A.M. Links: Syria Vote Delayed by Senate, NSA Reportedly Spied on Brazil, Republican Proposes Bill to Stop Potential Obamacare Favoritism for Unions

  • Russia made an unexpected proposal that Syria transfer control of its chemical weapons to prevent an attack by the United States. The proposal has support from China and Iran, and France will draft a U.N. Security Council resolution for it. Yet, uncertainty persists about who used chemical weapons on whom, as Human Rights Watch announced today that evidence "strongly suggests" Assad's regime is responsible. In the US, meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid insisted he had enough votes for cloture on a resolution to attack Syria, but decided to delay the vote anyway. Voting was initially scheduled for tomorrow.
  • Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) proposed a bill to prevent the Obama administration from granting tax subsidies to union health plans under Obamacare, as their health plans are currently ineligible for the new subsidies. 
  • The Obama administration allegedly used the NSA to spy on Brazil's state-run Petrobras oil producer, undoubtedly to keep Americans safe from terrorism.
  • New Yorkers vote in their respective parties' mayoral primaries in New York City today. Winning candidates need 40 percent to avoid a run-off.
  • A plan to tax financial transactions in 11 European Union member states from 2014 is illegal, the bloc's lawyers have concluded, dealing what could be a final blow to the measure as proposed.
  • Kenya's deputy president, William Ruto, has entered a plea of not guilty at his trial for charges of crimes against humanity in the International Criminal Court in The Hague.
  • Civilians are reportedly being used as "human shields" in a now two day standoff between Philippine troops and muslim rebels. At least four people were killed yesterday.

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||

    Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) proposed a bill to prevent the Obama administration from granting tax subsidies to union health plans under Obamacare...

    The GOP is risking the union vote!

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) proposed a bill to prevent the Obama administration from granting tax subsidies to union health plans under Obamacare...

    Perhaps the unions should have insisted on their pols reading it before they passed to find out what's in it. Fuck 'em. Let them bleed.

  • Lord Humungus||

    Vilks guards beat artist in 'cocked' pistol mix-up

    wedish artist Bengt Andersson was left bruised and bloodied after a clash with security guards who mistook his pistol sculpture loaded with steel penises to be a threat against controversial colleague Lars Vilks.

    sometimes a gun isn't just a gun.

  • Ted S.||

    In this case, it's not art, either.

  • Zeb||

    Oh, for fuck's sake. Who made you the art police? Is it really so hard just to say "I don't like it".

  • Rich||

    A Swedish *child* could have done that! ;-)

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    There has to be some definition of art that goes beyond, "someone told me this is art"

  • Almanian!||

    No. No, there does not.

  • BardMetal||

    Really so anything is art? The empty beer bottle in the trash, my altoids container, the cup of coffee I'm drinking right now, those little boxes of smoked oysters I have. Absolutely everything.

    Which I guess makes the word "art" pretty meaningless.

  • Zeb||

    No. It is art if you intend it to be art and you present it as art. The interesting part is discussing whether it is any good as art. And while you may find some sucker who would buy your household garbage as art, I doubt many woudl take a second look.

  • BardMetal||

    Have you've seen some of the shit that gets passed off as art nowadays? There was an "artist" who used to take pictures of his wive's used tampons, and some art critics actually applauded it.

  • Dweebston||

    I can live with the idea that if everything is art, nothing is art.

  • Mainer2||

    My personal definition is, If I can do it, it's not art. Therefore:

    Crucifix in urine: not art.
    Sisstein Chappelle: Art.

  • Zeb||

    I think you confuse art and craft. Why does art need to be difficult to produce? And how can that definition be applied to people who are artists?

    And while I don't think the NEA should exist at all, I think Piss Christ is a very interesting and artistic image.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    Except the notion of the artist as anything but a craftsman is, at best, a couple of hundred years old.

  • ||

    How about Andy Warhol's?

    "Art is anything you can get away with"

  • Zeb||

    Why?

    I think that is really the only workable definition. If someone makes or dopes something and presents it as art, then it is art. It might be total shit, but that doesn't mean it isn't art. The alternative seems to be people just using their personal tastes to define what is or is not art.

  • Zeb||

    "does", not "dopes".

  • DontShootMe||

    I liked it better the first way.

  • Zeb||

    Yeah, that could work too.

  • robc||

    Im fine with both definitions.

    Why do we have to be in agreement?

  • Zeb||

    I suppose we don't have to agree. It is just a pet peeve of mine when people appoint themselves as the arbiters of what is or is not art because they don't like or don't get something.

  • robc||

    It is just a pet peeve of mine when people appoint themselves as the arbiters of what is or is not art because they don't like or don't get something.

    But they are arbiters of what is or is not art regardless of the idiocy of their reasoning.

  • Zeb||

    I see your point. But I also think that is is useful to agree on a definition of a thing if you want to talk about it with people. SO the lesson I should probably take from this is that it is pointless to discuss art with people who think that their tastes are the only definition they need.

  • ||

    Art, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. So your personal tastes are absolutely going to shape and define what you, as an individual, consider art.

  • BardMetal||

    Well then I guess I make art every morning after my first coffee.

  • Zeb||

    You shit out carefully made replicas of revolvers with penis shaped bullets where the cylinder would go? Come on, whether or not you think it is any good, the penis bullet gun is clearly a sculpture, and really not all that far out or challenging as far as contemporary sculpture goes.

  • ||

    someone's already beaten you to it

  • Cliché Bandit||

    Like this Hot GIRL!

  • Ted S.||

    To me, "pistol loaded with steel penises" screams political/cultural statememt first, art second.

    It's the whole idiotic idea that art has to be "transgressive" and "challenging", but only of the right group.

  • Cascadian Ephor Xenocles||

    Since art is communication, I'd say the art was pretty successful.

  • Zeb||

    I agree to some extent that those trends in art are stupid and annoying. But that doesn't make is less art. Just less good.
    Art has always been used for cultural political messages. You think European Renaissance painters weren't trying to make political statements which were agreeable to their patrons? Some thing now, only the patrons are rich leftists and not the nobility and the church.

  • hotsy totsy||

    "Art is the concretization of one's values." Ayn Rand's definition.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    What a bunch of pricks.

  • Lord Humungus||

    *wedish = Swedish

  • db||

    That Northern California county that wants to secede should get together with Humboldt County and form the new state of Weeden. The Weedish will become the richest state in the union.

  • JW||

    Where did they get a WartyGun?

  • Lord Humungus||

    obviously dropped during one of his time traveling adventures.

  • Lord Humungus||

    Smile: USA ranks 17th among world's happiest countries

    Something to smile about? Americans are not the happiest people on earth, but we do rank a respectable No. 17, among 156 countries evaluated for a new United Nations report.

    The second annual World Happiness Report, released Monday, finds the highest levels of happiness in Denmark, Norway, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Sweden, all in northern Europe. The lowest ranked were Rwanda, Burundi, the Central African Republic, Benin and Togo, all in Africa.
  • robc||

    Denmark, Norway, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Sweden, all in northern Europe.

    Ummm...no.

  • Zeb||

    That stuck out to me as well. They are all predominantly Germanic, though.

  • robc||

    Swiss is a mix of german, italian, french and romansch. Well, by language. Probably ethnicity too, but they more think of themselves as Swiss, I think.

    Majority German though, just over 60%, so yeah.

    And I dont think the Scandinavian countries count as germanic.

    More Viking.

  • cryptarchy||

    The Vikings were birthed from the Germanic tribes that had settled the area. Zeb is correct

  • robc||

    Why not just call them African then?

    They were birthed by african tribes than settled the area too.

  • Zeb||

    Their languages are Germanic.

  • robc||

    The languages for all the countries mentioned, including switzerland, are indo-european.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    No. They are Germanic which is a subset of the Indo-European family of languages. English is Germanic too.

  • robc||

    No.

    They abso-fucking-lutely ARE indo-european.

    And Italian, French and Romansch arent germanic, they are romance languages.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Yes, I know.

    Indo-European isn't a language, per se, but a family of languages. IE can be sort of reconstructed, but only based on the languages that spawned from it.

    I never said that the Romance languages were Germanic. And yes, they are also from the IE family. English was "corrupted" by French after Billy the Bastard conquered England. We have much of our vocabulary that descends from the romance languages, but the essential structure (as well as a vast majority of the words we use most - pronouns, articles, mother, father, etc) of English still descends from Old English.

    As an aside, do you really want to argue this with a guy who got his masters via studying Germanic languages (specifically Old English and Old Norse)? My degree may not have much economic value, but there is knowledge contained therein. And the Scandinavian languages are Germanic.

  • BardMetal||

    Scandinavia is where Germanic culture and languages originated from. They then migrated south into the country now known as Germany.

  • BardMetal||

    Oh and ethically Switzerland is probably more Celtic then anything else.

  • robc||

    ethically

    okay.

  • BardMetal||

    Come on man you know what I meant to type there.

  • robc||

    I know, that was the funny part about it.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Scandinavians are absolutely Germanic.

  • kinnath||

    Just say it -- Aryan.

  • Lord Humungus||

    You know who else...

    oh, wait... I promised no more Godwins today.

  • Brett L||

    Before or after evening cocktails?

  • Atanarjuat||

    I think that referring to northern Europe is less geographical and a more a PC way of saying "look how much happier white people are".

  • ||

    Race isn't really the relevant factor either. It's more: "Look how much happier all the social democracies with nanny states are!"

  • db||

    Look at how much happier people in countries not at war with half the world are!

  • Bee Tagger||

    I'm pretty pleased with my high standards for happiness, though. That should count for something.

  • ||

    One reason the USA lags behind leading countries is "a relatively mediocre life expectancy," Sachs said in an e-mail. The USA also lost points, and fell from 11th to 17th, because of perceived declines in "freedom to make life choices," which might be linked to poverty or unemployment, he said.

    Or which might be linked to governm-... never mind...

  • ||

    How the hell is a 79 year life expectancy "mediocre" when the highest life expectancy is 83?

  • ||

    I've never visited northern Europe but having lived a number of years in the midwest I was friends with a lot of second generation Danes and Dutch and their parents are most certainly anecdotal validation of this.

    I wonder what makes them so comparatively happy up there.

  • Smilin' Joe Fission||

    They are fine with mediocrity. Canadian's are generally more happy than American's, but, from my own experience, it is because Canadian's are fine with second rate everything.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    The second annual World Happiness Report, released Monday, finds the highest levels of happiness in Denmark, Norway, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Sweden, all in northern Europe.

    If I lived in a country where I could freely smoke weed without the fear of being SWAT Teamed and having my dogs shot, I'd be pretty fucking happy too.

  • Blinded by the Derp||

    Those countries are too high a latitude to be the happiest.

  • BigT||

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Always pull the drive and mail it to yourself when taking your computer through Customs.

  • db||

    Yeah there's no way they could open the box and check out the drive. I once had a laptop disappear from a shipment in Canadian Customs. It was there when I shipped it, there when UPS took it to customs, but not there when delivered to me in Newfoundland. Whoever took it was a fool--it was two years obsolete, and they left the $7,000 scientific instrument in the crate with the laptop alone.

  • thom||

    Or even better, store encrypted files in the cloud and don't put any business or personal data on your hard drive at all.

