ya! (But not too hard)

  • ||

  • ||

  • ||

    She may have the look, but she's still a tramp.

  • ||

    Are you a Wonderlust King?

  • Sanity Clause||

    And She Was.

    What exactly was she?

  • ||

  • ||

  • ||

  • ||

    Ska doesn't suck, my I love this song.

  • ||

    Why don't you guys just meet up and fuck already instead of taking up all my bandwidth?

  • ||

    Because that's no fun (I need foreplay).

  • ||

    Doctor Paul is on a roll
    I been told
    He can't be sold
    He's not vicious or malicious
    Just lovely and delicious
    I couldn't vote for another

  • ||

    Tulpy Poo! I didn't know you were a Deee Light fan!

  • ||

    Dee-lite has been known to smoke. On stage that is.

  • .||

    RoboCain|12.16.11 @ 6:44PM|#
    Boy disciplined after waving gun-shaped pizza slice

    reply to this
    A Secret Band of Robbers|12.16.11 @ 6:54PM|#
    One more story proving that if I were going to school today, I'd have been in juvenile before fifth grade.

    reply to this
    Barack Obama|12.16.11 @ 7:02PM|#
    waving around a slice of pizza some say resembled a gun

    Let me be clear.

    There are some who say a slice of pizza resembles a gun.

    reply to this
    bosty|12.16.11 @ 7:05PM|#
    Imagine trying to explain the social contract to that kid

    reply to this
    Ezilie Dunn|12.16.11 @ 7:21PM|#
    Police Officer: Drop the pizza slice, young man!

    That Kid: No.

    Police Officer: (Shoots that kid)

    reply to this
    Almanian|12.16.11 @ 7:56PM|#
    Kid's Dog: *runs away*

    Police Officer: *shoots kid's dog, too*

    THE END

    reply to this
    sloopyinca|12.17.11 @ 12:57AM|#
    Not so fast, Almanian...Part 2:

    Cop gets paid leave.

    Union-approved Review Board declares shooting "justified."

    Cop gets kick-ass retirement 12 years later.

    THE END

    reply to this
    dunphy|12.17.11 @ 5:26AM|#
    ah yes. more stupid bigotry

    here's a hint: the union did not stand behind that asshole in seattle who shot the guy with the knife.

    the union did not stand behind paul schene who had 2 hung juries after being tried for assault. iow, they realized he was a fucking thug and wanted nothing to do with him

    note that review boards (shooting ones) are not "union approved"

    here's another hint, unions job (ALL UNIONS) is to support their members and fight for their rights.

    apparently, cops are the one group on earth that do not deserve advocates for their interests.

    i get it. you are butthurt.

    reply to this
    Rodney King|12.17.11 @ 9:44AM|#
    Can't we all just get along?

    reply to this
    Burger King|12.17.11 @ 10:14AM|#
    Pizza!

    reply to this
    The real question is....|12.17.11 @ 11:25AM|#
    ...why in the fuck do "Government Employees" need a union in the first place? They work for the GOVERNMENT -- how is that an adversarial position -- unless the adversary is the common citizenry?

    reply to this
    Concerned Citizen|12.17.11 @ 11:56AM|#
    Why do you hate the middle class?

    reply to this
    mad libertarian guy|12.17.11 @ 11:57AM|#
    When swindling taxpayers, it's easier to have one negotiator who's politically connected than individuals bargaining different levels of extortion.

    reply to this
    ∞|12.17.11 @ 1:04PM|#
    "here's a hint: the union did not stand behind that asshole in seattle who shot the guy with the knife.

    the union did not stand behind paul schene who had 2 hung juries after being tried for assault."

    Outliers.

    Or, are you the only one who gets to claim that?

    reply to this
    Coeus|12.17.11 @ 5:38PM|#
    . Outliers.

    Or, are you the only one who gets to claim that?

    I think he honestly thinks he is. We find out that the PD next door is routinely getting away with assault and battery (a PD he's claimed to work with, by the way). And he had no idea. Yet he will continually claim that every case shown where another cop gets away with criminal acts is an outlier.

    If he responds to this, it will most likely be by nitpicking the word outlier and with accusations of "butthurt". Like people getting beaten, sometimes to death, by police officers for no reason is a game on xbox live.

    Because for him, it is. He doesn't have to worry about it since he's a cop. How do you think the numbers stack up? Every 5th UOF in Seattle vs every prosecution of police misconduct in Washington state. He's not even right about cops not being above the law on his own state, yet he'll claim its not true for the whole country.

    reply to this
    sloopyinca|12.17.11 @ 1:24PM|#
    apparently, cops are the one group on earth that do not deserve advocates for their interests.

