A.M. Links: Al Qaeda Not Really Looking Like It’s On The Run, Journalists Worried About Covering Benghazi, Part Time Job Creation Outpaces Full Time Job Creation Seven to One

  • "if this is gonna be my future i wanna get paid full time money for flipping burgers part time"Thomas Hawk/Foter.comPresident Obama’s assertion that Al Qaeda’s on the run has been challenged by its recent apparent resurgence.  The US Army, meanwhile, is reluctant to cut ties with individuals and companies in Afghanistan tied to Al Qaeda despite the advice of the reconstruction watchdog out of concern for the due process rights of those Al Qaeda-linked individuals, while the State Department is urging Americans to leave Yemen, where a drone strike killed several suspected Al Qaeda militants, based on messages the government says it intercepted from Al Qaeda. Officials are also worried the terrorist group’s developed an undetectable liquid explosive.
  • “Journalists” are concerned about losing access to the White House if they ask tough questions about Benghazi.
  • The economy has created 270,000 full time jobs and 1.9 million part time jobs since January 2009, according to numbers compiled by the House Ways and Means Committee.
  • Republican governors are not enthusiastic about Republican attempts to shut down the federal government over Obamacare.
  • Foreign diplomats won’t leave Egypt alone and are set to continue to try to resolve the situation; John McCain and Lindsay Graham are visiting soon.
  • An attack along the disputed Indian-Pakistani border in Kashmir left at least five Indian soldiers dead. India blames Pakistani troops but Pakistan denies any skirmish. 

Follow Reason and Reason 24/7 on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.  You can also get the top stories mailed to you—sign up here. Have a news tip? Send it to us!

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.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Officials are also worried the terrorist group’s developed an undetectable liquid explosive.

    EXPLOSIVE PRELL!

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    I've figured it out. FOE works for the NSA and is intercepting the AM links before they get to you.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    For a magazine called Reason you'd think they would be more security-minded.

  • DEATFBIRSECIA||

    Drink!

  • db||

    Undetectable by what means?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    It will blow up in your face and there will be no sign of an explosion. That's how completely undetectable.

  • db||

    Alert Elmer Fudd!

  • Rich||

    You wascally db!

  • anon||

    So it's kinda like masturbating?

  • fish||

    It will blow up in your face and there will be no sign of an explosion. That's how completely undetectable.

    Complete and utter bullshit....explosive Prell always leaves a pleasant scent after detonation.

  • JW||

    The chatter they're hearing is "you're soaking in it!"

    THE MODERN FACE OF TERROR.

  • Rich||

    So, we can take liquids on planes now, right? That seems like the appropriate TSA reaction.

  • Marc F Cheney||

    It's derived from iocaine powder.

  • ||

    I'm immune.

  • anon||

    Remember that time the TSA started rapescanning people, and we were all like "hey dude they're just going to go through surgery and have their bombs implanted" then within a year some dude had surgery to have a bomb implanted in him?

    Yeah, this reminds me of how fucking useless any amount of "security" is. That is all.

  • Lord Humungus||

    Groom & Clean!

  • Brett L||

    Probably something like NI3

  • T||

    I would be amused to watch someone try to wear clothes dipped in NI3.

  • Brett L||

    Stay wet, get yourself arrested dry out and BOOOM! More seriously, though, its not magic that stable substances when wet can become explosive upon drying. Or vice-versa. Try wetting PI3 and see what happens. I assume a good chemist would know 8-10 different ways to make HE clothing. Nitrocellulose solutions probably bond well with cotton clothing off the top of my head.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    I think I just heard the NSA intercept switches just kick in.

  • Dweebston||

    Silly civilian, there are no switches! The intercepts are always on.

  • Bobarian||

    That clicking sound is the explosives being planted on Brett's door hinges.

    Why do you hate your dog, Brett?

  • Brett L||

    I don't have a dog and that cat r-u-n-d-o-f-f.

  • Brett L||

    Of course, I really can't think of way to generate a really good boom without compression. So wearing the clothes would make a neat bang, but rolling impregnated cloth tightly and compressing it further would probably be required...
    Hold on, cops at the door, brb.

  • Scarcity||

    So the "As Seen on TV Original SPACE BAG Vacuum-Seal Storage System" is the new pressure cooker?

  • Lord Humungus||

    The Dog's terrorist war against mankind continues...

    Is this the worst hangover ever? Man, 64, wakes up without a penis after night of drinking... and the neighbours tell him a dog ate it
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....night.html

  • anon||

    And his dog's still alive?!

    Dude, you left out the most outrageous part of the story.

  • Rich||

    What's that? "Scroll down for video"?

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    O M G

  • ||

    No doubt, the same fucker who got my homework.

  • Ted S.||

    This seems appropriate.

  • ||

    If that isn't "Detachable Penis", I am going to be very disappointed.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    “Journalists” are concerned about losing access to the White House if they ask tough questions about Benghazi.

    Luckily they've already sussed out the solution to that problem.

  • DJF||

    So the White House will stop handing out press releases? Can't they just read them on the White House web page?

  • Lord Humungus||

    Ke$ha sells penis/teeth jewellery
    http://www.thecmuwebsite.com/a.....jewellery/

    Popstar and romancer-of-ghosts Ke$ha has ‘created’ a range of accessories in collaboration with accessory-creating pro Charles Albert. Split into six themed mini-lines, it features bracelets, pendants and – as a kind of phallic parallel to Grimes’ feminist jewellery – penis-shaped earrings. Oh, and rings cast from real live Ke$ha fans’ teeth, and yes, I mean the same teeth that were reaped by the ‘Supernatural’ hitmaker last year.
  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Republican governors are not enthusiastic about Republican attempts to shut down the federal government over Obamacare.

    That teat is just too tasty.

  • ||

    Looks like Rove and co. has a whole new batch of potential nominees to choose from now that Christie, Ryan, and Rubio's ships are sinking.

    He'll claim its the "executive experience" of the governorship that qualifies them for the presidency but its the double talking and insatiable appetite for pork that is the real sell.

  • Lord Humungus||

    Aetna pulls health plans from state insurance exchange
    Insurer says Md.-approved rates weren't feasible as it scrutinizes its offerings across the country
    http://articles.baltimoresun.c.....nce-market

    Aetna was one of several carriers poised to sell on the state's exchange, along with Coventry Health Care, which Aetna acquired this spring. But Aetna told Maryland Insurance Commissioner Therese M. Goldsmith in a letter this week that cuts regulators made to the rates the companies had proposed "would not allow us to collect enough premiums to cover the cost of the plans."

    all is well... all is well...

  • tarran||

    But... But...

    Someone told me the exchanges were free-markety because the state didn't set prices!

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    What retard told you that?

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Aetna had filed a proposal with state insurance regulators to raise its rates 25.4 percent, the highest of any carrier.

    They went over the 10% maximum rate increase.

    I said it is "market-based" - not "free-markety". There are no free markets left in the USA.

  • ||

    Right on cue.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    You think I am the type to duck out of an argument? Fuck that.

    I stand my ground.

  • Lord Humungus||

    you stand on your knees.

  • ||

    AND...

    ...you are a fucking retard.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Thanx Obama

  • Certified Public Asskicker||

    But you are free not to choose, and then pay for not choosing. The choice is freedom, or something.

  • Sidd Finch||

    EDG reppin' LBC| 8.6.13 @ 9:16AM |#

    What retard told you that?

    Palin's Buttplug| 8.6.13 @ 9:16AM |#

    Aetna had filed a proposal with state insurance regulators to raise its rates 25.4 percent, the highest of any carrier.

    They went over the 10% maximum rate increase.

    I said it is "market-based" - not "free-markety". There are no free markets left in the USA.

    Asked and answered.

  • tarran||

    QE motherfucking D! :)

  • anon||

    You guys haven't filtered shriek yet?

  • tarran||

    I have, but not all my computers have chrome installed, so every now and then I get the crazy unfiltered.

  • some guy||

    It's invigorating, isn't it?!

  • DontShootMe||

    That US Army sentence is one of the greatest run-on sentences ever. Congrats!

  • Lord Humungus||

    Sheriff's deputy arrested for pistol-whipping his father when he caught him having sex with his wife in their son's bedroom
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....droom.html

    A betrayed husband has been charged after beating his father and hitting his wife in an alcohol-fueled rage after allegedly catching them having sex in his son's bedroom last month.

    Caught in a bizarre family love triangle, Timothy John 'TJ' Brewer, 33, allegedly found his wife Logan Rae Brewer 'on top of his dad', respected Moab fire chief Wesley 'Corky' Brewer, after they had dinner at TJ's Utah home on July 11.

    Furious at their love tryst, TJ 'backhanded' his wife and pointed a gun at her, before 'pistol whipping' his father, who later stabbed himself.

    fun times...

  • tarran||

    Wow!

    And I thought the drama in *my* family life was bad!

  • DontShootMe||

    I'm with you, I'm gonna go home and hug everybody in my family. Provoking cries of "Ew, Dad, what are you doing?"

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Ew, Dad, what are you doing?

    Not killing you, you little fucker. Now shut the fuck up go back to being seen and not heard.

    If only I could tell my children that.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Words fail me. It's like Maury Povich come to life.

  • Atanarjuat||

    That might be his brother's bedroom.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Oh snap.

  • db||

    That whole story is a mess of pronouns without antecedent.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    That whole story is a mess of pronouns without antecedent.

    What do you mean he hit his dad for fucking his wife in his son's bedroom?

  • anon||

    TJ 'backhanded' his wife and pointed a gun at her, before 'pistol whipping' his father, who later stabbed himself.

    Emphasis was necessary. What the fuck?

  • Ted S.||

    When police are involved, you have to figure the weapns activate themselves of their own accord.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Emphasis was necessary. What the fuck?

    It was an assault knife.

  • AlexInCT||

    Seppuku?

  • ||

    Deputy Brewer then shot the family dog as penance for the sins of his wife and father.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Police wrote in their report: 'TJ made numerous remarks to each officer and deputy that arrived, about all of us being stupid, dumb asses, and at one point stated we needed to call someone with a brain to come and talk with him.'

    [...]

    TJ was arrested and charged with attempted homicide, aggravated assault, two counts of domestic violence in front a child, assault on a police officer, intoxication, and disorderly conduct by Grand County officers.

    However, because of the Brewers' law enforcement ties in Grand County, the investigation was passed onto the Utah County Sheriff’s Office who reduced the charges to two class A misdemeanors - assault and assault against a peace officer.

    Apparently he hadn't called anyone in the Utah County Sheriff's Office "stupid dumbasses" so hence the lesser charge.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    However, because of the Brewers' law enforcement ties in Grand County, the investigation was passed onto the Utah County Sheriff’s Office who reduced the charges to two class A misdemeanors - assault and assault against a peace officer.

    There is no double standard. Dunphy told me so. Cops pass off investigations with multiple felony charges all the time.

  • Cdr Lytton||

    A betrayed husband has been charged after beating his father and hitting his wife in an alcohol-fueled rage after allegedly catching them having sex in his son's bedroom last month.

    Trust those pussy Brits to assume that alcohol is the cause of his rage.

  • Brett L||

    Yeah, raising your half-brother as your own son unwittingly should be enough of a reason.

  • Agammamon||

    I thought the advantage of newspapers over bloggers was that they had editors. I find it hard to believe that a professional let this sort of syntactic ambiguity pass.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Officials are also worried the terrorist group’s developed an undetectable liquid explosive.