  • db||

    Haha, good one.

  • Rasilio||

    The NSA thanks you for this advice

  • JW||

    Encrypt the drive, presuming that encryption isn't moot at this point.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    But they're going to take the drive and keep it while trying to crack it, apparently. That's what I'm trying to avoid.

  • Tonio||

    They don't need to hold the drive for that long; they can copy the drive in about an hour then work on decrypting the copy at their leisure. BTW, these are bit-level copies so get everything on the drive, even hidden, encrypted and deleted data.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    They held his laptop for weeks before returning it, acknowledging one year later that House had committed no crime and promising to destroy copies the government made of House's personal data.

    Government employees don't work that fast.

  • ||

    Russia made an unexpected proposal that Syria transfer control of its chemical weapons to prevent an attack by the United States.

    What's Putin's price for letting Obama crawl off that limb he got himself stuck on?

  • Atanarjuat||

    The only thing I can think of is they are secret lovers.

    Or, Putin gets to bang Michelle in a fucked up cuckold/bull scenario.

  • Ska||

    Then he stabs the husband in the neck with a broken bottle a dozen times.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    I think Putin's elevated stature as a diplomat who can stop hotheads from knee jerk reactions is thanks enough.

  • Bee Tagger||

    Yeah, I imagine Putin will be writing an op-ed about how the US should allow Obama to run for a 3rd term. He's having too much fun right now for it to end in a few years.

  • some guy||

    And all the people who opposed Obama for the last two weeks, giving this solution time to develop will get no credit.

  • Drake||

    1. Make Obama like a complete fool and pussy.

    2. Make it obvious to the world the Putin can do as he pleases in Eastern Europe.

    3. No missile defense.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Nobel Peace Prize!

  • DontShootMe||

    Question, which Nobel Peace Prize winner has been responsible for more deaths, Barack Obama or Yasser Arafat?

  • Marshall Gill||

    Yasser was in business much longer, but it could be close.

  • Lord Humungus||

    Outrage as toy company creates 'crystal meth lab' for children with Breaking Bad play sets

    Children can now build their own drug dens with a shocking new play kit inspired by TV show Breaking Bad.

    The sell-out £160 kit, branded 'SuperLab', lets any child or adult recreate Walter White's notorious crystal meth lab.

    Complete with protective masks, drug paraphernalia, figurines and a version of the car from the show, infants can even reenact scenes from the series.
  • RBS||

    I know what I'm getting my son for christmas now.

  • Ted S.||

    At least somebody's thinking of the children.

  • ||

    New Yorkers vote in their respective parties' mayoral primaries in New York City today. Winning candidates need 40 percent to avoid a run-off.

    Editors everywhere are praying for a run off. It's like an ad-hoc Groundhog day. 6 more weeks of Weiner jokes!

  • db||

    Nah, it's Weiner's last shot.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Civilians are reportedly being used as "human shields" in a now two day standoff between Philippine troops and muslim rebels.

    As long as no one uses chemical weapons those deaths are okay.

  • JW||

    What if they use weapons made with the 'Lil Walter White EZ-Meth chemistry set?

  • Lord Humungus||

    Europe: Treating Homeschoolers Like Terrorists

    Homeschooling has been illegal in Germany since Adolf Hitler banned it in 1938 -- one of the few Nazi laws still on the books. Hitler introduced the ban to force all children to attend state-approved schools where they were to be indoctrinated with the Nazi ideology.

    The Wunderlich children were seized on the order of a court, because their parents, who are Christians, want to raise them according to their own values. The court transferred formal legal custody of the Wunderlich children to the state, despite there being no allegations of abuse or neglect against the parents.

    The court order allowed the police the use of force against both parents and children; it stated that the children had "adopted the parent's opinions" regarding homeschooling, and that "no cooperation could be expected" from either the parents or the children.
  • Atanarjuat||

    The sadness of those kidnapped kids dragged Germany down to 26th in World Happiness.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    So are they going to send the kids to prison to save them if they refuse to obey their state parents and refuse to do schoolwork?

    A lot of the tolerant left here would love to be able to force kids into government schools.

  • CatoTheElder||

  • ||

    Quick, somebody tell Obama so he can pull his kids out of Sidwell Friends posthaste.

  • Virginian||

    Man you think the first thing they would have done when they returned to democratic government was repeal every single law the Nazis passed. Just a blanket repeal.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    That was my thought too. I mean, they sat and pondered each Nazi law and kept some of them?! Why, for galt's sake?

  • Virginian||

    Statists gonna state.

    Or maybe they thought there enough Nazis left around in the late 40s that all the Nazis would homeschool their children and take over again.

  • Drizzle||

    This I could actually see as valid reasoning

  • Bill Dalasio||

    Well, that's easy. Just because someone isn't a Nazi doesn't mean they aren't a statist. If you're a soft statist, you'd probably love to do some of the things the Nazis did. You just know you'd never get away with it. So, the soft statists decide "why not let it stay on the books?"

  • Hawk Spitui||

    The more things change...

  • ||

    One of the largest Jewish schools in Belgium is at risk of losing its state recognition and subsidies because it is "too conservative."

    ...

    The German authorities claim that by homeschooling their children, Dirk and Petra Wunderlich are violating their children's "right to grow up to be capable of living in society, which is only possible if they are exposed to different points of view."

    ...except for Jewish/conservative points of view. thooose views they can't be exposed to in any school setting.

  • Rich||

    Chuck Norris on Syria

    As a six-time world karate champion, I know something about fighting, winning and losing. Sometimes one has to lose a battle to win a war, if only in appearance before certain others. And the truth is, Mr. President, sometimes you win, sometimes you learn. My advice is to learn it now before it’s too late for all of us.

    But what would *Walker* do?

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Probably some type of flying roundhouse kick?

  • db||

    Chuck Norris is so badass, even his losses are wins.

  • Brett L||

    Seriously, Norris is now WAY more qualified in my eyes for SecState than John Kerry.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    When the Great Powers were dividing up the Middle East after WWI, they hired Chuck Norris to personally carve up the former Ottoman Empire into separate states. Today he feels a bit guilty about this.

  • some guy||

    The lines on the map aren't just on the map. Norris chiseled them into the bedrock by hand.

  • Ted S.||

    Since Walker was a cop, I presume he'd have shot somebody's dog.

  • DontShootMe||

    Nah, just a nice roundhouse kick.

  • CampingInYourPark||

    Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) proposed a bill to prevent the Obama administration from granting tax subsidies to union health plans under Obamacare, as their health plans are currently ineligible for the new subsidies.

    If union health plans are currently ineligible for new subsidies then why does a bill need to be presented to prevent granting new subsidies? Are there several meanings of the word "ineligible"?

  • wareagle||

    we have to look up the word to find out what's in it.

  • Ebriosa||

    Because the O admin doesn't bother changing anything with laws anymore.

  • andarm16||

    Well, every serious bipartisan knows that Congress is so gridlocked that there isn't any sense in even bothering.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    Well, there's ineligible and there's ineligible. Sure the law might not give you an exemption. But, that doesn't mean the executive doesn't have....discretion.

  • Lord Humungus||

    No shit?

    Obama Blames Iraq for ‘Challenging’ Case in Syria

    With a majority of the American people opposed to his plans and an uphill climb in Congress, President Obama laid the blame for the lack of support for military intervention in Syria on the previous administration’s Iraq campaign.

    “I’m not sure that we’re ever going to get a majority of the American people after over a decade of war, after what happened in Iraq, to say that any military action, particularly in the Middle East, makes sense in the absence of some direct threat or attack against us,” the president told PBS’s Gwen Ifill. “Tomorrow I’ll speak to the American people — I’ll explain this is not Iraq, this is not Afghanistan, this is not even Libya.”
  • WTF||

    Well yeah, everything is Bush's fault, for ever and always.

  • JW||

    It's all Adams' fault!

  • CatoTheElder||

    It's Madison's fault for writing that stupid Constitution.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I’m not sure that we’re ever going to get a majority of the American people ... to say that any military action ... makes sense in the absence of some direct threat or attack against us

    So.... he's saying this is a bad thing now?

  • #||

    I'm so upset at Bush's dumb war because it's preventing me from launching my own dumb war!

  • ||

    Civilians are reportedly being used as "human shields" in a now two day standoff between Philippine troops and muslim rebels. At least four people were killed yesterday.

    Today's uprisings are tomorrow's weak excuses for "limited US engagements."

  • Rich||

    Meh. Wait 'til civilians are used as "human chemical weapons", like in teh pr0n industry.

  • Rich||

    Oops. Sorry, Fist beat me to it.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Technically that would be biological warfare.

  • Rich||

    Wait 'til civilians are used as "human psychological weapons".

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    ...Human Rights Watch announced today that evidence "strongly suggests" Assad's regime is responsible.

    I remember the old days when evidence proved stuff.

  • Zeb||

    I think evidence and proof have always been different things.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    But groups didn't used to equivocate so with their assertions. What has the world come to.

  • Zeb||

    I guess I'm pro-equivocation. I don't like to make any promises or declare anything to be absolutely true unless I am really sure. Which is almost impossible. Basically, I don't like to use the word proof unless there is logical certainty about something. If there are unreasonable doubts that are nonetheless possible, you haven't proven anything.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    With your way we won't get to bomb anything.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Catholic SoCons Urge More Federal Action Against Gambling

    -Nearly seven years ago, Congress voted overwhelmingly to protect vulnerable communities within our country as well as the integrity of professional sports by stopping the expansion of gambling on the internet. Unfortunately Congress’ clear intent in the Unlawful Internet Gambling Act of 2006 (UIGEA) is now under assault.

    the Justice Department (DOJ) announced it was upending more than five decades of consistent interpretation of the 1961 Wire Act which prohibited all gambling over the internet with a new, unilateral opinion that the law simply applied to online sports gambling.

    It’s those “younger players” and other vulnerable populations like seniors who are at the most serious risk. Ninety-three percent (93%) of teens age 12-17 utilize the Internet and 97% of teens of the same age participate in some form of on-line gaming making them attractive targets for gambling marketing as well as illegal and fraudulent operators.

    Congress, though, does have the power to protect our seniors, our children, and give law enforcement the tools they need to protect the vulnerable from illegal predatory gambling interests. Federal restriction of on-line gambling is vital, urgent, and consistent with recent congressional intent.

    http://www.catholicadvocate.com/

  • robc||

    Eating into the bingo racket?

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    heh. Are Catholics the only example where an entity is both the Bootleggers and the Baptists?

  • robc||

    I think they are just the bootleggers in this case.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Well, they are taking a moral stand (Baptists) that aids those who provide an analogous product (bootleggers), right?

  • robc||

    Bootleggers always use the baptist argument.

  • db||

    I grew up Catholic and stopped going to church when I realized that the bulk of the homilies and the position of the Church was to basically shill for state control of most aspects of life. The Roman Catholic Church is essentially a socialist organization with a strong conservative flavor.

  • Virginian||

    Lotta truth to that.

  • JW||

    TJ Rodgers earned my infinite respect when he beat up a bunch of posturing, social justice nuns, through the mail.

    http://www.cypress.com/?rID=34986

  • tarran||

    That is an awesome letter.