    When the policies they bargain for are designed to protect them from prosecution at the expense of justice, yeah, I'd say they don't deserve "advocacy."

    No other profession can argue for rights that are at the expense of rights of others. Like the right for justice to be served when their criminal acts result in death or serious injury.

    And when a union's job is to support their members and fight for their rights, I believe they have a place. But rights of union members are not greater than rights under the eyes of the law. Yet police unions consistently argue to have their members protected from prosecution. Again, that is not advocacy. That is an attempt to cover up a crime.

    reply to this
    Coeus|12.17.11 @ 1:55PM|#
    here's another hint, unions job (ALL UNIONS) is to support their members and fight for their rights.

    That include the right to manufacture bullshit charges? Cause that's what the police union in Houston is doing. Called a fucking press conference cause the DA won't charge people with intent to distribute based on the weight of their bong water. Fuck off with that shit. Public sector unions are a cancer. And police unions are the worst.

    reply to this
    Chatroom Crank|12.17.11 @ 3:28PM|#
    All the more reason why government employees (not just cops, I put firemen, teachers and all other tax feeders in the mix) should not be allowed to join a union.

    reply to this
    Juice|12.18.11 @ 1:05AM|#
    apparently, cops are the one group on earth that do not deserve advocates for their interests.
    Not if their interest is abusing people's rights with impunity.

    reply to this
    Fist of Etiquette|12.16.11 @ 7:50PM|#
    Guns don't kill people, empty calories do.

    reply to this
    Joshua Corning|12.16.11 @ 8:16PM|#
    empty calories

    No Such Thing.

    http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH.....index.html

    His body mass index went from 28.8, considered overweight, to 24.9, which is normal. He now weighs 174 pounds.

    But you might expect other indicators of health would have suffered. Not so.

    Haub's "bad" cholesterol, or LDL, dropped 20 percent and his "good" cholesterol, or HDL, increased by 20 percent. He reduced the level of triglycerides, which are a form of fat, by 39 percent.

    Haub's body fat dropped from 33.4 to 24.9 percent. This posed the question: What matters more for weight loss, the quantity or quality of calories?

    reply to this
    PS|12.17.11 @ 3:18AM|#
    Yes, such thing.

    http://www.fathead-movie.com/i.....nkie-diet/

    reply to this
    Joshua Corning|12.17.11 @ 3:28AM|#
    Your article agrees with me.

    there is such a thing as too many calories...but empty? Not so much.

    reply to this
    dunphy|12.17.11 @ 5:28AM|#
    the very idea of the BMI is a hideous joke.

    the fact that it is used here instantly discredits the argument.

    you can have 10 % bf, be in phenomenal shape and be considered obese according to the BMI

    the BMI does not even distinguish between LBM and fat, nor does it account for bone density, or a host of other factors. it is not scientific, and it is not a useful metric whatsoever

    reply to this
    PS|12.17.11 @ 7:31AM|#
    dunphy, I agree BMI is ridiculous, but I don't see it mentioned. The prof lost 27 lbs of which 6 was muscle mass.

    reply to this
    Joshua Corning|12.17.11 @ 2:47PM|#
    Actually i was kind of ignoring how much weight he lost and looking more at the good cholesterol vs bad cholesterol and his drop in blood pressure.

    In essence he had a good diet with lots of calories...then he changed his diet to a bad one with less calories and he got healthier...ie he substituted lots of "full" calories for a smaller amount of empty calories and got healthier.

    reply to this
    PS|12.17.11 @ 7:26AM|#
    Huh? Did you read what he ate? Protein shakes, steaks, moderate carbs (~175 grams/day), low calorie (~1500 kcal/day). Oh and a twinkie for breakfast and dinner.

    That's not a junk food diet.