    Witchery.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    The economy has created 270,000 full time jobs and 1.9 million part time jobs since January 2009...

    Summer of Recovery, make way. Winter is coming. In the form of Obamacare.

  • anon||

    You forgot the quotes around "Recovery."

  • DontShootMe||

    Also, isn't there supposed to be a Roman Numeral after "Summer of Recovery"? Like, III, or IV?

  • db||

    Summer of Recover II: Hand-Cranked Environmentally Friendly Electric Boogaloo

  • DontShootMe||

    You know what else is hand cranked?

  • Rich||

    The Economy?

  • ||

    The stock market?

  • Lord Humungus||

    your mom?

  • anon||

    There aren't many hand-cranked things in the world that I'd consider worthy of a boogaloo.

  • Brett L||

    I keep telling you, its Summer of Recovery IV: Fuck the Russians

  • Lord Humungus||

    I know a certain programmer who would be happier -

    Portuguese court ruling says tipsy garbage men look happier
    http://www.reuters.com/article.....0O20130801

    A Portuguese court has ordered a waste removal company to rehire an employee it fired for being drunk on his rounds and said tipsy trash men appear happier to members of the public.

    The appeals court in Porto, a northern city renowned for its port wines, also ordered the company to pay the man 14 months' worth of back wages.
  • db||

    I used to work at a job where anyone who appeared happy was immediately suspected of slacking and given more work to do.

  • DontShootMe||

    Wow, I think we worked for the same company.

  • ||

    I give you, the United States Air Force.

  • Xenocles||

    I knew it was the Air Force because nobody looks happy in the Navy.

  • some guy||

    You mean the Village People lied!?

  • DontShootMe||

    We did!

  • DontShootMe||

    Although my time in was so long ago that the pilots had to actually sit in the planes they flew, not at some computer in Nevada...

  • Steve G||

    Eh, depends on the unit... we have pretty decent time in our orifice, despite being in the soul-sucking pentagram

  • Agammamon||

    Uh, that's impossible. Everyone in the AF is happy (or should be) what with the maids for the barracks and busboys taking your empty plates away in the mess hall, the cappuccino machines and kiddy pools on deployment, etc.

  • Steve G||

    It's actually some sort of bizarro world. Fighter jocks, you'd think who are at the pinnacle of enviable jobs, are leaving in frustration at such a rate they are literally throwing cash at theem to stay.

  • Knarf Yenrab (prev. An0nB0t)||

    George Costanza taught me a similarly invaluable lesson re: workplace temperament many years ago.

  • Rich||

  • anon||

    I predict a surge in completely shaved students.


    I gotta say, I'm only about 50/50 on this one. I like long hair... up top.

  • Ted S.||

    It is, of course, none of the school's fucking business what the students are doing outside of school hours off school property.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    It takes a village. Melissa Harry Perry said we all own the children so we can do whatever we want to them.

  • ||

    Private school.

  • ||

    Got an idea.

    How about EVERY student in the school refuses to surrender their body parts to these fucking Nazis.

    I hate Illinois Nazis!

  • Xenocles||

    Say what you will about their tenets, but at least it's an ethos.

  • SweatingGin||

    Woohoo!

    Portuguese garbage men must have a union right up there with the UAW.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Obama to urge Congress in speech to shutter Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politic.....z2bC4zsfOd

    That damned socialist!

  • DontShootMe||

    Cool, hopefully the stupid party doesn't mess this one up. Or maybe they're being played, I never can tell...

  • The Last American Hero||

    HAMP - from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

    I'm goddamn tired of paying taxes to cover the asses of irresponsible bankers that loaned money to irresponsible home buyers. How the fuck is that social justice?

  • T||

    Social justice means them that have gives to them that have not. Any more questions?

  • Agammamon||

    "Social justice means them that have gives to them that have not. Any more questions?"

    With a nice little percentage of the transaction going into the government's pocket of course.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    How the fuck is that social justice?

    Because not wanting to cover irresponsible banks who made shitty loans to irresponsible people is racist, you fucking racist. Didn't you know it's better for minorities to have a mortgage they can't afford than to have never had a mortgage at all?

  • Drake||

    Read beyond the headline dipshit.

    "In a speech Tuesday in Phoenix, Obama will call for transitioning the business model of Fannie and Freddie into a system where "private capital must be wiped out before the government pays on any form of catastrophic guarantee," a senior administration official said."

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    The combined liabilities of the GSEs are about $5 trillion. No private company can take that on.

    This is a daunting task no doubt but Obama is the first POTUS to engage it at all.

  • Brett L||

    Soo... maybe many private companies?

  • DJF||

    I thought that Bush had proposed putting them under Treasury control in 2003?

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Actually, he tried to put in an oversight committee as part of HUD. Not a tremendous improvement, but it might have put some light on their shenanigans prior to the complete meltdown. As Fannie and Freddie were pretty much revolving doors for the politically connected, it had zero chance of getting by Congress.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    He did that in 2008.

    Full frontal nationalization.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Also, in 2003 Al Gore was POTUS.

  • some guy||

    "private capital must be wiped out before the government pays on any form of catastrophic guarantee,"

    He's maybe halfway there. It's still better than nothing. Besides, what are the odds this gets through this Congress? Somewhere between slim and non.

  • JW||

    I get the feeling that the wiping out of private capital will be induced and not restricted to the homeowner.

    Remember, whatever Obama is proposing, it's the exact opposite of what he says it is.

  • ||

    The president will also look to link his housing proposals to immigration reform.

    It seemed like too good of an idea on its face for there not to be a catch. I knew he would have the legislation tied to a non-starter, unrelated piece of his agenda.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    He wants 30-yr fixed mortgages to be kept as an option for borrowers.

  • Bryan C||

    That's between the borrower and their bank.

  • ||

    That's fine, but he's never going to get it tethering good (I use that word loosely) ideas to unrelated agenda items.

    This is his playbook. Propose an idea that Republicans like, then make it an all-or-nothing package deal with shit that is unpalatable to the opposition.

    For the tax cut extension it was all about "let's pass the cuts for the lowest earners now and then we can talk about the top tax rate," but he's all for rigid, package deals now apparently.

  • Dweebston||

    This, or he'll walk it back in a month or two. If asked about it later he'll raise his hands up in a shrug of mock defeat. I tried doing something about it, but you know... obstructionists gonna obstruct.

  • ||

    Probably because the left lit him up for "caving."

  • ||

    Obama will also renew his calls for sweeping mortgage refinancing legislation when he travels to Phoenix Tuesday.

    Wasn't it "sweeping mortgage refinancing legislation" that caused the bubble in the first place?

    See the CRA and affordable housing requirements.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Math is racist!

  • Rasilio||

    No, it was the never ending gusher of low cost money flooding in from the Fed since 1992 that created the bubble, the CRA and affordable housing requirements (along with a few other things) just helped direct the bubble into housing as opposed to other parts of the economy.

  • Lord Humungus||

    Oh, Canada!

    Woman fined $219 for not paying bus fare with exact change
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/.....-fine.html

    “I think they showed a lack of humanity and a lack of kindness,” she said.

    Tantost said she told the inspectors she would contest the fine, words that according to her were met with a laugh and a comment about how the only benefit of that would be the overtime the STM employee treating the file would earn.

    The STM declined to comment.
  • Rich||

    "That's OK. In a minute you'll have 79 of 'em."

  • Ted S.||

    What part of "keep the change" don't these fuckers understand?

  • Agammamon||

    WTF! I usd to ride the bus all the time in Tucson growing up - if you didn't have exact change, you just didn't get change back (drivers didn't make change). No fuss, no muss, certainly not a fine.

  • Lord Humungus||

    A case of criminal cover-up: Naked man allegedly steals construction equipment
    http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2.....allegedly/

    The suspect, Joseph Michael Hall, had a perfectly good explanation for it all, though, when authorities caught up to him rolling along Maynardville Highway shortly after 7 a.m. — he was naked.

    “Mr. Hall stated that he was drunk and that he was trying to hide his nudity by taking the Bobcat,” the arrest warrant states.
  • tarran||

    I think we have to give him full marks for style.

  • ||

    First read that as Michael C. Hall and became very confused.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    I thought Anthony Michael Hall at first and said, "huh, makes sense"

  • ||

    Thats much better.

  • Rich||

    “Journalists” are concerned about losing access to the White House if they ask tough questions about Benghazi.

    Anybody seen Sharyl Attkisson lately?

  • Bee Tagger||

    "Journalists" are concerned about losing access to the White House if they ask tough questions about Benghazi.

    Got to be transparent 'cause they're so hard to see.

  • Lord Humungus||

    I thought it was the crappy pizza.

    Why do so many American parents brawl at Chuck E. Cheese? Alcohol, stress and excitement cause wild rages, claims psychologist
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....nting.html

    So what's causing this spike in brawls? Several things, according to a Southern California-based psychologist with expertise in family and child issues.

    'The elements within the environment can stimulate aggressive, impulsive behaviors,' Dr. Dean Leav, told HLN. Not to be underestimated, Leav said, is the indulgence of alcohol.

    'Situations that involve a group of excited people and alcohol can often lead to acts of violence. A classic example is the fights that frequently break out during baseball games,' she said.
  • Don Mynack||

    They have never sold alcohol at any Chuck E. Cheese I've been to. Believe me, I have inquired.

    I think the noise/environment is overstimulating, leading to higher stress levels. Seriously, when that place it crowded, it's a goddamn madhouse.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    You're in the wrong Chuck E. Cheese's. All of the ones I have been to have beer.

  • Brett L||

    50+ shrieking 6 year olds in a closed space and the big brains are having a hard time figuring out why the adults are edgy.

  • Fluffy||

    Americans brawl at Chuck E. Cheese because there is huge overlap between the set of persons who would take their kids to Chuck E. Cheese for a party and the set of persons who would jump up and scream "Oh no u did-ent!" at any perceived "diss" from another group of patrons.

  • Dweebston||

    I think the middle d is silent. And the t. Di-in'.

  • Apple||

    Ha! I've been to the place once in my life and there was a brawl. They weren't even drinking, we were the only table with booze. We told our daughter she could choose where her birthday party would be. We've already planned the next one, and it won't be at that shithole.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    India blames Pakistani troops but Pakistan denies any skirmish.

    That denial kind of makes Pakistan look guilty.

  • Dweebston||

    It wasn't a skirmish, it was a lockout.

  • Mike M.||

    “Journalists” are concerned about losing access to the White House if they ask tough questions about Benghazi.

    You can lose a hell of a lot more than access. Just ask Michael Hastings or Andrew Breitbart.

  • Mr Whipple||

    Freedom Hosting taken down by FBI/NSA. ALL TORMAIL COMPROMISED

    https://tinyurl.com/pft98uk

    https://tinyurl.com/mb2gmxv

  • Rich||

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Worst news I've ever heard. I'm saving up for one of those dream machines.

  • anon||

    Oh for fucks sake, that's *not* newsworthy. It was fucking designed that way.

  • Rich||

    The toilet ... Pin code for every model is hardwired to be four zeros (0000), meaning that it cannot be reset and can be activated by any phone with the My Satis app. "An attacker could simply download the My Satis application and use it to cause the toilet to repeatedly flush, raising the water usage and therefore utility cost to its owner."

    Nice design!

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    "An attacker could simply download the My Satis application and use it to cause the toilet to repeatedly flush, raising the water usage and therefore utility cost to its owner."

    What kind of retard comes up with a potential attack like that?