    It makes me want to quit my job to work for him.

  • JW||

    The best part is that it's on Cypress' own web site.

  • db||

    That is good. I'm saddened by the number of companies that actively promote the idea of "social responsibility" as a core value, including the one I work for, to a degree. Makr money and let your investors and employees be "socially responsible," whatever that means for them individually.

  • Blinded by the Derp||

    Sadly not the only Church that is pro-state

  • Blinded by the Derp||

    *church

  • Auric Demonocles||

    In the area where I grew up several of the community halls (on Catholic church land) held live poker tournaments once a month, with the proceeds going to a different charity each time. It lasted from ~03-07, before they started getting heat to shut down.

  • Atanarjuat||

    "We are opposed the Feds forcing us to do things against our convictions, like providing contraceptives in health benefit packages"

    [5 minutes later]

    "We want the Feds to force others to abstain from things that are against our convictions"

  • ||

    "Those are my principles. If you don't like them... well, I have others."

  • Stormy Dragon||

    It wasn't even five minutes. Given that Catholic Charities gets 60% of it's funding from the government, it was a "Get the government's hands off my medicare!" proposition from the beginning.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I spent one summer at 19 just playing poker online (and posting to Reason). I would not have described that experience as negative.

  • ||

    Online poker paid for my freshman year beer fund.

  • mr simple||

    Federal restriction of on-line gambling is vital, urgent, and consistent with recent congressional intent.

    Too bad it's not consistent with constitutional intent.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Nor is banning it urgent or vital.

  • Bam!||

    Mmmhmmm. And how many Catholic churches have casino night in the basement? Parents used to be a dealer at those things.

  • Lord Humungus||

    Man whose home was slated for demolition swaps numbers with the house next door - and crew knocks down wrong property

    A man in Michigan whose house was set to be torn down outsmarted demolition crews by switching address numbers with the house next door.

    It's not clear why his house was being forcibly demolished, but his plan to save his home initially worked.

    When demolition crews arrived Thursday, they tore down his neighbor Mike's home instead.



    thanks, neighbor!
  • Don Mynack||

    The article states that the neighbors are glad the wrong house was torn down, since it was being used by squatters. If so, kudos to the "man in Michigan" for getting the state to do the dirty work.

  • Brett L||

    What a clusterfuck of fail.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    A plan to tax financial transactions in 11 European Union member states from 2014 is illegal...

    Europe's 99% take it on the chin again.

  • Hawk Spitui||

  • Virginian||

    Hey look everybody, it's American. Hi American! Seen any good interracial porn lately?

  • Irish||

    That's not American. I have a sixth sense about these things.

  • Brett L||

    Ah, so we've found out who puppets his sock!

  • ||

    "Puppets his sock" sounds positively filthy

  • db||

    Have you seen that sock?

  • Teenage Girl||

    Eewww!!

  • Brett L||

    Thank you.

  • MJGreen||

    I don't know what that is, and I won't respond to it.

  • Lord Humungus||

    Flailing Obama slumps to lowest ratings of his presidency, as US voters see him as ‘a weak and indecisive leader’

    The scale of the challenge for Mr. Obama is encapsulated in a new poll released by Fox News (conducted by both Democratic and Republican pollsters), which shows the president’s approval rating falling to 40 percent, the lowest level of support in his presidency (on par with December 2010). Obama’s disapproval stands at 54 percent, the highest negative rating he has received since taking office.

    There is no doubt that Obama’s handling of the Syria crisis, and his handling of foreign policy in general, is helping drive the president’s unpopularity. According to the Fox poll, 68 percent of likely voters believe the US “should not be more involved in Syria,” with just 26 percent in favour of greater involvement. Only 36 percent agree that “President Obama (has) adequately explained for you the reasons US military action against Syria is necessary,” and just 27 percent “believe President Obama has clearly identified what the US goals and objectives would be in taking military action against Syria.”
  • CatoTheElder||

    Don't worry. In a few weeks, the MSM will be hailing Obama as the conquering hero who averted war in the Middle East, decommissioned Syrian chemical weapons, established democracy in Syria, outsmarted Iran, and kept Israel safe.

    Doesn't have to be true for the MSM to run with it, and they will assuming that Putin successfully averts war.

  • Irish||

    Brussels fears that European Industrial Massacre is fueled by energy costs.

    Mr Tajani warned that Europe's quixotic dash for renewables was pushing electricity costs to untenable levels, leaving Europe struggling to compete as America's shale revolution cuts US natural gas prices by 80pc.

    "I am in favour of a green agenda, but we can't be religious about this. We need a new energy policy. We have to stop pretending, because we can't sacrifice Europe's industry for climate goals that are not realistic, and are not being enforced worldwide," he told The Daily Telegraph during the Ambrosetti forum of global policy-makers at Lake Como.

    "The loss of competitiveness is frightening," said Paulo Savona, head of Italy's Fondo Interbancario. "When people choose whether to invest in Europe or the US, what they think about most is the cost of energy."

    Wow. I found a European who actually seems to be sane on this issue.

  • Smilin' Joe Fission||

    Since the Energiewende, Germany's air quality has, 2 years in a row now, gotten worse. Wind and solar projects are some of the biggest frauds the world has seen. Provide almost no useful energy, are erratic on when they provide electricity causing big problems to grid operators, and the government subsidizes the hell out of the damn things and gives them first to market priority. The first to market BS is killing base load generators because they have to shut down when the wind suddenly picks up.

    The whole thing is a giant scam. For some reason, every reliable base-load generator must bend over backwards and get screwed to accommodate the most useless form of electricity production available, wind and solar.

  • Lord Humungus||

    Meanwhile in Australia:

    Feral pig pinches multiple six-packs of beer and runs riot at Pilbara camp sites

    A booze-stealing feral pig that is wreaking havoc in the Pilbara has prompted a reminder for travellers at camp sites and rest stops to ensure their food and alcohol is secured.

    It is believed the animal has drunk up to 18 cans of beer at the DeGrey River rest area, east of Port Hedland, over the past few day
  • Atanarjuat||

    You've gotta have titanium balls to steal beer from an Australian.

  • Brett L||

    This is what gun bans get you. Feral pigs are way more dangerous than crocs.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Turn that pig into bacon before he sobers up - mmmm, beer-infused bacon...*drool*

  • ||

    what about bacon-infused beer?

  • Tejicano||

  • Stormy Dragon||

    For some reason I read that as "Federal pig pinches..." and was trying to figure out that meant.

  • mnarayan||

    Best. Story. Ever.

    Except maybe the one from a while ago about the dude who bit off the head of a cobra after it bit him.

  • Aloysious||

    If/when that stupid Weiner loses the race in NY, I am going to miss all the dick jokes.

  • Rich||

    It will never end.

    "Weiner peters out"

    "Weiner should have pulled out"

    ad nauseum

  • Steve G||

    Don't worry, he's already planning his next 'comeback'

  • Lord Humungus||

    P.J. O'Rourke: I Came, I Saw, I Skedaddled
    Decisive moments in Barack Obama history.

    Sir Winston Barack Churchill Obama

    We shall fight on the beaches—mostly on Martha’s Vineyard, where everybody was over Labor Day weekend—we shall fight at the G-20 summit in St. Petersburg, we shall fight at the U.N. Security Council, we shall fight in the House of Representatives and the Senate when Congress is finally back in session; we shall never surrender unless we don’t get enough votes or our poll ratings are low.
  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    -we shall never surrender unless we don’t get enough votes or our poll ratings are low.

    Hilarious, probably funniest thing I will read today. Thanks for posting it!

  • Stormy Dragon||

    From a technical standpoint it's hilarious. Captures Obama's speaking style perfectly.

    On the other hand, it's sad to see P. J. O'Rourke shilling for warbonerism now. What happened, man? You used to be cool...

  • BiMonSciFiCon||

    Hopefully he's just making fun of Obama. Parliament of Whores is one of the best books on government, ever.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Needz moar "let me be clear."

  • Irish||

    Wasn't O'Rourke hugely in favor of the Iraq war? I mean, he writes for the Standard.

    O'Rourke is a libertarian on domestic issues, but I think he's a bit of a neocon on foreign policy.

  • Stormy Dragon||

    In the past he seemed to me to be more a Jacksonian (i.e. if someone starts a fight, we're gonna finish it, but generally suspicious of messing around in other countries unnecessarily). He's seemed to become far more Wilsonian since he began writing for the Weekly Standard.

    He's also gotten less libertarian on domestic issues too. I recall reading somewhere (I forget if it was one of his own essays or an interview) that he changed a lot after his first daughter was born. Basically, he turned into the typical boomer: all for freedom when he was young and wanted to do whatever the hell he wanted, and then turning into a nanny once he was to old to enjoy it himself and was no more concerned about controlling his kids. Now his libertarianism is mostly of the "freedom to shop at the mall" variety.

    Which doesn't take away from the greatness of his earlier books (Eat the Rich and All the Trouble in the World are my personal favorites), but it sad to lose such a great voice.

  • BakedPenguin||

    Just got Eat the Rich from the library.

  • Gray Ghost||

    I didn't read it as lamenting the U.S. not bombing Syria. Rather, I saw it as he's making fun of Obama for being weak and vacillating. I agree that he's lost a bit from his humor ever since he had kids, and turning into the typical Boomer is a decent observation. I don't remember him being very supportive of the 2003 Iraq War, but he certainly supported the 1991 one. Hard to beat Parliament, but Holidays in Hell and Republican Party Reptile come close.

    The "water's cold. Yeah, and deep too." line had me rolling on the ground. Naughty, naughty.

  • Stormy Dragon||

    I was interpreting it as pro-bombing because all the original quotes were all someone giving a speech prior to battle on why we must have the courage to go ahead with it, and the Obama version was him chickening out part way through.

    If he wanted to be anti-Obama and anti-bombing, the chosen quotes should have been situations where someone rushed into disaster out of pride (e.g. Obama as Captain of the Titanic, Obama at the Alamo, Obama as General Custer, etc.)

  • Gray Ghost||

    Good point, especially on the Custer idea. Be interesting to see what P.J. would have done with, "Hurrah boys, we've got them! We'll finish them up and then go home to our station."

    I haven't read any recent reaction from him on Syria, so I don't know whether he'd support any military action or not. Supporting it doesn't sound like the sort of thing someone who wrote his Bosnian War columns would write, but people change.

  • CatoTheElder||

    In Parliament of Whores, O'Rourke explains the political theory behind his work.

    "But although this is a conservative book, it is not informed by any very elaborate political theory. I have only one firm belief about the American political system, and that is this: God is a Republican and Santa Clause is a Democrat.

    "God is an elderly or, at any rate, middle-aged male, a stern fellow, patriarchal rather than paternal and a great believer in rules and regulations. He holds men strictly accountable for their actions. He has little apparent concern for the material well-being of the disadvantaged. He is politically connected, socially powerful and holds the mortgage on literally everything in the world. God is difficult. God is unsentimental. It is very hard to get into God's heavenly country club.