    Of course food quality matters, are you seriously saying there's no difference between eating only flour and sugar and eating meat and vegetables? It's just about calories?

    reply to this
    dunphy|12.17.11 @ 1:06PM|#
    you are 100% correct. fwiw, nearly every day i eat either a 12-16 oz steak for breakfast OR about 5 eggs and a few pieces of bacon

    many "experts" would consider that "junk" vs. a bunch of whole grains, juice, and other stuff that would just raise my BF levels, contribute towards messed up insulin levels, and ultimately leave me winded in the gym

    i went to a party last night and chowed down on duck fat, pate, and all that good stuff.

    fruits, vegetables, meat and eggs.

    it's the processed crap, the flours, the sugars, etc. that i avoid. the fear of fat, or god forbid animal products is ridiculous and unscientific

    my cholesterol, blood pressure etc. all showed marked improvement when i cut out the flour and sugar and stuff and upped the saturated fats, fats in general, etc.

    reply to this
    johnl|12.17.11 @ 3:43PM|#
    No sane person considers eggs junk food. Hatchlings are made entirely out of egg.

    reply to this
    Kim|12.17.11 @ 9:24PM|#
    A lot of people swallowed the whole "fat is bad, grains are good" government BS - - they really do think eggs are a bad choice. My in-laws act like I'm heading full speed towards a heart attack when they watch me eat eggs and bacon for every breakfast. I say nothing but think the same of their breakfasts of cereals, bagels, pancakes, etc.

    reply to this
    Juice|12.18.11 @ 1:11AM|#
    Empty calories means that no other nutrients came along for the ride with the calories. If you ingest nothing but glucose, but no vitamins and minerals, you'll eventually get sick and die. That's what empty calories means.

  • .||

    heller...hey, pst, heller! I iz in ur interwebz takin ur bandwidth!

  • Colonel_Angus||

    FACT:

    Mumford and Sons looks like a bunch of music major hipsters who wanted to play hillbilly music.

  • ||

  • Fluffy||

    I think the entire band was just an elaborate plot by the singer to nail Laura Marling.

  • ||

    I can play this, but not half as good as Alison.

  • ||

  • ||

  • ||

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Three comments in reverse chronological order? It's a Christmas miracle.

  • Weekend Thread Monster||

    Another thread shot to hell.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    The day of reckoning is at hand.

  • Fluffy||

    It's a little sad to me that Ron Paul is regarded as insane because he wants to withdraw the US military from its overseas bases, but Newt Gingrich can openly announce his intention to be a dictator and it's just a "thought-provoking" position.

  • Weekend Thread Monster||

    Government: an institution with true monopolistic power to create, enforce, and adjudicate law.

    The Framers of the Constitution recognized this problem and attempted to separate these powers. Unfortunately, they failed miserably.

  • Ayn Rand||

    A government is an institution that holds the exclusive power to enforce certain rules of social conduct in a given geographical area.

    If physical force is to be barred from social relationships, men need an institution charged with the task of protecting their rights under an objective code of rules.

    This is the task of a government—of a proper government—its basic task, its only moral justification and the reason why men do need a government.

    A government is the means of placing the retaliatory use of physical force under objective control—i.e., under objectively defined laws.

  • ||

    "This is the task of a government—of a proper government—its basic task, its only moral justification and the reason why men do need a government."

    LOL

  • Anti Rand||

    Adjudication is a "service" and can be best delivered by the free market through competing arbitration firms.

  • Anti Rand||

    Under Customary and Natural law

  • Uncle Rand||

    Which customary law?

  • Anti Rand||

    Which customary law?

    The one that the individual firm develops. Not all firms would have exactly the same law. If the disputing parties were both Muslim, they could choose an arbiter based on Sharia, for example.

    I would assume Natural Law and the NAP would be the primary guideline, but it doesn't have to be, as long as the parties agree on the arbiter.

    The important thing, is that no one institution would have monopoly power. Therefore, the firms that gain the best reputation for fairness would be the most successful. And there would be ample opportunity for new firms to develop and bad ones to fail.

    But that's just my vision of Utopia.

  • Uncle Rand||

    So are you going to divide these firms into regions of responsibility, where their rules apply (which sounds a little like a state)? If not, how does one know what rules apply where? If myself (a non-Muslim) and Mohamed are playing hoops at the Y, and I steal his wallet, do I get my hand cut off or just a slap on the wrist? Why exactly would two opposing parties ever agree on an arbiter?

    And how would a private firm protect your rights when the offender has a Division of tanks and a Wing of fighters?

    This is what I see as the problem with anarchy and why I side with the Objectivists on this. Anarchy appears to assume that the offender is rational, shares your non-aggression belief system and has parity in weaponry. None of this applies in the real world.

    It's a romantic notion, but I don't think it workable. I'm obviously no expert, so where am I wrong on this?

  • Mike M.||

    Jesus stops by to pay a visit to Tebow and the Broncos.

    Today is the big day: the hoodie vs. the goody-goody. Can't wait to see what happens.

  • ||

    The end

  • chris||

    Costas just pronounced Phillip Rivers name 'filled rubbers.' Brokaw not so lonely at NBC.

  • veemee sashimi||

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