    Oooooohhhh! I know! We'll cause it to flush all the time and spend more water and it will look like they hate Mother Gaia! It'll be awesome!

  • anon||

    To be fair, if I had one, I'd fuck with my fiancee *all* the time.

  • Brett L||

    Only the fiancee's pregnancy status saves her from being fucked with all the time. I actually spare her 4 out of 5 times. She gives back really well, though. She led me through a five minute conversation about how our spawn wouldn't be allowed out on grandpa's boat (13 foot outboard) without a helmet. I nearly bust a vein trying to find polite ways to say "that's the stupidest fucking mommy bullshit I've ever heard." She got me good.

  • tarran||

    Why does she want to weigh your kid's head down in the water?

  • Brett L||

    Backstory: she hit a tree on a bike when she was young, and although wearing a helmet, still had a hemotoma, so whenever the subjects of wearing a helmet comes up, saying "that's fucking stupid" has to be done politely unless I want the rant about how she wasn't going that fast AND wearing a helmet AND they didn't think she was ever going to talk again (sometimes I wish!).

  • ||

    Might want to politely explain the concept of odds of occurrence.

  • Brett L||

    Might want to politely explain the concept of odds of occurrence.

    Well, lets just say that our kid will wear a helmet on open vehicles such as bicylces and skateboards, but she knows the boat thing is silly, she was just trolling me.

  • anon||

    She led me through a five minute conversation...

    Yeah, mine knows better. I'd have just said "That's the most stupid thing I've ever fucking heard." and left it at that. There would not have been any conversation.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Yeah, but you'd probably squirt the bidet while she was leaning over to flush. Way funnier.

  • Mr Whipple||

    What's wrong with just leaving the seat up? Always worked for me.

  • ||

    The terrorists have won.

  • mr simple||

    Oh noes! Not the deadly repeated toilet flushing!

  • Mr Whipple||

    Oh. So, instead of kicking in my door, they will just blow some hot air up my ass?

  • Zeb||

    I'm still trying to figure out what the use of such a toilet is. Since you have to be very close to it to actually use it, why not just have buttons on the toilet? Seems like the only point is so that you can fuck with people who are using it.

  • Brett L||

    Science-free germaphobes who think the toilet buttons are "icky" but their phone screen is "clean". (This is obviously the reverse of the truth, but its a phobia and not subject to reason.)

  • Lord Humungus||

    so I've been watching this documentary: The Nazis: A Warning from History
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0207907/

    In the middle episode, the documentary discusses Hitler's governing style. He pretty much was a lazy bastard who slept in, watched movies and rarely dictated anything at all. Most of the "governing" was done by a chaotic mess of rival factions, who would try to interpret Adolf's daily ramblings into some sort plan, with their own bias added, of course.

    Anyway, an interesting departure from the "rigid, tightly controlled" German governing I imagined.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    I hear he maintained control precisely by having no clear lines of authority, so he kept having to be called in to resolve conflicts among his subordinates.

  • Drake||

    I've seen maniacs at work who keep people on edge by being purposely vague - then chewing them out for misinterpreting the nonsense.

  • ||

    You know who else had no clear lines of authority?

  • tarran||

    One of the major factors behind the success of the invasion of Normandy was

    1) Rommel being on the road to/from Germany and unable to command his forces directly

    2) The inability of his underlings to get Hitler's authorization to release Panzer regiments being held in reserve to drive the landing parties into the sea because Hitler's staff refused to wake him.

    Hitler was convinced that the landing would come in Pas de Calais and that any landing further north would be a diversionary feint. He didn't trust his generals not to get suckered in by the allies, so he had ordered that the Panzer reserves not be committed without his direct order.

    Had Rommel been at his HQ he probably could have browbeat Hitler's staff into waking Hitler up, but he wasn't and there we are...

  • John||

    The biggest factor in the success was the complete air superiority. The Germans could not move freely enough to get enough forces to stall the invasion.

  • Bardas Phocas||

    If Hitler had come to power anywhere else in the world, he would have been just another half-assed dictator, running his country into the ground. Think Peron or Mugabe.
    But Germany and Germans, they are a different breed. Totally generalizing and collectivist but you have to explain that. Why did march to the sound of the guns? ... and do it really, really well?

  • John||

    What is interesting is that for all of the films of the Nuremburg marches and such, most Germans did it rather glumly. There is a great scene in The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, where Shirer describes Berlin on the day of the French Surrender in 1940. The Nazis of course wanted to make it a national holiday. And for the Germans it should have been. But no one showed up for the parades except party hacks who were told too and no one was in any kind of festive mood.

    I think what happened was they signed up for Hitler because they didn't think there was any other alternative. Then once Hitler got in power and started doing nasty things it was too late to stop him. The state had too much power. But what Hitler did was so bad, that the Germans were terrified of what the world would do to them if they lost the war. The Germans knew about the Holocaust and the camps. And they were terrified of what would happen to them if they lost the war and the world found out. That as much as anything is why they fought so hard.

  • tarran||

    The fear of what the world would do to them wasn't solely because of the Holocaust... In the aftermath of WW-I the world did some pretty shitty things to them, so they had little to lose.

  • John||

    And they were a guilty of a thousand times more sins in the second than in the first. Many Germans thought that losing the war would mean the end of Germany forever.

  • tarran||

    True...

    Part of me wants to study what the fact was happening with the civilian population in Germany in the inter-war years, what the fuck they were thinking. But I recoil in fear that what I read will send me into a black depression because of parallels with what's happening here now.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Read The Nazi Seizure of Power

    It's a narrative reconstruction of exactly how the Nazis took control of a single town. Compiled primarily from historical documents and testimonials.

  • Cliché Bandit||

    Great Book.

  • John||

    What was happening was they were starving. Their currency and savings were destroyed in the great inflation. They lost all of their wealth. Meanwhile the Nazis and the Communists were running wild in the streets. The German state didn't die in the 30s, it was buried then. It died in the 1920s when Nazis were allowed to use the mob to terrorize their political opponents. That is when the rule of law and civilization died. Once the Nazis were able to do that, people were afraid to stand up to them. And that was it.

    The rise of the Nazis is an abject lesson in the importance of having an armed and frankly little dangerous population. The Nazis could have never pulled the shit they did in Germany in the United States. They would have gotten their heads blown off.

  • db||

    Imagine if all Germans had been deported to Palestine and the Jewish homeland was created by the UN in Germany instead. I bet there's and alternate history novel in there somewhere.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    My first thought is whether or not the Palestinians would be into scheisseporn.

  • John||

    That is a great alternative history DB. Something tells me the Arabs would really with that Europe had sent them the Jews instead. The Jews have spent 70 years kicking the Arabs' asses. The Jews, a people with no real martial history since the Macabees. Imagine what the Germans would have done.

  • Lord Humungus||

    Saudarabiaschmitter, home of the strudel.

  • Lord Humungus||

    the documentary does have several "gotchas" where they are interviewing people who participated in some of the atrocities, claiming they were helpless to do anything.

    And then the interviewers bring out a piece of paper, an official report made by the person in question, supporting or encouraging the act.

    Anyway, generally a depressing documentary, but it does have boobs! As part of the Nazi party circle, one would be invited to these big pagan festivals with naked women riding on top of slave pulled floats.

  • John||

    Very few people said no. The Nazis were brilliant at dehumanizing people. They started with the sick and the old and then moved on to the Jews and lesser races. What the race propaganda did was give people a reason to rationalize what they were doing. Sure murder is wrong. But it is just the Jews and the sick or the Slavs and they don't really count. And we were starving before the Nazis. The whole country was collapsing. Something had to be done.

    The Nazis were able to get the Germans to do unimaginable things primarily because they convinced them that something had to be done. It is a great lesson that everyone should remember every time some top man asks the country to sell out their values to solve this or that crisis.

  • Heedless||

    Obedience to authority wins out over personal morality in most people. Millgram experiment and its follow-ups.

  • Matrix||

    “Journalists” are concerned about losing access to the White House if they ask tough questions about Benghazi.
    Most transparent administration EVAH!!!!

    If you dispute that, you're a racist.

  • Matrix||

    dammit... I thought I put in /i

  • John||

    What is the point of having access if you can't ask any interesting questions?

  • DJF||

    Free donuts and coffee?????

  • John||

    Being able to bootlick power. Reporters are pathetic. They just love power. The are the worst jock strap sniffers in the world. They will do anything for the self important feeling of being around power.

  • Rich||

    "Dear Diary, He looked at me again today. I was *sure* he was going to call on me, but instead he almost winked."

  • anon||

    Jay Carney has power?

  • John||

    The White House does. They get to hang out at the White House, feel important. Really, they are that cheap of dates. They really are that pathetic.

  • anon||

    The saddest thing is my reaction to that statement: "The security line for that place has to be a bitch. Who the fuck would want to go there?"

  • Agammamon||

    To be fair, the donuts and coffee are really good.

  • ||

    Unrequited love

  • Bardas Phocas||

    Egyptians gettin snarky with Obama.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WL_mEYP8N-A

  • John||

    I love that. Stupid mother fucker has ensured that Egyptians will hate our guts for a generation or more. And all to support a bunch of crazy religious fucks who want to kill us. At least the Shah was an ally. Obama isn't even smart enough to alienate the populace to support someone who likes us.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Still peddling the lie that Obama is a supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood, I see.

  • John||

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnYUFKFs5As

    CHRISTFAG!! BUSHPIG!!!

    Let it out Shreek. Just let it out.

  • John||

    And the Egyptians certainly think he does. They hate Obama and the US because of it. Lets see, who are we to believe, the Egyptians who saw what happened first hand or some pathetic sock puppet who spends his days deep throating Obama?

    HMM

  • Gbob||

    I'm starting to become convinced that Obama is secretly being controlled by Dick Cheney to make Bush foreign policy look good.

  • DontShootMe||

    + 12 gauge birdshot

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Dr. Taylor Marshall does a Thomistic analysis of marijuana. Conclusion: It's not sinful to use it for medical purposes, but it is sinful to use it recreationally.

    http://taylormarshall.com/2013.....#more-3099

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Shorter translation - If it's fun, it must be sinful.

  • anon||

    That'd explain why I'm going to hell.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    That and the top hat.

  • Lord Humungus||

    the bottom circles of hell are overpopulated by men with (silk) top hats and monocles. They march in lonely abandon, swishing their canes at perceived enemies of their winsome past.

  • Rich||

    Thomas Friedman?

  • John||

    http://www.postbulletin.com/ne.....e064f.html

    Mayo Clinic employees must marry to keep same sex partner benefits. You wanted marriage, have fun.

  • anon||

    Unintended consequences.

    Hooray!

  • John||

    Marriage sucks. The only reason straight couples get married is out of religious conviction and societal mores. Why the hell gays wanted to sign up for it is beyond me.

  • Spoonman.||

    Buh? I think it's pretty awesome - you can make plans a lot better when you have clear commitment.

  • anon||

    You say that as if you make plans.

  • robc||

    You saying you can get commitment without a marriage license?

  • robc||

    CANT

  • Spoonman.||

    I'm saying some kind of contracty thing makes for a lot more security.

    Obviously I was in a committed relationship before getting married.

  • anon||

    I'm saying some kind of contracty thing makes for a lot more security.

    Another example of the plebes trading their liberty for security at every turn.

  • robc||

    Another example of the plebes trading their liberty for security at every turn.

    Yep, especially since a lawyer can draw up a contracty thing for the couple.