  • CatoTheElder||

    "Santa Clause is another matter. He's cute. He's nonthreatening. He's always cheerful. And he loves animals. He may know who's been naughty and who's been nice, but he never does anything about it. He gives everyone everything they want without a thought about quid pro quo. He works hard for charities, and he's famously generous to the poor. Santa Claus is preferable to God in every way but one: There is no such thing as Santa Clause."

  • Irish||

    Syrian rebels take over Christian town, burn down churches, shoot civilians, and forcibly convert some of them to Islam under threats of beheading.

    I'm really excited to come into the war on the side of such kindhearted human beings.

    Best quote: "Where is President Obama to see what befallen on us?" asked the man, who fled the village on Sunday. He declined to give his name out of fear for his safety.

  • Virginian||

    Yeah from what I've seen, Obama is essentially champing at the bit to give logistical support, CAS missions and strategic interdiction strikes in support of what is basically Al Qaeda.

    Maybe those fucksticks are right and god really is on their side.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Kinda like, he wants us to be Al Qaeda's air force? I think I heard that somewhere.

  • CatoTheElder||

    In fairness to Obama, he really, really wants the less extreme, Saudi-aligned Wahhabi rebels to vanquish the al Qaeda variety.

    Of course, the Saudi-aligned Wahhabis will still persecute the Shiites, Alawites, Sufis, and Christians who comprise about one-third of Syria's population. They'll probably wipe out the Alawites but none will call it genocide.

    However, since the preferred rebels are aligned with the Saudis, they'll probably more cooperative with US/Saudi foreign policy than either Assad or the al Qaeda types.

    Of course, the US has no chance of success other than that afforded by dumb luck.

  • Tim||

    We should add that town to the bombing list.

  • Lord Humungus||

    Paul Hosts Secret Anti-War Meeting

    Aides say Paul planned the gathering over a week ago, and the list of attendees grew by the day. He is pleased, especially, by the number of Democrats who are eager to work with him to kill the war resolution. Representatives Alan Grayson (D., Fla.) and Tulsi Gabbard (D., Hawaii), among other liberals, spoke.

    The meeting, which started at 8:00 a.m., lasted for nearly an hour. It was a conversational setting, with members sitting and talking through the issue, rather than giving speeches. Coffee and light refreshments were provided.
  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    I wonder when the Blue Media Outlets will declare Grayson and Gabbard as wreckers and Enemies of the People for daring to work with reactionary elements within our Society.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    "Alan Grayson"

    Isn't he Batman's ward? Why not invite Batman to these peace shindigs?

  • Brett L||

    No, that's his cousin, Dick. Alan is the guy who runs his mouth too much, but for whom I continue to gain respect.

  • Virginian||

    Temper it. He's a piece of shit socialist. I'm glad he's against Barack and John's Excellent Syrian Adventure, but he's still a piece of shit socialist.

  • Brett L||

    Eh. Anyone with consistency to issues besides party and self in Congress get some respect for me. There's only about 8 of them. I can afford some. I'm sure he'll remind me of why I think he's an asshole soon enough.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Yes, this. Grayson is the same piece of shit who said Republicans want Americans to "die quickly". He's useful for these purposes, but fuck him otherwise.

  • Rich||

    We cut away now from the President's address to cover Hillary's Liberty Medal Award.

    “Former Secretary Clinton has dedicated her life to serving and engaging people across the world in democracy.”

    With all due respect, what does that even mean?

  • Citizen Nothing||

    The Barack Obama Award for Achievement in the Field of Excellence.

  • Drake||

    Hopefully it means Jeb Bush now has no chance at a Republican nomination.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I think it means that she let people in Benghazi elect what to do with the embassy in their city.

  • Ted S.||

    What difference, at this point, does it make?

  • Pro Libertate||

    It means nothing. This is the Age of Big Nothing.

  • Don Mynack||

    The Guardian lays it all out on Benghazi:

    http://www.theguardian.com/wor.....-challenge

    Money quote:

    "The bigger question, so far unanswered, is what the CIA was doing in Benghazi. Neither the accountancy review board, the state department nor half a dozen congressional committees investigating the death of Stevens have made any public comment on the role of the CIA; nor have congressional committees tasked with performing the role of scrutinising the government on behalf of the electorate."

    Also, evidence contradicts the assertion that there was a "huge" firefight there.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Reason, we need to have a talk about your website. I count no fewer than 10 social media trackers running and like 30 scripts. It's ridiculous.

  • Rich||

    It's Free Markets.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    It's not as noticeable to me since I upgraded my smartphone and got a new work laptop, but yesterday I forgot my computer at home and had to use one of the loaner ones. I had forgotten how unbearably awful Reason's memory usage is.

  • NebulousFocus||

    Ghostery is your friend.

  • ||

    One day, we will all turn into Ted S

  • Ted S.||

    The world will be a much better place at that point.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I am missing this reference.

  • ||

    Ted S complains about the myriad of scripts running on Reason frequently. That's when he's not complaining about the backdating of Brickbats, of course. It's his morning training for his hate

  • Ted S.||

    You forgot to include my complaints (actually they're more ribbing than complaints) about people posting articles that have been posted several times already. And gifs substituting for video. And slideshow lists.

    At least I don't hate Kiwis like you do. ;-)

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I guess I couldn't keep straight your list of complaints. I only remembered the brickbats and slideshows.

    You should be a simple man, like me or P Brooks.

  • H. ReardEn||

    And grammer, and spelling.

  • Rasilio||

    "And grammer"

    What's wrong with Kelsey?

  • H. ReardEn||

    And Tori. That Ted S. - he's a hater.

  • OldMexican||

    It's indeed one of the slowest loading websites I have the pleasure to endure. LewRockwell.com loads in a jiffy, in comparison. If it weren't for H&R, I would just read the feeds from Reason and not bother with the website at all.

  • Ted S.||

    Web-sites should be about the content, not about the so-called social networking stuff that's really just shilling for clicks to drive up ad revenue. We don't need a bunch of "tell all of your 'friends' how much you want to give us a blowjob!" buttons. (Well, maybe Warty and SugarFree do.) If I want people to know about a page, I can copy the URL and link to it that way, thank you very much.

  • JW||

    Adblocker + Reasonable in Chrome.

  • Cascadian Ephor Xenocles||

    They have to add more to make up for all the people blocking them.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    This is what gun bans get you. Feral pigs are way more dangerous than crocs.

    No kidding. In Texas, this would be a momentary inconvenience.

  • Brett L||

    Yeah, it takes a while to get the coals hot enough to roast a whole pig.

  • Pro Libertate||

    To be sure, the fauna in Australia are all lethal. It's like Deathworld down there.

  • Lord Humungus||

    Well that's one way...

    Alcoa, Hewlett-Packard and Bank of America to Be Dropped from Dow Industrials

    Alcoa Inc., AA +1.98% Hewlett-Packard Co. HPQ +0.38% and Bank of America Corp. BAC +0.83% will be dropped from the Dow Jones Industrial Average next week, in the biggest shake-up of the 30-stock index in almost a decade.

    Alcoa, a Dow component for 54 years, will be replaced by athletic gear maker Nike Inc. NKE +0.64% Payments company Visa Inc. V +1.05% will replace H-P, which joined the index in 1997, and securities firm Goldman Sachs Group Inc. GS +1.77% will supplant Bank of America, which spent five years in the blue-chip benchmark.
  • Virginian||

    So their replacing metals, computers, and a bank with sneakers, credit cards, and shady financial instruments.

    Yeah, that sounds about right.

  • andarm16||

    Well, HP is a shadow of itself from before the Compaq merger (They've had a decade of questionable management - look at the spying scandal,The sexual harassment based ousting of Mark Hurd (He wasn't fired for the harassment, but for accounting issues discovered during the investigation of the harassment), the next CEO making bone headed business moves which led to his dismissal).

    That is not the sign of a healthy company.

    One should also remember that as long as Obama is in office, Goldman Sachs has the full faith and credit of the United States Government behind it.

  • Virginian||

    Yeah I mean I'm not saying HP deserves to be on the list, I just find it interesting that the supposed Industrial index is losing real industry in favor of credit and financial stuff.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Credit and financial stuff is legit. What's your beef?

  • Virginian||

    Well I am no investor, so maybe I'm way off base here, but I thought the purpose of the DJIA was a snapshot of the biggest industrial concerns in America.

    I mean, isn't there a financial index?

  • Lord at War||

    "Real Industry" like GM- which is a retiree health plan plan who tries to sell cars for extra bucks.

  • sarcasmic||

    A father has been arrested after beating a naked prowler he found peering into his daughter's window...and he could face a LONGER sentence than the peeping tom
    Albuquerque, New Mexico dad Emilio Chavez III sent peeping tom Dylan Maho to the hospital Thursday night
    Both men now face felony charges, though the maximum sentence for Chavez's alleged crime is longer


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....-Maho.html
    The land of the free and the home of the brave.

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Take this to a jury and dare them to convict the Dad.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    What is with this latent streak of vigilantism running through some of you?

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    I hope my streak of vigilantism isn't latent.

    I guess I'm missing the problem here.

  • Brett L||

    What? It isn't vigilantism on your own property. The guy didn't take the law into his own hands. He had a physical confrontation with a naked trespasser, who happened to get the worst of the exchange. A guy at your prepubescent daughter's window wearing nothing but a hardon ain't collecting for the Red Cross.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Where's the initiation of force?

  • ||

    I believe that would be the trespass and the peeping. When you come across a guy on your property without permission beating off to your child, at what point, in your mind, does it become an initiation of force? Penetration?

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    How did you get from peeping to rape? Are those two activities commonly associated? Free hint: no.

    That doesn't mean you get to beat a guy in the street. We have a civil and criminal justice system for these things. But far be it from me to puncture a pack of beta males' vigilante fantasies.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    The state's protection of my family can take up where mine leaves off.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Your protection of your family ends when the threat has abated. The man practically admitted he chased the other guy into the street. you have to learn to restrain yourself.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    Letting the guy get away doesn't end the threat.

  • Marshall Gill||

    No, what you do is shoot to kill and ask questions later. Don't want to die? Don't be on my property without my permission.

  • Marshall Gill||

    Of course, if you were stupid enough to come into my backyard naked you would probably get any dangling appendages ripped off by my dog.

  • Irish||

    Your protection of your family ends when the threat has abated. The man practically admitted he chased the other guy into the street. you have to learn to restrain yourself.

    So you let a man get away who you know is a pervert with an unseemly interest in your 15 and 13 year old daughters. Yeah, what possible threat could such a man pose to your family?

  • Stormy Dragon||

    Pretty much anyone could pose a threat to your family in the future. Violence is justified to prevent imminent threats. Not hypothetical future threats.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    But far be it from me to puncture a pack of beta males' vigilante fantasies.

    Only a beta goon would clutch their pearls about a peeping tom getting beaten up.

  • Irish||

    What vigilante fantasies? This man did not randomly troll the countryside attacking people he thought were criminals. This is an instance where a SERIAL pervert was looking in on his daughters while naked and subsequently the father beat him up. This does not fit any possible definition of vigilantism.

    Here:

    'They call him the nudist around here' Morang told KOB.com. 'Apparently he's been looking in other peoples' windows.'
    Morang, himself a father, believes the nude man is the same one he says holds sexual parties at a nearby home that he calls 'swinger' parties.

    Morang also claims he's found condom rappers in the street and maintained Chavez did exactly what he should have done.

    'I would've done a little worse than what happened to him and I think any man or dad would do the same,' Morang said. 'I feel bad for the other guy and I hope nothing bad happens to him for protecting his family. I think he did what's right.'

    Come on. The guy has a history of pretty gross invasions of privacy, as well as a number of other perversions. This is the exact sort of person you expect to eventually commit a legitimate sexual assault. Generally the people who commit sexual assaults do so after being long time pervs in other areas of their lives. You'll excuse me for not weeping that a pedophile peeping tom was beaten during the commission of a crime.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    So, Irish, he may at some point in the future could have possibly initiated force against some unknown victim or victims at some indeterminate time in the future?

    That's a compelling case. No really.

  • Irish||

    No. I'm saying nothing about 'unknown victims' or some indeterminant time. I'm saying that this is a person who you unequivocally KNOW has a sexual interest in YOUR underage daughters and who has a history of sexual deviancy.

    Are you honestly trying to tell me that you don't see a reason for a father in such an instance to feel that his family is under legitimate threat? When a pedophile looks in a window while naked at your 13 year old daughter, please explain to me how the threat is ended when said pedophile gets away to perv again.

    And please do so without glib sarcasm.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    So, like I said downthread:

    Under your standard, the father here is permitted to beat the trespasser because the trespasser presents, if I may state your case, a persistent and ongoing threat to his family. If that's the case, is it then permissible in your view for the father to hunt down the trespasser a week from the incident and beat him then? If so, how? And if not, why not?

  • Lord at War||

    If that's the case, is it then permissible in your view for the father to hunt down the trespasser a week from the incident and beat him then?

    It's not "permissible"... It's "expected.

  • ||

    he may at some point in the future could have possibly initiated force against some unknown victim or victims

    Or he may, in the immediate present, be on your property without permission. That alone is enough to justify an action by the property owner. Saying nothing of invading his underage daughters' privacy for his sexual gratification. The guy doesn't have to be poking you with his boner for "force" to have been initiated.

  • ||

    How did you get from peeping to rape? Are those two activities commonly associated? Free hint: no.

    I was asking at what point you would consider that an "initiation of force" has taken place, since trespass and cumming on your lawn while perving out on a child is so benign as to merit no response. Seemed a more natural escalation than peeing in your chimney, but fill in your own blank: At what point is a naked guy on your property getting his jollies an actual "initiation of force" in your mind?

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Where did I say it merited no response? I defy you to cite that.

    It doesn't exist.

    What I did say was is that the property owner may use force until the trespass has abated. Here, the property owner went beyond that, as evidenced by the fact there is blood in the street.

  • ||

    What I did say was is that the property owner may use force until the trespass has abated.

    I think the homeowner is entitled to subdue the guy rather than let him limp away into the night and hope the cops find him when they show up a couple hours later. As Irish pointed out, the threat isn't necessarily subsided because he vacates the premises.

    In any case, I certainly don't think the beating is more deserving of punishment than the trespass and peeping. I'd love to see it go to a jury.

  • ||

    Also, you said that no initiation of force had taken place, so actually, I call total bullshit on your claim that you supported the property owner's right to defend his property. By saying that no initiation of force took place you take away all legitimacy of his defense of his property (again, saying nothing of his kids). You started out here arguing that going onto somebody else's property and jacking off to their naked underage daughter didn't constitute an initiation of force. And that's retarded.

  • Tonio||

    Trespass, NLK. You missed that part. And I put it to you that coming within arms reach of someone's house and peering in their windows is a far more egregious form of trespass than cutting across an open field.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    No, Tonio, I have specifically defend a property owner's right to defend his property. That "defense" does not extend to chasing someone down and beating them in the street.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Neoliberal Kochtopus,

    That "defense" does not extend to chasing someone down and beating them in the street.


    Now, that's a good point. Once the guy is retreating, the owner of the property had no justification to beat him up. Which is why I believe he should've shot the guy dead on the spot, to allow him no chance to go anywhere.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    That "defense" does not extend to chasing someone down and beating them in the street.

    If that's the case, why does the property owner have the right to delegate the authority to punish that behavior to the authorities, as you suggest earlier?

  • ant1sthenes||

    "Are those two activities commonly associated?"

    Based on my extensive research into TV police procedurals, yes. It escalates from peeping to rape to cannibalism.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Neoliberal Kochtopus,

    Where's the initiation of force?


    The moment the guy misinterpreted the "Beware of Dog" sign for an invitation to get a look.

    Ba-rum-dum!

  • Biden's Scroteplugs||

    Where's the initiation of force?

    he was beating his meat

  • Virginian||

    When did vigilantism become a slur? Oh, and even if it is bad thing, this isn't vigilantism. This is simple defense of property.

  • sarcasmic||

    Some see no distinction between vigilantism and defense.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Defending against what?

  • sarcasmic||

    I can tell you don't have kids.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Well, you would be wrong, moron.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Well, you would be wrong, moron.

    I catch a naked guy peeping in my daughter's room, he's going to be lucky to get away with his nuts still attached.

    Fuck anyone weeping over this perv getting beat down.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Fuck anyone weeping over this perv getting beat down.

    I'm not crying over it, you buffoon. If you want to say he deserved it or whatever, I'll leave that to your conscience and respectfully disagree. The guy doing the beating in the street failed to restrain himself and initiated violence. That means he goes to jail, and I don't have a problem with that either.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    I'm not crying over it, you buffoon.

    Sure, that's why you're bending over backwards saying he should have been left alone the second he stepped onto the sidewalk.

    If you want to say he deserved it or whatever, I'll leave that to your conscience and respectfully disagree.

    LOL at your appeal to emotion. Anyone who doesn't feel the need to defend their family from intrusions like this isn't in a position to be arguing about anyone's conscience.

    The guy doing the beating in the street failed to restrain himself and initiated violence. That means he goes to jail, and I don't have a problem with that either.

    The peeper lost his right to public safety the minute he stepped on the guy's property, naked, and looked in his kid's window. He didn't just magically gain it back the second he stepped back on the sidewalk. That you think the father needs to be in jail for protecting his kids--against a guy who had made a habit of peeping in other neighborhood windows, no less--says quite a bit as to where your definition of "justice" lies.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    The peeper lost his right to public safety the minute he stepped on the guy's property, naked, and looked in his kid's window. He didn't just magically gain it back the second he stepped back on the sidewalk.

    So can the father track the transgressor down hours later and kill him in the transgressor's house? If not, why?

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    So can the father track the transgressor down hours later and kill him in the transgressor's house? If not, why?

    Go ahead, NLK, make that strawman suffer!

  • Zeb||

    Going to prison for assault will do your kids so much good.
    In this case, I could be convinced that using force was appropriate. He was defending his property and family from a pervy trespasser who may have meant to harm his daughter.
    But I would think that parents ought to consider very carefully before getting violent with someone they perceive to have harmed their child. Even if it is in some way justified, if the likely result is that you end up in jail, you will do your kid a lot less harm by restraining yourself and actually being there to be a good parent.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    I think that's another good point, Zeb.

  • sarcasmic||

    According to the article the dad says he was in such a rage that he doesn't even remember what he did. So it's not like he was in a position to exercise restraint.

    I see the point that the perv didn't initiate violence, but as a father there is no way I would vote to convict if I was on the jury. No fucking way.

    Yes, technically the perv didn't harm the child. However when you whip your dick out in the presence of a young girl and her father, you're asking for a beat down. Period.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Alright, so i don't want to hear anymore about the NAP ever again, because there are apparently exceptions.

  • sarcasmic||

    Sure, Tony. Whatever you say.

  • Tonio||

    Then your best course of action is to take yourself elsewhere, NLK. Farewell...

  • robc||

    NLK is apparently unfamiliar with Kurt Gödel.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    Horse crap. By trespassing the perv initiated aggression. Period. You may argue the father's response was overkill, but you can hardly argue that he initiated aggression.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    According to the article the dad says he was in such a rage that he doesn't even remember what he did. So it's not like he was in a position to exercise restraint.

    So he was too busy EMOTING? Isn't that like Offense 1A in your book?

  • sarcasmic||

    Sure, Tony. Whatever you say.

  • sarcasmic||

    Isn't that like Offense 1A in your book?

    Making policy on the basis of emotion is not the same as a father beating the shit out of a perv.

  • Virginian||

    Yes Zeb, the State does often act to turn citizens into sheep. It is a main goal of the justice system.

    "Keep your head down, wait for the police, that's not your job. Let the professionals handle it."

  • Zeb||

    I thought the goal of the justice system was to keep people from settling disputes by beating the shit out of each other in the street. I'm all for using force in self defense. I shed no tears for people who get killed or injured while assaulting someone or breaking into a house. But there is a big difference between using violence in self defense and using it because you are really, really pissed off.

  • sarcasmic||

    I thought the goal of the justice system was to keep people from settling disputes by beating the shit out of each other in the street.

    I wouldn't call a naked perv masturbating in your daughter's window a "dispute."

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    I wouldn't call a naked perv masturbating in your daughter's window a "dispute."

    You already admitted it's not an initiation of force. Meaning "retaliatory" violence is not called for.

  • sarcasmic||

    You already admitted it's not an initiation of force. Meaning "retaliatory" violence is not called for.

    Would it not be considered sexual assault? You think sexual assault does not deserve retaliation?

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    No, actually, it isn't sexual assault. You wanting to bootstrap "assault" where it isn't there is the wrong thing to do.

  • ||

    You already admitted it's not an initiation of force.

    Fuck you in the ear if trespassing, peeping in my windows, and jacking off to my kids isn't an "initiation of force". Point not ceded.

  • Zeb||

    OK "disputes or grievances".

  • Virginian||

    I thought the goal of the justice system was to keep people from settling disputes by beating the shit out of each other in the street.
    _____

    Yes, and taxes are for keeping the roads patched and the streets well policed.

  • ||

    there is a big difference between using violence in self defense and using it because you are really, really pissed off.

    You'd be on firm ground with that argument if he'd followed the guy home, or kicked his ass in the grocery store parking lot the next day or something. He caught the guy in the act on his property. That he was really, really pissed off doesn't mean he wasn't using violence in self defense.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    If the individual doesn't have that right to delegate to the authorities, how can the authorities have that right?

  • ||

    Trespass? Invasion of privacy? Possible attempted sexual assault?

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Trespass to property is a civil tort and a misdemeanor criminal offense. "Possible" sexual assault isn't any sort of initiation of force I have heard of.

    If he was crawling through the window, that would be a different thing. Once you've chased him off your property, you have an obligation to break off the chase.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    From the article:

    Meanwhile, this isn't the first run-in the neighborhood has had with the peeping tom.
    'They call him the nudist around here' Morang told KOB.com. 'Apparently he's been looking in other peoples' windows.'

    IOW, the father did this neighborhood a community service by kicking the shit out of a serial peeper.

  • robc||

    Once you've chased him off your property, you have an obligation to break off the chase.

    Why?

    Capturing a criminal (even a misdemeanor) is reasonable action.

    Only the police can chase? Thats statist bullshit.