  • John||

    What Rob said. I mean legal marriage sucks. There is nothing wrong with committing to one person. But going to family court if it ever ends, paying extra taxes, isn't so great.

  • NoVAHockey||

    my father-in-law is basically stuck in a marriage that both of them hate b/c they can't afford to get divorced. every year or so it's "i'm leaving." but he never does. I think he'd rather bitch about the situation than resolve it.

  • Zeb||

    Just because they are married doesn't mean they have to live together.

  • kinnath||

    Enough about your loveless marriage . . . .

  • Zeb||

    The only reason straight couples get married is out of religious conviction and societal mores.

    Wrong. The only reason I go married was so my wife could get health insurance through my employer. I have no religious conviction and I don't give a fuck about societal mores.

  • John||

    So if you could have gotten health insurance without getting married, that would have been good right? Gays just gave up that privilege.

  • Zeb||

    Well, it's still up to the employer. Some companies give benefits to unmarried straight couples too. I suspect that more employers will probably make similar decisions to what the Mayo did. But that's a problem with the tax law, not the marriage law.

  • Cdr Lytton||

    My employer's coverage has had a clause in it for years that covers unmarried same sex couples only if they're barred by getting married by law. As far as I know they didn't enforce that clause when same sex marriage was (briefly) de facto legalized by county clerks but without a change in the law.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    The only reason straight couples get married is out of religious conviction and societal mores.
    Wrong. The only reason I go married was so my wife could get health insurance through my employer.

    I got married for both. I wanted health insurance and as soon as my wife was eligible to sign me up through her plan, we got married.

    But I also would have had to marry her if I planned on doing things like bringing her to my grandparents' house. She would never have been accepted as a member of the family were we not married.

    And now she is treated as a queen because she provided the first great grand children. Had we not been married, we both would have been black sheep.

  • Zeb||

    Makes sense. Now that they can get the federal tax benefits on insurance provided for a gay spouse. I'd prefer that they just stop treating health insurance differently from other forms of compensation, but what are you going to do?

  • mr simple||

    The biggest concern is that couples are forced to marry in Minnesota in order to get health benefits could end up moving to another state where same-sex marriage is not recognized. Guequierre said there are no federal protections in place to prevent someone for being fired based on sexual orientation. As a result, some individuals may feel they need to keep their sexual orientation a secret, which would be more difficult if they got married in Minnesota.

    So, basically, you just don't want to lose your privilege so you're throwing out a bunch of non-related excuses to see if anything sticks.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    So, basically, you just don't want to lose your privilege so you're throwing out a bunch of non-related excuses to see if anything sticks.

    It's the prequel to their argument for universal gay marriage in America as a right.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    English translation of the Pope's press conference:

    http://www.thetablet.co.uk/blogs/642/18

  • Lord Humungus||

    MATT DAMON!

    Public school supporter Matt Damon admits he sends his kids to PRIVATE schools because they are more 'progressive'
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....ssive.html

  • John||

    California public schools are just not leftist enough for him. Where the hell is he sending his kids? Is there a high end Maoist reeducation camp running in Hollywood?

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    It's the same type of argument you encounter when explaining how communism has never worked. Their response is always "It's never really been tried. Those guys were imposters. We can do it better this time. Trust us."

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Figures. Damon keeps proving himself an asshole over and over again.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    These folks think they get to support public schools because, while existing public schools fall short, the *idea* of great public schools is within reach, if only Republican saboteurs and wreckers wouldn't starve them of money and make them bad, thus forcing these rich public-school supporters to sorrowfully send their kids to superior private schools. But when the millennium arrives and the public schools get all the money they need and teachers are respected, then everyone will be able to proudly send their kids to public schools, and private schools will wither away!

  • thom||

    Apparently Baltimore Public Schools are the ideal then: run by a Democrat government, with zero opposition from the Republican party, with enormous amounts of cash thrown at them (of the top 100 school districts only New York spends more per pupil) and teachers who are compensated at levels two or three times what the parents of their students are earning.

  • thom||

    Oh, btw, the Baltimore Public Schools aren't very good...

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    You didn't really need to add that. The word "Baltimore" is sufficient.

  • db||

    Only the upper class get to choose who indoctrinates their children.

  • ||

    At least do the whole "for security reasons" song and dance. That's a really easy sell. More progressive? Bullshit.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Such an excuse, even if valid, acknowledges that private schools are safer than public. But this is only a transitional stage while the Rethuglican ideologues are wrecking the public schools - defeat the wreckers, and they'll be just as good, and just as safe, as the private ones!

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Damon is in LA, right?

    Private schools here in Georgia tend to be Wahhabi Christian.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Do they worship life-size cardboard cut-outs of George W. Booosh?

  • WTF||

    CHRISTFAG!!11!!!BUSHPIG!!11!!!

  • robc||

    I bet his private school isnt even unionized.

  • Certified Public Asskicker||

    He has four daughters, let's see how he changes when they become teenagers.

  • Fluffy||

    The really funny thing is that I guarantee you that, policy for policy, his local public school is actually more progressive than the private school he chose.

    When he uses the word "progressive" he doesn't mean politically progressive or "employing progressive educational theory". He means that the private school feels progressive, because when he shows up there all the moms are upper class hippies who talk about art. He means what we could call "farmer's market progressivism", which is a matter of atmosphere and not of policy.

    It's also a type of progressivism you can't experience when the poor are around. Because a school that caters to the poor will feel "urban". And "urban" is not "progressive", no matter how completely and utterly progressive dogma is followed there.

  • John||

    THIS

    HE just wants his kids to be around the right kind of people. The whole "progressive" is just camouflaging old fashioned elitism.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Republican governors are not enthusiastic about Republican attempts to shut down the federal government over Obamacare.

    Who's gonna shovel pork to the states if the government is shut down?

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    There's the perfect demonstration of how the Federal government has won the battle already. The States are completely dependent on it for budgetary support.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Foreign diplomats won’t leave Egypt alone and are set to continue to try to resolve the situation; John McCain and Lindsay Graham are visiting soon.

    Those two just want someone left to kill when we enter Egypt's oncoming civil war.

  • Loki||

    Giant bus sized fat blob found in London's sewer. That reminds me, has anyone seen Rosie O'Donnell lately?

  • db||

    Chris Christie's European tour to establish his foreign policy bona fides took a turn for the surreal when he fell into an open manhole.

  • Ted S.||

    "Tragedy is when I get a paper cut on my finger. Comedy is when you fall into an open sewer and die."

    --Mel Brooks (although I probably slightly misquoted it)

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    There's no manhole big enough.

  • Lord Humungus||

    ewwww /teenage girl

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Starting at 3:54, we see Christie re-emerging from the manhole.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRZ9WT4QtMc

  • Rich||

    Weiner roast

    *** rising intonation ***

    Looks like *someone* will be getting a "text message"!

  • sarcasmic||

    FBI allowed its informants to commit more than 5,500 crimes in a single year - or over 15 times a day

    Report reveals FBI informants committed 5,658 crimes in 2011
    This is the first time this data has been publicly revealed
    FBI numbers show a tiny fraction of government sources
    No information available for other federal authorities such as the DEA


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....s-day.html

  • anon||

    Psh, that's nothing compared to how many crimes the FBI commits per day.

  • John||

    That should be a national scandal. Instead it is being reported in an English tabloid. The Whitey Bulger case is freightening and very instructive.

    The FBI's MO seems to be to hire one set of criminals to run wild and inform on the remaining criminals. The FBI gets to make headlines and cases and the informants get to run their criminal operations in peace. That is what happened in Boston with Bulger. The FBI put the Irish mob on the payroll as informants against the Italian mob. The Angulos went to jail and Bulger conducted a reign of terror in South Boston. Good if you lived in the North End and no longer had to pay the Italian mob protection. But pretty bad if you lived in Southie.

    I bet what happened in Boston happened in every other city. Who did the FBI let run wild in New York to get the Gambinos?

  • anon||

    Who did the FBI let run wild in New York to get the Gambinos?

    The Russians.

  • John||

    That is my guess too.

  • Steve G||

    "allowed" Is there like an approval process or something? "Um, excuse me, Special Agent Smith? Was wondering if I could, uh, hold up a bank"

  • ||

    Cleveland Browns surprisingly not letting somebody down... yet, anyways.

    The Browns had a special guest during their Family Night scrimmage on Saturday night. He ended up scoring their most memorable touchdown of the season.

    The Akron Beacon Journal said a tumor was discovered on Encinas' left lung when he was 2. Aug. 2 was his two-year anniversary of being in remission.

  • Ted S.||

    It's not as if they're going to have any other memorable touchdowns.

  • anon||

    He ended up scoring their most memorable touchdown of the season.

    Was that because it was their only touchdown of the season?

  • Certified Public Asskicker||

    It's hard to tell if they were trying to let him score or if their tackling is still that bad.

  • Brett L||

    The sad part was, the Browns defense was playing full speed.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    I hope Encinas recovers fully, but at least if (God forbid) he dies of cancer, he has pallbearers ready.

  • John||

    This whole thing with shutting the government down over Obamacare shows the Stockholm Syndrome of journalists in Washington. Take every piece written about the subject, including Suderman's a couple of days ago, and you could reverse the parties and it would make just as much sense. Are the Republicans shutting down the government in an attempt to defund Obamacare or are the Democrats refusing to fund the government in an attempt to fund a wildly unpopular bill that isn't even set up to function at this point? The logic is just as valid either way. Yet, every journalist left and right writes the story as the Republicans doing the shutting down. And this is always the case. When Reagan vetoed spending bills back in the 1980s, Reagan shut down the government. When Clinton did the same in the 1990s, the Republican Congress shut down the government. Never is the story written about the Democrats shutting down the government even though they are just as culpable as the Republicans. The default position is that anyone trying to cut spending or stop something is "shutting down the government" and any one trying to spend money is the victim of extortion. It doesn't surprise me leftist see it that way. But it is kind of sad how Libertarians and Conservative journalists both buy into the same logic and language.

  • Rich||

    I keep waiting for something like "Government shutdown resulting in widespread starvation".

    *Then* things'll get interesting.

  • John||

    That is the other thing. Journalists who cover the government for a living are not really in a position to give an objective view of what a shutdown means. For them it is the end of the world.

  • DJF||

    Looks like the transgender bandwagon has hit a pothole. Or maybe this is going to be the new ABC hit reality show starting this fall.

    """ABC newsman who switched genders wants to switch back""

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013.....back/print

  • Rich||

    “I’m asking all of you who accepted me as a transgender to now understand."

    We're *trying*, Don. Lord *knows* we're trying.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    That was weird.

  • John||

    People who are transgendered are mentally ill. Study after study has shown that switching genders doesn't make then any happier or better adjusted. Their desire to change gender is a manifestation of deeper problems that remain after they switch genders.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Some of them are transgendered by accident, when they wake up after a bender and discover that a dog ate their male organ.

  • BiMonSciFiCon||

    What about Deirdre McCloskey? I'm not saying many don't have serious mental problems, but perhaps not all do.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    MSM reporters should have surgery to transform themselves from partisan hacks to real news(wo)men.

  • DJF||

    Medical science has not yet developed a backbone transplant.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    On Thursday an email went out that someone in our company is undergoing a sex change. Starting next Monday we have to refer to him as Melissa and use female pronouns or be considered "harrassing". I've never actually worked with this guy (there are about 2000 people in the location where we both work), but he's been here over a decade so a lot of people have.