  • JW||

    Thare several actions here:

    1 - You have an expectation of privacy in your home. I don't know if he was peeking through a crack in the window shade or she was putting on a show for the neighbors. I'll presume the former.
    2 - You have an expectation to be free from trespass. The perv violated this as well.
    3 - What rob said.

    He violated both 1 and 2. I don't have a problem with dishing out private punitive actions that can serve as a deterrent to future transgressions. I'll let the courts decide where the line between reasonable and unreasonable action falls.

  • MJGreen||

    1) The NAP has plenty of holes and exceptions.

    2) I'm confident civilization and justice will not be harmed should we adopt the norm that serial peepers can get the shit beat out of them when caught in the act. Civilization may even improve slightly.

  • Virginian||

    Yeah and inactivity is activity now in the eyes of the Supreme Court.

    You can call a tail a leg, but that doesn't mean my dog has five legs.

  • Irish||

    This isn't really defense of property because he apparently chased the guy down.

    I still think that beating the hell out of some naked guy on your property who is peeping on your daughter is totally justified, but calling this defense is a stretch.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    I think I understand the impulse, but I am disinclined to say it's "justified". It's a disturbing trespass to be peeped on, but civilized people don't resort to violence unless violence is imminent against them or their families.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    Count me as uncivilized then, because I would've beaten the everloving hell out of him if I caught him peeping in my daughter's window.

    I'd use violence to protect property, too, so I guess I'm doubly uncivilized.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    I don't have a problem with using violence to protect property, because property violations are an initiation of force. Once you've used the violence to defend you or your property, you don't get to chase the offender down for a little "extra".

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    Is there any question this guy committed a property violation by being on the property in the first place? Unless you're trying to draw a distinction between real property and other property, it doesn't seem like you're being consistent here.

    Why is walking off with a water hose more violent than peeping in a window?

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Property is an extension of self. That water hose represents my labor and my time.

    Yes, the man was on the property. No, you don't get to beat him in the middle of the street for the transgression.

  • JW||

    Huh. The iron-clad "I ran away" defense.

    Nope. No getting around that crafty tactic to dispense justice.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Oh goody, I can now decide what amount of 'justice' is appropriate for those that harm me.

    Should I use bird or buck shot on the kids that cut through my lawn?

  • Virginian||

    Chased him where? Because from that picture it looks like he put a beatdown on him at the sidewalk. Which I would call hot pursuit.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Hot pursuit of someone who committed a misdemeanor? Nope.

  • Virginian||

    The law says that kind of shit is a misdemeanor? Then the law is wrong.

    Look dude, I get what you're saying here. If some guy left the hot sidewalk to stand under my shade tree, and I beat the shit out of him without telling him to move along, I would be in the wrong. But that's not what happened here. This guy deserved a beating, and the father shouldn't be put in prison for protecting his child.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    "deserved a beating". Like I said, you aren't the justice system.

  • sarcasmic||

    We don't have a justice system. We have a legal system. And it is a joke.

    Justice is a father beating the shit out of a perv.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Justice is a father beating the shit out of a perv.

    I keep forgetting that you have a lot of impotent rage built up in you.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    If you believe that the only valid justice is that which is administered by the state then you're just operating from a completely different set of premises.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    So question for you guys: what if the father found out a week later that this guy was naked and peeping, and then just beat him down on the street for it?

    That seems to be OK in your worldview, right?

  • sarcasmic||

    So question for you guys: what if the father found out a week later that this guy was naked and peeping, and then just beat him down on the street for it?

    That seems to be OK in your worldview, right?

    You really see no distinction between catching someone in the act and hunting them down a week later? Wow. I mean... wow.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    You really see no distinction between catching someone in the act and hunting them down a week later? Wow. I mean... wow.

    Answer the question.

  • sarcasmic||

    Answer the question.

    Are we in court or something? Look. If you can't see the distinction then there is something wrong with your brain. That's all there is to it.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Are we in court or something? Look. If you can't see the distinction then there is something wrong with your brain. That's all there is to it.

    It's because you know the answer cuts against you. Your justification for this beating is that the man posed a threat to his family. If that's the case, then the threat is ongoing, even a week later. But you don't want to admit your logic leads to people beating each other in public places weeks after the event, so you're evading.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Your justification for this beating is that the man posed a threat to his family.

    If someone steps on my property naked and peeps in on my kid, you better believe I or any other parent who's been raised to think like a normal human being is going to take that as a threat.

  • ||

    Your justification for this beating is that the man posed a threat to his family. If that's the case, then the threat is ongoing, even a week later.

    Ummm, no. Your second sentence is a non-sequitur. That the man posed a threat when he was peeping in my windows with his cock out doesn't mean that he is still a threat a week later with his pants up sitting on a lawn chair on his porch. Your argument is that he ceased to be a threat 3 seconds after he was caught and he managed to drag his ass to the public street; not a week later. And if you can't tell the difference, you're either an unbelievably mentally deficient moron or you're being a mendacious cunt for the sake of arguing.

  • Irish||

    You really see no distinction between catching someone in the act and hunting them down a week later? Wow. I mean... wow.

    Answer the question.

    Now you're just being deliberately obtuse. Sarcasmic's answer makes it obvious that he doesn't think you should randomly track someone down weeks later, but if you catch them in the act then violence is justified. It's the same reason I can attack you while you're robbing my store but would not be justified in finding out who the robber is and beating the shit out of him a month later.

    Sarcasmic clearly answered the question.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Except, Irish, that was NOT the justification you used for the beating. you said this:

    Are you honestly arguing that the risk to his family was gone because the deviant managed to get away? This sort of sexual crime tends to be the kind that elevates to more serious crimes. As a result, wanting to make damn sure that this man will no longer pose a threat to your family seems to be a pretty reasonable thing to do.

    That applies in the immediate circumstances AND weeks later, and you know it. Do you think the pervert is just going to be cured weeks later? Do you think his interest is going to abate in a week? Your justification here is that "letting the pervert get away" does not mean the threat is over. That applies for all future times you encounter this individual.

  • sarcasmic||

    Now you're just being deliberately obtuse.

    Yep. This conversation is over for me anyway. The derp is getting to strong.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    what if the father found out a week later that this guy was naked and peeping, and then just beat him down on the street for it?

    "Found out" is a bit weasel wordy. I think you might be unwise to beat someone down on the say so of someone else's version of the facts.

    If the peeper somehow got away and the father ran across him out in public a week later, I wouldn't have any problem with the father trying to detain him for the cops and using force if necessary. Perhaps circumstances like being able to get a license plate number or take a picture would make the case for a beat down more tenuous.

    Even with the actual circumstances of the situation, if the peeper had surrendered, I'd be a lot less inclined to support beating the hell out of him.

    I think the substantially greater likelihood of mistake in beating down some guy in the street and beating down the guy you caught peeping makes the two situations distinguishable.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    I think it would be completely justified. No doubt illegal. But, completely justified. I can even accept that it would be illegal. There's the entire notion of a fair trial. But, a fair trial isn't the case here. He caught the perv in the act.

    A serious question for you, though, NLK. If the father, or anyone else, doesn't have the right to exact punishment for the initiation of aggression, how can the state have it? I can hardly see the state having some sort of right that isn't delegated to it by the people.

  • Virginian||

    "deserved a beating". Like I said, you aren't the justice system.
    ____

    Yeah the justice system is so awesome. Food for fucking thought here: carrying dried plant matter across a line on the map is a federal felony, but staring at a sleeping girl whilst masturbating in the middle of the night is a misdemeanor.

    Fuck the justice system.

  • Gray Ghost||

    but staring at a sleeping girl whilst masturbating in the middle of the night is a misdemeanor.

    FWIW, IANAL, but my reading of the New Mexico statutes makes his conduct as least a 4th degree felony (sentence around 18 mo. in prison.)

    I also don't have a problem with what the father did. Shame he's going to go seriously out of pocket to defend against the agg. battery beef. As well as any civil suit to recover hospital bills. Sad thing is, he might have been better off shooting the guy, rather than kicking the shit out of him.

  • Gray Ghost||

    I get to the charge of agg. indecent exposure from what the peeper did because I think a prosecutor could easily convince a grand jury, judge, and trial jury that the dude was masturbating with the intent to threaten or intimidate the little girl, an element of the crime. YMMV.

  • Irish||

    "deserved a beating". Like I said, you aren't the justice system.

    Yes, but the justice system is not a system of morality. Me saying that he did nothing wrong based on my belief that a naked man peeping on your daughters is asking for a beating has nothing to do with the American legal system.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Me saying that he did nothing wrong based on my belief that a naked man peeping on your daughters is asking for a beating has nothing to do with the American legal system.

    So you're saying he did nothing wrong but he should go to jail anyway? Or that he shouldn't go to jail and the law should be changed so people can beat each other for these sorts of transgressions?

    What's your point here? Because I'll be damned if I can find one.

  • Virginian||

    Uh I think it's a pretty common libertarian belief: that laws are not exhaustive of all possibilities of human interaction, and that the discretion of juries is the final arbiter in criminal matters.

  • Irish||

    I'm saying that the American legal system is royally fucked and that a man who assaults a pedophile serial peeping tom should not have the potential of a longer prison sentence than the pedophile.

    You seem to be continuously ignoring the fact that allowing a man with a disturbing interest in your underage daughters, who you have already caught masturbating outside your window, to get away actually does put your family at risk. Are you honestly arguing that the risk to his family was gone because the deviant managed to get away? This sort of sexual crime tends to be the kind that elevates to more serious crimes. As a result, wanting to make damn sure that this man will no longer pose a threat to your family seems to be a pretty reasonable thing to do.

    Unless you think he should just live with the fact that there is a pedophile who is interested in his daughters nearby.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    You're ignoring my question. Under your standard, the father here is permitted to beat the trespasser because the trespasser presents, if I may state your case, a persistent and ongoing threat to his family. If that's the case, is it then permissible in your view for the father to hunt down the trespasser a week from the incident and beat him then? If so, how? And if not, why not?

  • Virginian||

    I'd argue no, simply because the burden of proof is far too high to be met in that scenario.

  • robc||

    Me saying that he did nothing wrong based on my belief that a naked man peeping on your daughters is asking for a beating has nothing to do with the American legal system.

    To statists, the law and morality are one and the same.

  • Tonio||

    Neither are you, NLK, neither are you. But you have been arrogating yourself to speak for the justice system the entire thread. Who appointed you? Was there a vote?

  • ant1sthenes||

    The guy was known to the neighbors, so I expect people either tried to get the police to help without success, or realized that the police weren't there to help them.

    Vigilante justice sucks, but it's better than no justice.

    Anyway, it's not like he hunted down a guy based on accusations, the guy was at his house. Fuck him.

  • ||

    That's not vigilantism, it's very clearly a citizen's arrest.

  • WTF||

    As long as he kept yelling "STOP RESISTING!" He should be good.

  • SugarFree||

    Bending the Cost Curve: Mice Eat Face of Dementia Patient in Canada

    A dementia patient in Canada is being treated for infection after a staff member at a long-term care facility found mice nibbling on her face. Due to the patient’s physical disabilities, she was unable to remove the mice herself.

    So, yeah. She was awake, knew mice were eating her face and was unable to stop them.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Coming to your health care: Room 101 panels.