    My favorite part of the email was that literally the next sentence after saying that you had to use female pronouns said "We are confident that you will continue to treat her no differently than when she identified as Steve."

  • anon||

    Starting next Monday we have to refer to him as Melissa and use female pronouns or be considered "harrassing".

    Someone aught to tell "Melissa" or whoever to fuck off and quit harassing you with their bullshit.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Can you call him Loretta?

  • Lord Humungus||

    I see SF is starting to show some respect for me.
    http://hrsugarfree.blogspot.co.....match.html

  • Loki||

    Careful what you wish for. Today it's "respect", tomorrow it's a starring role in one of his slashfics.

  • Lord Humungus||

    that's my ultimate fear.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Really? I would think the "dog ate my dick" story above would be your ultimate fear.

  • Lord Humungus||

    I wear a metal codpiece for a reason.

  • anon||

    What are you going to do when the army sicks its cinder block chucking robodog on you?

  • Lord Humungus||

    that's what the nitrous is for...

  • SugarFree||

    I wear a metal codpiece for a reason.

    Damn straight! [clank, clank]

  • SugarFree||

    You will notice a comment from "James." That is our long-lost Art-P.O.G., may he one day return to us.

  • PRX||

    Part Time Job Creation Outpaces Full Time Job Creation Seven to One

    thanks a lot Obama.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    “I’m asking all of you who accepted me as a transgender to now understand."

    I didn't give a shit then, and I don't give a shit now.

    Does that count?

  • ||

    Journalists”are concerned about losing access to the White House if they ask tough "tough" questions about Benghazi

  • Cdr Lytton||

    "Journalists"are concerned about losing access to the White House if they ask tough "tough" questions about Benghazi

  • Slammer||

  • Slammer||

    Holy smokes! It got posted above? WTF!! That's awesome!!

  • mad libertarian guy||

    I've been busy in the mornings of late.

    It's good to know that all my hard work has been missed.

    Here's some battle hymns for your pleasure!

  • Slammer||

    I bought that CD. They're from Utah. The whole album is based on the Malazan Book of the Fallen books by Steven Erikson. Great stuff.

    Have you heard the new Summoning album, mlg?

    Have you listened to Gris? from Quebec?

  • mad libertarian guy||

    I'm quite enjoying this band.

    Thanks!

  • Aloysious||

    beautiful.

  • Aloysious||

    Well, that was positive and uplifting. I think I'm uncomfortably numb.

  • John||

    I am so tired of hearing idiot sports writers whine about the exploitation of college football players. The universities make millions and they just get free tuition. Big fucking deal. Welcome to the real world where you employer always gets the keep the bulk of the value you product. There are engineers all over the world who have in some cases dozens or even hundreds of patents that they have created and belong to their employers. Their employes make millions from these patents and the engineers who created them get a salary. Are they being exploited? Ah no. They are working for a living like the rest of us.

  • Brett L||

    So you don't think the atheletes would benefit more if a cabal of employers hadn't set their compensation well below market value and ruthlessly blacklists everyone who attempts to get compensation outside of their cabal? Fuck the NCAA.

  • John||

    What cabal? The NCAA can set its own rules. If you don't like it, don't play. The only way to fix that would be to file an anti-trust action and get DOJ and the courts to run things. The universities have every right to form an organization and set their own rules. And last I looked anti-trust law wasn't particularly libertarian.

    And it is not the NCAA's problem that the NFL won't set up a minor league system. If you don't like the rules, play baseball where you can sign right out of high school.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Go ahead and start your own college league.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Actually, the very best athletes are also kind of getting an internship for a job that could pay millions.

  • Zeb||

    And the rest are getting phony-baloney degrees and graduating with little to show for their college careers. But, as I say below, they knew what they signed up for.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    In which case they aren't being paid way under their market value anyway.

  • robc||

    GT's QB from last year isnt going to play pro ball.

    He is going to law school. yeah, phony-baloney.

  • Zeb||

    Well, not all of them, obviously.

  • Zeb||

    I don't think anyone is being exploited unfairly and I don't really care all that much either way. But the whole situation does seem like a bit of a farce. Pretending that the players at top college football and basketball schools are really there to be students first, and not just in a free minor league for the NFL and NBA is a bit of a joke. And the NCAA is a big racket.
    But the players know what they are getting into and work hard to pursue it, so you can't really say they are being treated unfairly.

  • John||

    It is not a farce. It is a salary cap. The NCAA wants parody and wants to keep costs low. If they allowed players to be paid, the Alabama's and Ohio States of the world would drive the cost of players through the roof and make it impossible for teams to compete hurting the product. So the NCAA has set a salary cap of "tuition and board and no outside benefits". It is no different than the salary caps in professional sports. It is just a lot lower.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I had never thought about it that way. That's an interesting point of view.

  • Brett L||

    If they allowed players to be paid, the Alabama's and Ohio States of the world would drive the cost of players through the roof and make it impossible for teams to compete

    Exactly. Collusion to cheat market forces.

  • John||

    That is not collusion. And even if it is, who cares. There is nothing to stop you or anyone else from forming a college league of your own that pays players. And players are free to play other sports if they like. And the NCAA has to compete with the pro leagues and such for sports dollars.

    Why can't colleges agree to a set of ground rules in order to participate in the organization?

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Are all public colleges members of the NCAA?

  • John||

    No. There are other organizations. NAIA for one.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    No, I mean are all public colleges members of the NCAA.

  • Sidd Finch||

    Are all public colleges members of the NCAA?

    No, I mean are all public colleges members of the NCAA.

    Well that really clarifies the question.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    No, I mean are all public colleges members of the NCAA.

    Do you mean is the NCAA solely comprised of public colleges? Because the answer to that is also "no".

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    No, I mean is every public college a member of the NCAA. Can you name a public college that is not?

    The reason I mention this is if all or even most are then we might have market distortions.

  • anon||

    UNC-Pembroke, UNC-Wilmington... lots of smaller public colleges.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    I see, thanks.

    I still think that all the public colleges at play don't make these arrangements simply natural products of market forces.

  • Sidd Finch||

    So you realized your facts were wrong, and that didn't change your priors one bit?

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    -if all or even most are then we might have market distortions.

    My prior didn't rest on all of them being members, just most.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    No, I mean is every public college a member of the NCAA.

    FOR THE TENTH TIME NO.

    For example, google "NAIA"

  • Sidd Finch||

    Can you name a public college that is not?

    every community college

  • John||

    No Bo. There are public colleges that don't have athletic programs or are members of the NAIA.

  • Sidd Finch||

    no

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Nope.

  • John||

    And Bo. The feeling is that the 80 or so biggest football schools are probably going to leave the NCAA in a few years for football at least and form their own organization. So, there is nothing coercive about this. The schools are free to leave and form their own league if they choose to.

    As for the players, welcome to the real world. Your employers make the rules. You don't always get everything you want.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Employers don't 'make the rules.' With respect you sound like a leftist with that comment.

    Employers and employees negotiate and agree on the rules in a free market. Employees 'taking it' is not inherent in libertarianism. There is to be no government coercion to improve their lot, but they are free to do all kinds of things to do so themselves. Libertarianism doesn't require us to accept all employment arrangements to be good things, it just requires us not to turn to coercion to change them.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    If you want to dig into the issue deeper, I have exactly zero fucks to give to the players on this issue.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Talk about 'terrible arguments.'

  • John||

    Employers do make the rules. They don't owe you a job. They have a right to set the rules. You just have a right to say no and leave the job. But once you take the job, you have to live by the rules.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    In many employee-employer relationships there is active negotiation with considerable give and take that produces 'the rules.'

  • thom||

    I strongly suspect that any attempt to set up an alternative college league that paid players would be met with fierce regulation.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    That's simple conjecture and a terrible argument to boot.

    "There MIGHT be regulation so why even try?" Pussy.

  • thom||

    Go out and try it then. There's a high probability that in the end politicians will get involved. Why waste your time.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Does the NAIA exist, yes or no?

  • Sidd Finch||

    I strongly suspect that there's a high probability that the NAIA does not exist.

  • thom||

    Do they pay their players? No. Start a college league that pays their players and see how that goes, especially if it gets some traction.

  • John||

    http://www.naia.org/

    Yes, the NAIA exists. What do you people think I just made that up?

  • Sidd Finch||

    John, read thom's comments before mine.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    You are perfectly free to start your own league which pays players to compete with the NCAA.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    ^THIS

  • mr simple||

    He's also perfectly free to have an opinion on other people's actions.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    He's not saying he dislikes the decision they made. He's saying the decision is "cheating" market forces.

  • Sidd Finch||

    I agree with this, but I that's no reason to not go with the Olympic model. In fact, that might create more parity because some talented players would choose to be stars at less prestigious schools rather than be just another 4 star at Bama.

  • John||

    Maybe. But if the NCAA wants to do it this way, that is their choice.

  • KDN||

    The NCAA wants [parity] and wants to keep costs low. If they allowed players to be paid, the Alabama's and Ohio States of the world would drive the cost of players through the roof and make it impossible for teams to compete hurting the product.

    Yes, because nothing screams parity quite like NCAA football. The system exists to keep the top teams at the top, it's analogous to campaign finance restrictions.

    The NCAA rules are arbitrary, stupid, immoral, and promote dogma over creativity (SMU should have been a blueprint, not a black mark), and the NCAA itself is staffed full of the worst sorts of university bureaucrat. They are not worth any defense and the sooner that organization dies, the better.

  • John||

    You don't like their system KDN. They do. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to have it. If you don't like it, don't watch.

    They are not worth any defense and the sooner that organization dies, the better.

    Bullshit. They are worthy of the same defense any other organization gets. It is a free country. That doesn't mean free as long as I like what they do. That means free. And how dare you try to tell them they can't run their business as they see fit.

  • robc||

    You can think they should be free to run it as they see fit and still criticize the way they run it.

    As my school is a member and has been screwed by them, I feel fine railing against the NCAA.

    Im a stakeholder in the org.

  • KDN||

    Their actions make them unworthy of defense. They can run their business however they want and I can call them out on their stupid rules and the shitty restrictions they place on their affiliates. I will continue to root for their demise while doing nothing to hasten it, just like Hezbollah or any number of labor unions.

  • John||

    Again, so don't watch. But don't claim that your aversion to them is anything other than a matter of taste or that what they are doing is somehow a subversion of the market.

  • Zeb||

    And how dare you try to tell them they can't run their business as they see fit.

    Trying to tell people things like that is also part of being in a free country. Maybe not telling them that they can't, because they clearly can, but telling them that they shouldn't is perfectly reasonable.

  • robc||

    The funny thing is, it means that Duke and Stanford get to pay their players more than Alabama or Ohio St, as tuition is higher.

  • Zeb||

    It is not a farce. It is a salary cap

    Maybe it's both.

  • Sidd Finch||

    I'm still a bit amazed that I haven't seen one column calling out the Eagles players for being unable to play with a puppy torturer a guy with a potty mouth. I guess I shouldn't be surprised given that sportswriters are among the worst of the PC groupthinkers, but it's such an obvious angle.

  • John||

    This Riley thing is a new high in retard. Vick is a dog torturer and felon and he plays on. The moron twins who play for Pittsburgh and Miami show up on the internet in Free Aaron Hernandez hats. Which is worse, dropping a single racial slur or going on public record saying that a guy who is almost certainly guilty of an execution style murder should go free? I hate the sports media.

  • robc||

    I was hoping the NFL would suspend him for a game.

    Because it would be funny with how many black players they would then have to suspend for using the same word.

    It is, of course, exactly why the NFL did nothing. They dont want the obvious lawsuit.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    The fact that there is a lot of 'raw deals' going on doesn't necessarily justify any particular one.

  • John||

    No. But it doesn't mean the NCAA owes the players anything. And it doesn't mean it is a raw deal just because your employer makes a lot of money from your services. If it is such a raw deal, don't take it.

    Look at it this way. If the NFL had a minor league system, Johnny Mazel would not be a celebrity and no one but a few keeper fantasy league geeks would know who he was. He only has the ability to make outside income because he plays for Texas A&M. No A&M no Johnny Football. Therefore, I see no problem with A&M telling him when and if he can sell his autograph.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Sure, they don't owe them in some legal sense and of course should not be made to in any coercive way. But that doesn't mean it is not a poor deal for the players. They should form a players association, but that would never happen.

    -If the NFL had a minor league system, Johnny Mazel would not be a celebrity and no one but a few keeper fantasy league geeks would know who he was

    We do not know what it would be like absent the present system. It is like people saying without government's monopoly on roads there would be no roads.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Free college, easy classes and all the tail you can ask for?

    Yeah, rough life.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    And no share of the millions you play a key part in generating.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    I know college football scholarships are such a "raw deal" because you never see anyone desperate enough to take such a deal. There aren't literally thousands of kids breathlessly waiting for the magic day they get a letter...

    Oh wait.

  • Houkt Un Fanixs||

    GO DUCKS!

  • sarcasmic||

    Monroe County Court in August 2012 sided with the township and ordered Newell to vacate and never again occupy or use the property unless he had the permits to do so. The report said Newell had been living out of a car, a 1984 Pontiac Fiero, and in abandoned buildings since being ordered to vacate.

    Newell told the paper he was unemployed for years after an injury from a crash and had nowhere else to go.

    'They have no right to kick me off my property,' he told the newspaper. 'They call my property an eyesore. When I bought it, it was one of only three properties on the entire road that didn't have what they call junk.'

    Township ordered that he needed a permit to occupy his own property, so he went to the town meeting with a couple guns and now at least one township official is dead.

    Is it wrong that I am not saddened in the slightest that he murdered a town official?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....jured.html

  • Fluffy||

    Personally, I applauded when I heard that story this morning.

  • John||

    It makes me a free rider since I don't have the courage to do such a thing. But yeah, if town tyrants started getting their heads blown off for this kind of shit, this kind of shit would stop very quickly.

  • sarcasmic||

    I doubt it. More likely they'd call in the National Guard or something. After all, the town tyrants are blameless. This is terrorism, not push-back.

  • John||

    There isn't enough national guard. And the police can't be there all of the time. If someone wants to kill you and doesn't give a shit if they are caught or die, you are in a lot of trouble. They would start thinking twice.

  • anon||

    If someone wants to kill you and doesn't give a shit if they are caught or die, you are in a lot of trouble.

    And our elected leaders would do well to remember this.

  • sarcasmic||

    They'll just surround themselves with armed guards.

  • anon||

    They'll just surround themselves with armed guards.

    ... so?

  • Xenocles||

    Something about a tree and taking care of it routinely.

  • sarcasmic||

    On the one hand I would like this to happen more often - people murdering power-mad government assholes that is. On the other hand that would likely be labeled domestic terrorism rather than push-back government assholes meddling in things that are none of their business (golly don't that sound familiar?) and result in military action against citizens.

  • Drake||

    Militarized police, not the military.

  • Scarcity||

    Militarized police, not the military

    What difference, at this point, does it make?

  • Lord Humungus||

    a permit to occupy his own property

    death by a thousand legal cuts - that's what little bureaucracies become.

  • John||

    I am not either. Terrible thing to happen. But I can't lie. If you are going to start fucking with people and kicking them out of their homes, you are basically asking for this kind of thing to happen.

    What was the point of kicking him out? If the home was an eyesore, the solution is for the city to clean the place up and slap a lien on the property for the cost of doing so. That is how this stuff is supposed to work. Kicking him out of his home didn't solve anything.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Kicking him out of his home didn't solve anything.

    You can't be sure about that.

    I bet that no one in that particular local government will kick anyone out of their houses so long as this event is in living memory.

  • anon||

    Is it wrong that I am not saddened in the slightest that he murdered a town official?

    I'd answer, but they're listening.

  • Gbob||

    Yeah...I would never advocate violence, but it seems to me that the government was a little less intrusive when there was a decent chance of a guy with a shotgun coming out to chase off the revenuers.

    I wouldn't make him a hero, but if I was on a jury I would tend to sympathize with his plight.

  • sarcasmic||

    it seems to me that the government was a little less intrusive when there was a decent chance of a guy with a shotgun coming out to chase off the revenuers.

    Seems to me that citizens were more willing to chase off the revenuers with a shotgun back when the police didn't murder anyone who didn't immediately obey their every command.

  • John||

    The two bit conspiracy now is that Obama is playing up this threat to the embassies in response to the NSA scandal. I am inclined to believe it. There is always chatter. There is always something that you can use to conclude an attack is imminent. Yet, right when things are turning on the NSA, we get this. This time it is real. Bullshit.

  • Mike M.||

    Isn't it kind of obvious now that we closed down the embassies out of fear of possible backlash to the strike we just made in Yemen, which we must have been planning days, if not weeks, ahead?

  • John||

    That is a good point. And what is the point of closing the embassies other than security theater? Do we think the terrorists will go home? We have to open them up eventually.

  • anon||

    "Hey, uh, guys, sorry, we're closed today. Will you please come back and blow us up on Monday? k thx."

  • thom||

    It doesn't make good security theater though, because nobody inside of the United States actually seems to care.

    If they want tactics like these to be politically effective they have to do something big and visible to everyday Americans: shut down air traffic for a week or the freeway system in a large American city. Implement a vast, Boston style "manhunt" with a vague and unspecified target that can't be revealed for "serious national security reasons". Something like that.

  • anon||

    If they want tactics like these to be politically effective they have to do something big and visible to everyday Americans...

    Oh, you mean like, say, 9/11... times a thousand?

  • thom||

    9/11 is way too messy. Much easier to just say you're doing something to prevent the next 9/11. This has the added feature of making you look more capable.

  • Irish||

    Apparently an intelligence officer said that the information they got for this had nothing to do with the NSA program.

    Here it is.

    But an intelligence official said the controversial NSA programs that gather data on American phone calls or track Internet communications with suspected terrorists played no part in detecting the initial tip. That official spoke on condition of anonymity because the official was not authorized to discuss the spying publicly.

    He claims he isn't supposed to discuss it publicly, so it's definitely possible that the administration wanted to give the impression that the NSA programs were involved.

  • John||

    Even if they don't give that impression, shows that the treat is out there and how we need the NSA. The funny thing is that it also totally blows Obama and the Democrats' narrative that they totally went Chicago on Al Quada.

  • Irish||

    The fact that we haven't heard a dozen stories about the NSA program working tells me that it doesn't help.

    This administration would purposefully leak any information necessary to get the public off its back. The fact that they haven't leaked the names of some people caught by the NSA program tells me it hasn't caught very many.

  • anon||

    . The fact that they haven't leaked the names of some people caught by the NSA program tells me it hasn't caught very many.

    What the fuck is this "logic" shit? Get the hell out of here!

    /government

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Township ordered that he needed a permit to occupy his own property, so he went to the town meeting with a couple guns and now at least one township official is dead.

    And he's no longer homeless.

    Win-win!

  • John||

    The lesson is don't fuck with old people. At my age, I would never do something like that. I have too long to live to want to spend it in prison or die and not spend it at all and I have a wife and things to lose. But if I were 80 and maybe not in so good of health and a widower and some petty town tyrant really fucked with me like this? Yeah, that very well could change the equation.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Just so. Didn't we learn from Breaking Bad it's a really bad idea to mess with people who have nothing to lose?

  • sarcasmic||

    Ellen DeGeneres and Portia de Rossi put sprawling California home on market again for $11m after slashing millions off the price


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs.....price.html
    Portia... such a waste. Ellen, well, who cares, but Portia. Sad.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Yeah not seeing what you're seeing. I kinda wish I did because you always seem to be enjoying yourself.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I'm not sure what happened to her in the past decade. When I was watching the new season of Arrested Development, I really thought they had gotten a different actress to play Lyndsey.

  • anon||

    Yeah, me too.

    Ellen has ruined what was once a fantasy of mine, but no more.

  • Irish||

    Her face appears to have melted.

  • sarcasmic||

    Her face appears to have melted.

    I'm sure anyone's face would melt after spending a lot of time between Ellen's legs.

  • Irish||

    Yes, but first she had to get enough plastic surgery to get the proper plastic/face ratio so that face meltage could occur.

  • sarcasmic||

    Had a roommate who watched Ally McBeal all the time, and because of Portia I watched it too.

  • John||

    I wouldn't be shocked if de Rossi goes back to the other team. Who knows. But it is entirely possible that she is more bi than gay and used being gay and being with Ellen as a way to stay in the public eye.

  • OldMexican||

    Something about Ellen that makes women go straight, I guess... Anne got out just in time and looks much hotter now, even when she's still batshit nuts.

  • John||

    I like Anne a lot. I know she is crazy. But damn she is sexy.

  • Zeb||

    ?

    Yeah, because you totally would have had a chance if she wasn't gay.

  • Dr. Frankenstein||

    A babystep in the right direction. Bill on Quinn's desk would require police officers to be trained on canine behavior and nonlethal ways to subdue dogs.

    Great story in the Chicago Tribune but it's behind a paywall. Anyway, IL residents encourage Quinn to sign this into law.

  • sarcasmic||

    A briefs encounter: Hundreds strip to their underwear in Times Square for world record attempt

    Attempt to break record for most people in their underwear in one place
    Failed to smash current record of 2,270 - set at Utah's Undie Run in 2011
    Exhibitionists invited to descend on Times Square in their 'favourite undies'


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....tempt.html
    View at your own risk. Some people should not go out in public wearing only their underwear.

  • Lord Humungus||

    On the way to work, I saw a couple riding on a Tandem bicycle. Regarding the woman, I never knew they made riding shorts that large. It was a like a black abyss, sucking in the colors and sounds of the surrounding landscape.

  • Libertymike||

    Would the character called "dancing man" be one of those peeps?

    BTW, if you were a guest at my house, we would not be watching sports because I am a gracious, thoughtful host and know that is not your thing.

  • sarcasmic||

    Hope you like homebrew. I have this habit of bringing gallons of the stuff with me when I visit friends.

  • robc||

    As do I.

    The only time its even caused a minor issue is that time I brought a corny to a baby shower.

    But, I stand behind it. If you throw a co-ed baby shower, the guys are going to want booze to make it thru the afternoon.

  • sarcasmic||

    That's funny, because nobody complained the last time I brought a corny to a baby shower.

  • robc||

    No one complained, it was more surprise. The two preggers (it was a double party) whined that they couldnt drink, especially since I brought what was probably my favorite beer for both of them.

  • sarcasmic||

    They were pretty happy that I brought a keg because it kept the menfolk in the garage so the women could do women things inside the house.

  • Zeb||

    You should have told them to stop being silly. There is nothing wrong with having an occasional beer while you are pregnant.

  • Cliché Bandit||

    I have a 3 gal corny for easy transport. Best purchase EVER. Got it off a friend for 75 bucks a few years back.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    go home libertymike, you're drunk.

  • Libertymike||

    WTF?