  • John||

    That stuff never happens in socialized medicine. That is just a myth. Kruginuts and Joe from Lowell told me.

  • sarcasmic||

    Caught on camera: Deputy brutalizes a family

    HARRIS COUNTY, Texas -- Harris County investigators said Deputy Jimmy Drummond was caught on dash cam video brutalizing a family.

    Drummond followed the son home because he said he was speeding. As other family members approached the scene, they were all beaten.

    The son's ribs were broken and his father's face was bruised. The mother was dragged.

    Deputy Drummond was charged with official oppression and is due in court on Friday.


    http://www.khou.com/video/feat.....74081.html
    Will anything else happen?

  • OldMexican||

    Deputy Drummond was charged with official oppression[...]


    Whoa! You mean to tell me that Official Oppression is a crime?

    When can we start arresting the 4 million that work for the government?

  • Brett L||

    Well, at least in Texas they still give lip service to the idea that officials can be guilty of unlawful oppression.

  • Ted S.||

    They'll give him a paid vacation and a medal.

  • Aloysious||

    Paid vacation?
    We'll be subjected to 'The World According to Dunphy?'
    Tulpa will quibble over minutiae?

  • jamesrk||

    from the video: "tonight a former precinct 4 deputy constable is charged with a crime"

  • Juice||

    That is one fat piggie.

  • Irish||

    John Kerry a few days ago: Any military action against Syria will be 'unbelievably small.'

    Barack Obama on the Today Show this morning: "The United States does not do pinpricks. Our military is the greatest the world has ever known."

    I've said it before, but does Barack Obama even talk to his Secretary of State?

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Unbelievably small? Pinpricks? This whole Syria thing is going to be a worse source of dick jokes than Weiner.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Unbelievably small? Pinpricks?

    "Don't worry, baby. It's just the tip" and "I'm just a little bit pregnant" come to mind with this bullshit.

  • Cascadian Ephor Xenocles||

    Virginity is like a balloon - one prick and it's all gone.

  • db||

    Kerry keeps acting like he was elected President. A terrible choice by Obama and one he probably should have foreseen.

  • Almanian!||

    I like how the media keeps showing Hillary Clinton weighing in on things.

    I'm sorry, what office does she hold, again....??

  • andarm16||

    So they've turned away from Christie as the serious bipartisan choice that fast?

  • db||

    They're all driving around with "Hillary is my President" bumper stickers.

  • ||

    Pre-emptive prep work to make her look more "presidential".

  • Ted S.||

    Barack Obama on the Today Show this morning: "The United States does not do pinpricks."

    And yet they elected a prick twice.

  • NeonCat||

    Only twice?

  • Pro Libertate||

    Not only the worst president in forever, the worst administration. Godawful on foreign policy, godawful on domestic policy, dishonest, abusive of power, and rankly incompetent.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Godawful on foreign policy, godawful on domestic policy, dishonest, abusive of power, and rankly incompetent.

    The fuck are you talking about? Fast and Furious was AWESOME (in-so-far as is incorporates ALL of those facets).

  • The Late P Brooks||

    The meeting, which started at 8:00 a.m., lasted for nearly an hour. It was a conversational setting, with members sitting and talking through the issue, rather than giving speeches. Coffee and light refreshments were provided.

    Why can't these traitors be rounded up and beheaded?

  • sarcasmic||

    Black and white delight: Ali Larter shows off her toned figure in monochrome dress at the Donna Karan NYFW show


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs.....-show.html
    *drool*
    Goldie Hawn is scary looking.

  • kinnath||

    Goldie Hawn is 68.

  • sarcasmic||

    And scary looking.

  • kinnath||

    If here face weren't full of spackling compound, she might look like a normal 68-year-old woman.

  • John||

    Yeah. It is such a shame. Watch the movie The Cactus Flower sometime. It was when she was in her early 20s. She had to dumb sexy blond thing down to an art form. She invented cute sexy.

  • kinnath||

  • Tonio||

    But surely she was too skinny for you back then, John.

  • OldMexican||

    Ali looks good on the dress but Joy Bryant has much better legs. Yummy!

  • Rich||

    ‘I hate white people’ beating victim dies

    Lashawn Marten, 31, who is black, “made statements to the effect that I’m going to punch the first white man that I see,” said NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly. After punching Babbitt, Marten allegedly attacked two other men who came to Babbitt’s aid, police said. Police were investigating the incident as a possible hate crime.

    Emphasis added. No way.

  • Mike M.||

    We're not allowed to talk about that here, you racist.

  • Rich||

    Kelly is white. I rest my case.

    /sarc

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    I don't see where anyone here ever said that. you know what's obnoxious? I am one of those people who is on your side when it comes to having frank discussions on race, but then you come in here acting like an asshole and it just pisses me off.

    Cut the shit.

  • Irish||

    What happened was that Mike pulled the whole 'WHY ISN'T REASON TALKING ABOUT THE SCOURGE OF BLACK ON WHITE CRIME!' thing. People called him out for being obsessed with the topic.

  • Mike M.||

    Right, Zimmerman and Martin are fair game for months and months of discussion, but anyone who thinks that Delbert Belton's murder was worthy of more than two seconds worth of attention is "obsessed". My point is proven once again.

  • Virginian||

    No Zimmerman's case was debated and discussed because the facts were unclear and that was an interesting thing to debate.

    The scumbags who killed Delbert Belton have been caught, and should hopefully spend the rest of their lives in a cage.

  • SugarFree||

    Or it might have to do with the frequency with which you bring this stuff up.

  • Mike M.||

    That's fucking bullshit. I asked one time over a weekend if Reason was going to say anything about them, and a couple of people flipped out and went on a tirade.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    That's right, Mike M., your reputation here is completely manufactured and you have done nothing to contribute to it.

    If 20 people are telling you something, it may be those 20 people are wrong, but it may also be that you have a problem.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Here's a point that may not penetrate the feet-thick dura around what you ostensibly call a brain, but it is possible to think the media is responsible for race-baiting us all on Martin/Zimmerman BUT it's a really bad idea for you to likewise race-bait.

    Gee golly, whatta concept.

  • John||

    Sure it is a bad idea to race bait. But how else is the media ever going to stop race baiting on cases like the Zimmerman case? They only do it because they know they can bully people into it being one way. If it ever went both ways, the media would suddenly decide that perhaps focusing on the race of defendants in any case is a bad idea.

    Beyond that, we will never get beyond race in this country until we stop telling t he lie that only white people are racist or even the most racist in society. A lot of blacks are very racist. That is a problem. I don't see how pretending it doesn't exist helps solve it.

  • Mike M.||

    You can pull every classic passive-aggressive maneuver right out of the Saul Alinsky playbook, but it won't work on me. I know the book like the back of my hand, I see right through every trick.

  • Mike M.||

    That wasn't directed at you John.

  • John||

    I know. I understand the concerns about race baiting. But unless these assholes get a taste of their own medicine, it will never stop. Taking the high road has clearly not worked.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Oh my god you have to be a parody. Yeah, dude, my hardcore Objectivist near-anarchist self who sides with the Right more than the Left on many things, I'm a total Alinskyite.

    You're a fucking idiot.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    Except, why is it necessarily race baiting to identify the fact that what are called "hate crimes" get treated as a fact of life depending on the race of the perpetrator and victim?

  • Lord at War||

    At least we know the color of the gun

  • sarcasmic||

    Drunk horseback rider arrested by police after weaving into traffic with a dog in his rucksack and a beer in his saddlebag said he was off to a wedding 600 MILES away

    Patrick Neal Schumacher, 45, was spotted weaving in and out of traffic in Boulder, Colorado, on his horse Dillon
    He was stopped by police and given a field sobriety test, which he failed
    Officers found his pug Bufford in his backpack and a beer in his saddlebag
    Schumacher, from Colorado Springs, claimed he had been trying to get to his brother's wedding 600 miles away


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....-away.html
    I'm surprised the cop didn't shoot his dog. Pugs can be dangerous and threatening.

  • sarcasmic||

    His pets, Dillon and Bufford, have been impounded with the help of the Boulder Police Department Animal Control Unit, Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks and the Humane Society of Boulder Valley.

    They'll be euthanized soon enough.

  • Virginian||

    "use of weapons"

    uh oh he had a single shot black powder pistol in his saddlebag. Activate pants shitting hysteria, quickly.

  • Brett L||

    Huh. I wonder what the law is in Colorado. In FL, if the cops can't prove you were "operating" the horse (directing it by use of reins or giving other guiding signals), it is legal to ride with a BAC of greater than 0.08.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    If they're prosecuting him under Boulder law, he's fucked. Those looney-tunes consider animals to be the social equivalent of human beings.

  • Lord Humungus||

    Crisis Chronicles: Tulip Mania, 1633-37

    It’s interesting to compare Tulip Mania with more modern debt crises, where asset classes have strong legal protections for creditors with interconnected claims. Take securitized mortgage-backed assets, for example. In a typical crisis, market seizure initially leads to potential fire-sale prices that may wipe out debtor financial institutions. Official sector support steps in to curtail full financial contagion and systemic collapse, thus limiting spillover to the real economy. Individual debtholders (households), however, typically aren’t considered contagious or systemic to the financial system. But with no efficient private sector debt write-down mechanism at households’ disposal, there’s a greater chance for household debt to trigger a large negative spillover to the real economy.
  • Auric Demonocles||

    Not that I'm upset at getting the pick right, but how did I manage to get the Texans correct? I went to bed after midnight, with a 21 point defecit in the third quarter, and both the Texans and Chargers looking like mid 00s version.

  • Virginian||

    Remember last year when the Chargers were up 24 to 0 at the half? Same thing.

  • Brett L||

    Philip Rivers will find a way to be mediocre. No matter the coach or the talent around him.

  • John||

    You are not kidding. He has already ended the career of two coaches. Whatever Norv Turner's flaws as a head coach, if you are a quarterback and he can't fix you, you are hopeless.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    To be fair, I don't think Schottenheimer was his fault. Schotty and AJ Smith were notorious for not getting along very well, and for all of his abilties to spot talent, Schotty always had a bad habit of shitting the bed in the playoffs.

    And Tuner, quite frankly, has never been a good head coach. He's the offensive version of Wade Phillips.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    His highs are really high.

  • SugarFree||

    It should come as little surprise to most of you that I have a very strong stomach, but this is still kinda barfy to me.

  • Brett L||

    Eh. The whole keurig concept is such an abomination, I'm totally unsurprised they are trying to expand their perversions to other areas.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    Abomination? On what grounds (npi)?

  • Brett L||

    I know many offices don't care and make bad drip coffee that is comparable to the k-cup, but with just a little care and understanding, it can be good coffee, not office slop. K-cups don't give you that option.

  • SugarFree||

    I've had a few cups of coffee out of one and they were uniformly vile, but I got some hot tea of out one in a hotel room and it was pretty good.

    The hippies at the office complain about the "waste" but they forget throwing away filters full of coffee grounds and wiping up continual spills.

  • John||

    I wish someone would explain to the hippies that landfill space is not at a premium. And even if it was, there is more to protecting the environment than limiting trash.