    If you hear me praising Woodrow Wilson, okay, you might have a point or if you hear me opining that Trent Dilfer was better than Dan Marino.

  • Render Unto Caesar||

    Anti-Americanism is the new blowback.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    You are perfectly free to start your own league which pays players to compete with the NCAA.

    Sorry, but I find this to be a completely bogus argument. It's like saying, "You're perfectly free to create your own parallel local government." The NCAA does not exactly exist in a vacuum.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    The NCAA doesn't rule anybody by force. You don't go to jail if you fail to abide by the NCAA's rules. You can leave the NCAA any time you like. NCAA Inspectors don't carry guns.

    You're the one making the bogus parallel.

  • robc||

    Exactly, I hate the NCAA with a fiery passion, but members are there voluntarily. The fact that many of those members are state owned is problematic, but its a different issue.

  • John||

    The only issue is the idea of the a state college running a football program. You can debate the value of doing that. But if you are going to run a football program, there is nothing wrong with a state college running it well and joining an organization that keeps costs down by paying players in kind rather than cash.

  • Irish||

    The only issue is the idea of the a state college running a football program. You can debate the value of doing that.

    Don't many of those state colleges make a ton of money from their football programs? I went to UW-Madison and they make tons of money from football.

    I don't know that I have a problem with a state school running a football program so long as it's not subsidized. If it pays for itself or even makes money, I don't know why I should care.

  • John||

    They do. But more than anything they give alumni a reason to identify with their old school and then donate. Giving to your old college is unheard of in Europe. People just don't do it. But they do in America like crazy. And the biggest reason is that people feel connected to their colleges in America in a way they don't in Europe. And college sports is one of the big reasons for that. It is not so much the cash flow it directly creates. It is the donations that it creates indirectly by making going to that school also mean membership in a sports tribe.

  • robc||

    A small number of football programs make money. Those that do, make tons.

  • robc||

    Not to mention, for many big state schools, you can get donations from non-alumni.

  • Brett L||

    for many big state schools, you can get donations from non-alumni.

    I'm not even sure the U of Texas has an alumni organization, but the Texas Exes is huge.

  • robc||

    The only issue is the idea of the a state college running a football program.

    Well, I have a problem with "state college" to begin with.

    And yes, I graduated from one. That changes nothing.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Yeah, I wasn't trying to defend the choices the NCAA makes, but refute the assertion that it is "cheating market forces" for them to make a decision in the first place.

    Anti-trust laws and the like are anti-market, not the other way around.

  • Libertymike||

    As are "rules" promulgated by organizations dominated by state actors which restrict money making opportunities for ballplayers.

  • John||

    As are "rules" promulgated by organizations dominated by state actors which restrict money making opportunities for ballplayers.

    No they don't. How are money making opportunities restricted? The NFL doesn't owe high school ball players a minor leagues. If it were profitable to set up a minor league, someone would set one up. They did so in baseball.

    It is just that the only way to make minor league football profitable is to do it via the colleges. And the colleges don't want to pay anything but in kind payment.

    It goes back to the basic point that no one owes you a living playing ball. If the NCAA only wants to pay you tuition to play ball and you don't like it, tough shit. Don't play ball if the deal is that bad.

  • Libertymike||

    John, do you really think that P Brooks or I believe that the NFL or MLB or the NCAA OWE any athlete a living?

    But, to contend that the NCAA is not dominated by state schools is just silly.

    To argue that the NCAA is not concerned first and foremost about its institutional survival and its institutional interests and not the individual schools or individual athletes is also silly.

    To be sure, one or more schools could wave bye-bye any time they choose. Part of my beef is why they have not already done so. IMO, it does not appear to be in the best interests of many of the schools to continue with the NCAA.

    BTW, I think your analysis above on the AFL was spot-on.

    As to the USFL, I think robc was spot-on. I would add that Howard Cosell may have been a liability for the USFL.

  • John||

    I never said the NCAA is not dominated by state schools. I said I don't see how that fact matters. If state schools run football programs, it makes sense for them to join the NCAA. And if your problem is with state schools in general or with them running football programs, then your issues are with state schools not the NCAA.

    And I don't know if the NCAA is a good idea. Its members think it is. So who am I to say they are wrong?

  • robc||

    NAIA already exists.

    I dont know their rules on paying players, but an alternative to the NCAA already exists.

  • John||

    The NCAA is not the government. And since when does the market owe you a fucking living? You want to play football after high school, the NCAA is hiring. But they only pay you tuition. If you want millions you have to make the NFL.

    Why can't the NCAA choose to only pay its players in tuition? Why do they "owe" the players all or even any of the money that they make from football? The NCAA owes the players whatever the hell they want to give them. And the players are then free to decide if they like the deal or not. That is the way any job works.

    If the NCAA is wrong to just give players tuition as payment for football, then every corporation in America who pays its employees less than the absolute value they produce is also wrong. Do you really think that Brooks?

  • Irish||

    But they only pay you tuition. If you want millions you have to make the NFL.

    Also, the tuition they pay you is often on the order of $30,000-$40,000. The amount of money they'll give you in tuition is more than a good number of people make from their job.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Plus they give the athletes the training and experience necessary to have a shot at the NFL.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    [NCAA} members are there voluntarily.

    All things being equal, is that really true?

    To be honest, I don't give a shit anymore. I played division III football in college; no scholarships, no nothing, so it's not like I have any claim to having been "gypped" by the NCAA.

    My point, for what it's worth, is that there is a huge institutional inertia at play, and the notion somebody could "just" start their own league is ridiculous. Who would you even be in competition with, the NCAA or the NFL? We have seen repeatedly what a great business plan going head to head with the NFL is. The NCAA and the NFL have an incestuous relationship which neither one wants to see disrupted.

  • John||

    But Brooks some markets are like that. The start up costs to starting a pro league are huge. So basically, the NFL because it got there first owns the business. That is just the quirky nature of the professional football market. The only way the fix that would be to have DOJ step in and file an anti-trust action and force the NFL to subsidize a competitor? Is that really a solution that is worth it? I don't think so.

    Markets are quite efficient and fair in the aggregate. But as they say individual results may vary. An individual market at a given time may not be fair at all. It may be such that it creates a monopoly. But so what?

  • robc||

    The AFL shows its possible.

    The USFL too, they would have been fine if they had ignored Trump and stayed in the spring.

    The CFL continues along.

    And Arena football...maybe that shouldnt count, its pretty much a different sport. Much more so than the CFL.

  • John||

    The AFL only succeeded because the country had grown a lot and the NFL hadn't expanded enough to cover new growing cities like Houston and San Diego and Denver. There was a gap in the market. Now the market is saturated. There just are not many cities that could support a professional team that don't already have one. And the AFL ended up being absorbed into the NFL.

    At this point, any new league will either fail or get absorbed. The only thing that would change that is if the NFL finally succeeds in destroying their product in the name of safety. The XLF failed because it was based on the bullshit assumption that the NFL somehow really wasn't violent of manly enough. The NFL is very much both. So the XLF was just the NFL with worse athletes. But if the NFL really ever did do something stupid like make it illegal to hit a quarterback or hit someone above the waist, an alternative league that played football like people want to see it, would eat its lunch.

  • robc||

    Subsidies in college athletics

    Sort by percent subsidy, 7 public schools in D! that are unsubsidized.

    There is another one with more detail, but I couldnt find it in quick google search, its also from usatoday. That one breaks down the sources of the subsidies.

  • John||

    Lots of businesses are subsidized. Big deal. Moreover, as I said above sports are a loss leader used to tie alumni back to their schools. It is not about the cash flow they create. It is about the publicity and the marketing they create.

    Think about it this way. Without football, Notre Dame is just another small Catholic school in a nowhere town in the Midwest. It is Valparaiso or Creighton. Without basketball, Duke is the University of the South or Emory. These schools all compete for the same pool of students. And within the various tiers they are all basically the same at least at the undergrad level. So how do you get the best students to come to your school and thus increase your ranking and prestige? Well, one way is via the bread and circus of college sports.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    When big-shots get sick, they are much more likely to come to Duke than Emory. The hospital is well-regarded, and is linked to the medical school.

  • anon||

    And if you have ever been to UNC's hospital, you'll know why everyone goes to Duke.

  • robc||

    Big deal.

    It is a big deal.

    Sure, not first on my agenda list or anything. But killing subsidies is killing subsidies, whether its the rebels in Syria or farmers in Iowa or football teams in Alabama.

  • John||

    But the problem is the subsidy not the way the NCAA is run. One has nothing to do with the other.

    And like I said, there is a case to be made for college sports beyond the immediate bottom line. It is marketing for the school. So, you can't say it is "subsidized". No, it is a marketing expense.

  • anon||

    But the problem is the subsidy not the way the NCAA is run.

    Public schools get public money for this shit, meaning it's (effectively) subsidized.

  • John||

    Again, public schools get money for a lot of things. Why is sports shit? You don't like it. Well, I don't like gender studies.

    If your problem is with public schools in general, than your problem is with schools as a whole not the NCAA. If your problem is with sports, well, the administrators see it differently. Do you think no money should be spent on marketing? Should college sports be banned by law?

  • anon||

    Again, public schools get money for a lot of things. Why is sports shit? You don't like it. Well, I don't like gender studies.

    Defensive much? I was using "shit" as a substitute for "stuff."

  • anon||

    . Do you think no money should be spent on marketing? Should college sports be banned by law?

    I think schools should not be public so that I don't have to answer or deal with any of their bullshit.

  • John||

    Again Anon,

    Then your problem is with the schools in general not really the NCAA. If there was no such thing as public colleges, you wouldn't care if the remaining colleges formed the NCAA. Right? That is unless you bought into some kind of leftist bullshit about athletes being owed a salary.

  • anon||

    Oh, I never said I had a problem with the NCAA; I was just observing that a good chunk of operating capital comes at the taxpayer expense.

    I quite literally couldn't care much less either way about the existence of a sports program.

  • Libertymike||

    Don't you think that many of the schools would be better off without the NCAA?

    Its not as if the existence of the NCAA is a pre-requisite for intercollegiate athletics to thrive. Its not as if the NCAA is the sin qua non of intercollegiate athletics.

    Like most institutions, the NCAA is primarily concerned about its institutional interests and not those of the schools, much less the athletes.

    The NCAA adds nothing of value. Nothing.

  • anon||

    Don't you think that many of the schools would be better off without the NCAA?

    Who am I (or you) to judge?

    Let em do what they think makes them the most money, or whatever. Just don't use my money to do it.

  • Libertymike||

    In order for your second sentence to be honored, the NCAA would die.

    In order for your second sentence to be realized, the NCAA would have to just suck it up when a Johnny Football signs autographs for remuneration.

    Using the state to enforce rules promulgated by an organization dominated by state actors is hardly libertarianism in action.

  • John||

    Mike,

    Why would the NCAA die without subsidies? Private schools seem to do just fine in it. The NCAA exists because it is a way to control costs and make money.

    In order for your second sentence to be realized, the NCAA would have to just suck it up when a Johnny Football signs autographs for remuneration.

    Bullshit. The NCAA has a salary cap that says its players can't make outside money. That keeps costs down and makes the whole thing profitable. Letting players make money on the side would drive costs up because schools would then be forced to figure out ways for their players to do so.

    The bottom line is that Manziel is effectively an employee of Texas A&M. And they have every right to tell him he can't sell his autograph. If Manzeil doesn't like it, he can quit. Texas A&M doesn't owe Manziel a living. They let him play on their team and they get to set the rules.

  • Libertymike||

    John, my post was tied to anon's second paragraph in which he expressed his desire that his money not be used to fund the NCAA.

    Of course you and I differ on such things, but, in a free society, those who seek to enforce their rules have no right to ask me or anon to subsidize dispute resolution mechanisms. Thus, consistent with that proposition, if Johnny Football signs his autograph for a fee, the NCAA would have to suck it. Let them try and enforce their stupid rules - but not on my dime.

    Johnny Football does not owe fealty to the NCAA. Too fucking bad if he signs autographs for money.

  • John||

    So A&M can't fire Manzeil Mike? The NCAA doesn't "enforce" anything really. They just kick you out and say you can't play there anymore if you don't abide by the rules.

    If Manziel wants to sell his signature, he can. And the NCAA and A&M are free to kick his dumb ass out on the street and he can go play football somewhere else. It is that simple. Do you think they shouldn't be able to kick him out of their own game if he doesn't abide by their rules?

  • anon||

    In order for your second sentence to be honored, the NCAA would die.

    Not necessarily, but I wouldn't care either way if it did anyhow.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    That is just the quirky nature of the professional football market.

    Pay no attention to that Congressional committee behind the curtain.

    What do you suppose would happen if the Big Ten (or whatever the fuck they are calling themselves, these days) announced their intention to abandon the NCAA and establish a new collegiate athletic sanctioning body?

  • Libertymike||

    Don't you hope that they do?

  • John||

    What do you suppose would happen if the Big Ten (or whatever the fuck they are calling themselves, these days) announced their intention to abandon the NCAA and establish a new collegiate athletic sanctioning body?

    They would establish one. Indeed, that is exactly what many people think is going to happen in the next few years. The big schools who make all of the money in football are going to break away from the NCAA. But they still won't be paying their players in anything but tuition. That is their right.

    Pay no attention to that Congressional committee behind the curtain.

    What does that even mean? Congress isn't stopping people from competing with the NFL. What Congress isn't doing is forcing DOJ to go after the NFL. But again, doing so would mean DOJ running the NFL and forcing the NFL to subsidize a competitor. Is that what you want?

    The USFL and XFL and Federal League all tried and failed. They didn't fail because of Congress. They failed because the market won't support rival leagues. You don't like that. Well tough shit Brooks. The market doesn't owe you your tastes.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    And, further, they had no problem with medically supervised instigtutional PED programs, and all athletes would be paid cash money?

  • John||

    They would lose their asses mostly likely. It would cost a fortune to pay players. The problem is that it is really hard to tell which high school kids are actually going to be productive college players. And even the ones who are often need a couple of years of work before they can do that. You would have to be paying them a salary while they didn't produce any value for you.

    The great thing about paying players in scholarships is that since the school already is running, there is little marginal cost of adding another student. The real cost of an athletic scholarship is not the retail price but the marginal cost to the school, which ain't much.

    And why would thy pay their players in cash? They don't have to. They are doing quit well now. Why do they owe players charity?

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Congress isn't stopping people from competing with the NFL.

    This "discussion" is all over the place.

    Did Congress, or did they not, attempt to insert their big hairy collective proboscis into the question of NCAA football playoffs? Did I just imagine that? Do you think they would sit idly by while "special interests" DESTROY THE HALLOWED TRADITIONS OF INTERCOLLEGIATE SPORTS!!111?

  • John||

    So. How is trying to tell the NCAA they must have a playoff, keeping people from competing with it? Congress sticks its nose in a lot of things. But that doesn't mean the people whose business they nose into have some kind of sinister monopoly.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    It would cost a fortune to pay players.

    Huh. It's almost as if you're admitting the actual cost to the school* of those scholarships is negligible.

    *cost to the "program' is, of course, zero

  • John||

    Huh. It's almost as if you're admitting the actual cost to the school* of those scholarships is negligible.

    I am absolutely saying that. And good for the colleges. Why shouldn't they pay their players via a means that costs them as little as possible? Isn't it their duty to keep costs as low as possible?

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Why do they owe players charity?

    Wow.

  • John||

    What is wow about it? Lets say I am running a business Brooks and I need your services. And you are willing to work for me for $10 an hour. Why am I under any obligation to pay you a penny more? If I offer you $10 an hour and you take it, then the price is fair end of story. If I make a hundred dollars an hour off your labor, well that just means I am a good business man. I don't owe you a single dime of that extra $90 dollars. The only way you can get any of that is if you are willing to quit and I am unable to find anyone else who will do the work for $10.

    It is the same thing here. The NCAA players are willing to take scholarship as payment. The NCAA is under no obligation to pay them more than that. To say they are is to say the NCAA owes them charity. Bullshit.

  • Libertymike||

    No, John, analogy fail.

    In your hypothetical, is Brooksy prohibited from making other money, outside of his employ with you?

    Johnny Football did not take an oath of poverty and chastity, did he? The NCAA is trying to prevent him from making money. Market forces are such that people are willing to pay for his autograph. Its the free market and you are arguing for a restriction of the free market.

  • John||

    In your hypothetical, is Brooksy prohibited from making other money, outside of his employ with you?

    Damn straight he is. It is part of the employment contract. I can't practice law outside of my job. Employers prevent their employees for working outside of their place of employment all of the time. That is a perfectly legal and acceptable contract term.

    Johnny Manzel by going to A&M agreed not to take any outside income or work at anything except playing football and going to school at A&M. That was the deal he struck. And there is no problem at all with A&M and the NCAA firing him if he breaks the deal.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Libertymike doesn't believe in contracts.

  • Libertymike||

    Oh, and AD does not believe in the free market and the vindication of individual liberty.

  • Libertymike||

    John, you know that restrictive covenants are not always enforceable. In fact, I know that you know that. The restriction has to be set forth in writing (a fact which you did not set forth in your hypothetical) and it has to be reasonable and it has to protect a legitimate business interest of the "employer".

  • John||

    The NCAA rules are widely known and in writing. Manziel knows the rules. And there is nothing unreasonable about this restriction. It is to prevent schools from getting around the pay restrictions. Controling costs is a legitimate business interests.

    And since when you are in favor of courts having the final say on what is a "reasonable" contract as opposed to the parties themselves?

    And again so what if it is "unreasonable"? If it is unreasonable, Manziel should quit. A&M doesn't owe him a spot on the team.

  • Libertymike||

    John, you are assuming facts not in evidence. First, the generalized, undifferentiated assertion that "the NCAA rules are widely known" hardly carries the day because you do not know this to be a fact. Which rules are widely known? By whom?

    The NCAA does not provide a scholarship or anything else to Manzell. What is the nature of the NCAA's consideration? You know that for a contract to be valid, there has to be consideration and the consideration can not be illusory.

    Controlling costs, generally, yes, is a legitimate business interest. But how does that relate to PROHIBITING the Manzells from making money outside of football? How does it cost A&M a dime if Manzell is paid for signing autographs by people who freely and voluntarily desired to do so?

    Your answer must be concrete and not left to speculation. Just exactly how do A&M's costs increase because autograph seekers paid Johnny Manzell to sign?

    I don't favor courts determining what is reasonable. But you know what the score is relative to litigating covenants not to compete. Furthermore, I am holding you to a higher standard than the non-lawyers here because I think you have been exposed to restrictive covenants in the employment context, beyond law school, and that you know that the elements I set forth above are part of what a court weighs in considering covenants not to compete et al.

  • Libertymike||

    John, I do agree with you on the general principle that an employer, such as a white shoe law firm which agrees to pay you $500,000.00 per year, provided that you agree not to compete against the firm during your employ and for a period of one year thereafter, is legitimate.

    I just don't see the parallel to Manzell.

  • John||

    Manziel is an employee of Texas A&M. When he signed his letter of intent to come there, he agreed not to take outside income. When he broke that agreement, if he did, A&M has every right to kick him off the team or suspend him. Further, the NCAA and A&M have agreed that A&M will not allow its players outside compensation and when they do, they can't play in NCAA sanctioned games.

    It is that simple. The NCAA doesn't owe Johnny Manzel shit. It has every right to set the rules for its games. And A&M has every right to enforce its rules as well. If Manzel doesn't like those rules, he can always not play.

    Why is that so hard to understand Mike?

  • Libertymike||

    Whither privity of contract?

    Again, what is the consideration that the NCAA provided to Manzell?

    Why do you persist with the NCAA doesn't owe JM shit? Am I contending that the NCAA owes him anything?

    Its the NCAA trying to interfere with Manzell's money making outside of the football field. He is not playing for a rival college of a rival intercollegiate association.

  • Libertymike||

    b/4 I go, just gotta tell you that a gorgeous six foot blonde , tanned and tasty, just walked by and I guarantee you that she would make you forget all about Johnny Manzell and shriek and sarc.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Okay. Before I go:

    The players all voluntarily agree to enter into indentured servitude to the NCAA-credentialed athletic program. Play, and we'll waive your tuition. Fine. Accepted as a given.

    But why does the NCAA get to control the player's outside sources of income? If I sacked the quarterback six times and we got a bump in the rankings, why is it any of the NCAA's business if a local car dealer wants to pay me five thousand bucks to be on his lot and shake hands during his Midnight Madness Sale?

    If he wants to pay me ten grand a week to sell cars in the summer (between workouts) why is that any of the NCAA's business?

  • Libertymike||

    Exactly.

  • John||

    But why does the NCAA get to control the player's outside sources of income?

    Because that is part of the contract and they want to. Why does my employer get to tell me that I can't practice law outside of my work?

    It is not entured servitude. It is called a job. That is how employment works. The bottom lie is that without the platform of A&M football, no one would want Manzel's autograph.

    Do the Broncos have a right to tell Payton Manning what he can and cannot do in the off season? Damn straight they do. And they could sure as hell put it in his contract that he can't sign autographs or do commercials if they wanted to. Of course Manning wouldn't agree to t hat. But Manning has more juice than Manzel.

  • John||

    Brooks, you need to stop listening the NCAA bullshit and look at this thing in as what it is, a job. Playing NCAA football is a job. And since the NFL won't pay you to play out of high school, it is the only job available if you want to play football past high school. As a result, the NCAA gets cheap labor.

    In contrast, baseball will pay you out of high school. So the NCAA only gets second rate talent in baseball. The best players take the better offer and go to MLB. In football that option is not available. So football players have to work cheap.

    You wouldn't see a problem with that in any other context. And there is no reason to see it here.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    The NCAA players are willing to take scholarship as payment. The NCAA is under no obligation to pay them more than that.

    Yeah, and the cartel can prohibit any individual member from outbidding the others. Everybody wins, except the kid who could be getting compensated in cash, instead of a line of credit at the bookstore.

    But the kid can always forego Ohio State football, and be a cage fighter or Congressional staffer, so he's got that going for him.

    I really don't care, except it bugs me to hear people try to pretend this is in any way a free market (for the buyers or sellers of services), or that the alternative is to just go start your own league.

  • John||

    Yeah, and the cartel can prohibit any individual member from outbidding the others.

    So you want the government to come in an forcibly break up the cartel? Do you support anti-trust law? I don't. So I don't see any reason to support it now. And there is nothing stopping the NFL or anyone else from paying players out of high school. They have just chosen not to. In contrast baseball does and the best baseball players don't take the NCAA's offer.

    Again, you problem is that the NFL won't run a minor league and as a result the NCAA gets to hire players really cheap. Why does that bother you so much? That is how the market works.

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