  • Zeb||

    Well, I'll give it some credit. It is better than coffee from a pot of Maxwell house that has been sitting on a hot plate for 4 hours. So it has done a bit to improve waiting room coffee in many cases.

  • ||

    "How fresh is that coffee?"
    "I generally make a fresh pot here ever week, even if there's some left over."

  • Lord at War||

    I also like my coffee with a little Chigurh...

  • ||

    Two girls, one K-Cup

  • SugarFree||

    Excellent.

  • ||

    +1 non-dairy creamer.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Since I never drink coffee, I am happy with the keurig in our apartment, as I can use it to make quick hot chocolate for spiking.

    But there already is microwavable soup which takes a minute.

  • Brett L||

    Man, did I have a horrible fantasy football week. I'm pretty sure Sloopy could have beaten me with just the Thursday night game. And then he proceeded to pummel me in every other aspect. I'm already looking forward to relegation.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Well, at least your pick em was... not the worst?

  • Brett L||

    I was a bit... optimistic in the first round of the pick em. I think I have a better handle on things now.

    But honestly, if Washington's safeties could tackle in the open field would all the sportswriters still be sucking Chip Kelly's dick about his "hi-speed offense"? All I see is a bunch of gimmicks that aren't going to last the season in the pros -- like the low blocks on the quick throws.

  • Virginian||

    Shit yes. Skins gave them three possessions on our own 30 or less. Two picks and a fumble. They scored on all of them.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I'm also in another pick 'em which uses confidence points (first time I've used those). I just did my week 2 picks. It's really nerve-wracking assigning the point values.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    It was damned near a perfect storm of incompetent Redskins offense hanging the D out to dry. I don't think it's a coincidence that as the Washington O started to have some success that the Eagles O came back to earth.

    The fast pace, like anything else, is pretty effective when it is clicking. Once you start going 3 and out in 45 seconds, things can turn against you pretty quickly.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    The Bills' were using an uptempo pace against the Pats, which was working fairly well... Until they were up by a couple of points with 4 minutes left and they went 3 and out in like 25 seconds.

  • Virginian||

    Exactly. I mean yeah we got beat, but if one of those turnovers hadn't happened, I think we would have won. The defense tightened up nicely in the second half, and the offense got rolling.

    We didn't lose, we just ran out of time.

  • Rasilio||

    "The fast pace, like anything else, is pretty effective when it is clicking. Once you start going 3 and out in 45 seconds, things can turn against you pretty quickly."

    Amazing how people seem to forget the Buffalo Bills Offense of the late 80's and early 90's.

    It was basically the same idea, uptempo no huddle to keep the defense gassed and confused. Worked great 90% of the time, until you ran into a good defense who could stop you periodically and then had an offense that could hold on to the ball for a few minutes at a time. As hard as it made things on the opposing defense, it made it even harder on your defense.

    And that's why they went to and lost 4 straight Superbowls.

    Odds are Kelly's system will work the same, will be really good in the regular season, papering over weaknesses in offensive personnel and winning 9 - 11 games a year then getting knocked out in the early playoff rounds repeatedly because they are playing teams with good enough offense & defense combinations to beat it.

  • creech||

    As a typical doom and gloom Eagles fan, I expect you are right. Though it was nice to see that 1st half, even with the blown call by the zebra on the "backward" pass. The whole game reminds one of the rookie pitcher who dazzles on the first trip through the lineup then serves up a couple of bombs in the middle innings.

  • Virginian||

    I mean you guys have the right guys to run it. Especially McCoy. He's scary good in space.

  • Brett L||

    I don't think its a bad system, but its no more magical than the West Coast offense or the zone blocking/tight end heavy "ball control" offense that Houston and New England run variations on. I do think that a lot of it won't work against teams you have to play twice. The dive blocks, especially, started to lose effectiveness in the 2nd half. The athletes are too good for that to be a tool used more than a few times a game.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    The dives gave up a couple of easy pressures once the defense was ready to jump them.

  • ||

    Hopefully your shittiness will continue while my RB situation sorts itself out.

  • Lord Humungus||

    the only time I ever did well with footballs picks (and won the company office betting pool) was when a co-worker helped me. He was a (highly ranked) receiver in college and part of the practice team for the Lions - eventually cut because he was considered too short for the big leagues.

    He was also the secret ringer for the corporate flag football games.

  • Cascadian Ephor Xenocles||

    Those numbers from Peyton were crazy. We all feel sorry for you.

  • Brett L||

    To be fair, he beat me without the Peyton numbers.

  • OldMexican||

    Academic paper claims that China tends to sell weapons to more democracies than autocratic regimes, whereas the United States tends to arm autocratic governments more than democracies

    The reason is not that China is more interested in human rights or democracy but that they're simply more maket-friendly than the United Ststes when it comes to selling weapons abroad (!!!!!!)

    Who would've thunk it?

  • John||

    Maybe it is because they sell cheaper lower tech weapons. Democracies tend to have less money to spend on the military. We sell F16s and M1 tanks. Hard to buy those on credit.

  • Irish||

    Democracies also tend to be far richer. Even if they spend less of their total spending on weapons, a lot of them are still probably spending more in real terms.

  • John||

    Democracies are richer, but that doesn't mean they spend more money on defense even in absolute terms.

    I also wonder if maybe Israel doesn't buy a ton of stuff from the Chinese and if that doesn't skew the number.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: John,

    Maybe it is because they sell cheaper lower tech weapons.


    Yes, the study warns that there is no politics involved behind weapons selling by the Chinese but rather market forces at work. However, they DO say that the U.S. interventionist policy tend to favor autocratic governments (when it comes to military aid) over democracies. Whereas the Chinese just care about the money - the bastards!

  • John||

    I am don't think it is even interventionist policies as much as a few autocratic countries having really cozy relationships with defense contractors. We send billions of dollars in equipment to places like Saudi Arabia not so much out of some interventionist spirit but because it is a welfare program for Lockheed Martin.

  • Juice||

    We sell F16s and M1 tanks. Hard to buy those on credit.

    The US does it all the time.

  • John||

    No. We print our own money. There is a difference.

  • Virginian||

    Real democracies tend to have their own arms factories. I bet a lot of the "democracies" China sells to are countries like Venezuela, Bolivia, various African nations where the President is reelected in a fair election every year with 90% of the vote, etc.

    Venezuela and Saudi Arabia are equally bad politically, but Saudi Arabia makes no pretense at being anything other than an autocratic state.

  • John||

    That is a good point about Democracies building their own weapons. But as I point out above, we send a lot of weapons to a few places who are very juiced in with our defense contractors.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Virginian,

    I bet a lot of the "democracies" China sells to are countries like Venezuela, Bolivia, various African nations where the President is reelected in a fair election every year with 90% of the vote, etc.


    Well, to be fair, the current Venezuelan and Bolivian presidents did get much less than 90% of the votes, closer to the required 51%. And to be even MORE fair, Barry Soetoro was reelected in a virtual landslide with the help of a few hundreds of thousands of dead people, so it is not like you can throw stones in a glass house, or some shit like that.

  • John||

    This is funny. Help Kickstart World War III.

    http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/175717/

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Wouldn't that k-cup stuff more properly be referred to as "broth"?

    Soup, as I define it, won't pass through a filter.

  • Virginian||

    You pour the veggies and noodles into the cup, then the hot broth rehydrates them.

  • NeonCat||

    Or else it gets the hose again.

  • Lord Humungus||

    OT: for the month of September, my turgid novel Nano Zombie is available for free - everywhere (B&N, Apple, Sony, etc) but Amazon. Enjoy (ha!) at your own risk.

    How's that for aggressive marketing?

  • Brett L||

    Oh, hey. I just started this yesterday. I couldn't remember why I had this novel sitting in my Kindle app. I can say that it went head to head with Jesse Walker's new book and won my attention. (No offense, Jesse, I'll get through USoP, but I need something a bit lighter in the week before my wedding.)

  • John||

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....ory_1.html

    Have a seriously creepy Op Ed. We need to transform America from competing to "caring". And of course caring means joining the hive.

    Care starts from the premise that humans cannot survive alone. Our progress flows from our identity as social animals, connected through love, kinship and clanship. Success should be defined not as individual victory but as group advancement, whether the group is a family, a community or a company. Satisfaction comes less from beating others than from bolstering them, enabling them to reach their full potential. The betterment of the group helps the individual as well. All members have the security of knowing that they are part of a community and that when they are young or old, ill or weak, they will be cared for.

    I imagine an America that invests in the infrastructure of care like we invest in the infrastructure of capitalism: high-quality, affordable child care and eldercare; higher wages and better training for caregivers; support structures allowing our elders to live at home longer; paid family and medical leave for women and men; flexible work arrangements to give breadwinners who are also caregivers equal chance to advance; financial and social support for single parents; higher pay and far greater respect for the caring professions.

  • ||

    This shit is straight out of Atlas Shrugged.

    I am not a utopian. Rather, I want to return to our roots, to recommit to a communal strand in our history and civic mythology. Frontier stories of barn-raisings and quilting bees are just as celebrated as Wild West shootouts. When Alexis de Tocqueville came to the young United States, he commented less on our individualism than on our remarkable social capital — we create civic associations for every purpose imaginable — and on our “habits of the heart.”

    And it's all well and good to nag people to help each other, but I strongly doubt that voluntary cooperation is what this harpy has in mind.

  • John||

    She wants to return to our roots. You know, back when we lived in communal societies and the average life span was 40 years. Come WARTY, don't want to be on the winning team here?

  • thom||

    I doubt she sees herself in this world. People who advocate for this kind of stuff always see themselves as ending up in the Inner Party.

  • John||

    Of course not.

  • ||

    Rather, I want to return to our roots

    PROGRESS!

  • Brett L||

    This annoys the shit out of me. Capitalism tends towardss the efficient allocation of scarce resources that have alternative uses because it has the best objective outcomes for the most people. However, capitalism is actually agnostic on the value proposition. It doesn't care, as anyone who has been fucked by an irrational market will tell you. If a large section of soceity decided that their resources were best spent on these infrastructures, capitalism wouldn't prevent it.

  • NoVAHockey||

    ". Satisfaction comes less from beating others than from bolstering them, enabling them to reach their full potential"

    that's loser talk. okay, everyone take the field. not you. you're cut. loser.

  • ||

    After thinking about it a bit, it reminds me of Our Enemy, The State.

    It is largely in this way that the progressive conversion of social power into State power becomes
    acceptable and gets itself accepted.1 When the Johnstown flood occurred, social power was
    immediately mobilized and applied with intelligence and vigour. Its abundance, measured by
    money alone, was so great that when everything was finally put in order, something like a million
    dollars remained. If such a catastrophe happened now, not only is social power perhaps too
    depleted for the like exercise, but the general instinct would be to let the State see to it. Not only
    has social power atrophied to that extent, but the disposition to exercise it in that particular
    direction has atrophied with it. If the State has made such matters its business, and has
    confiscated the social power necessary to deal with them, why, let it deal with them.
  • ||

    We can get
    some kind of rough measure of this general atrophy by our own disposition when approached by a
    beggar. Two years ago we might have been moved to give him something; today we are moved to
    refer him to the State’s relief-agency. The State has said to society, You are either not exercising
    enough power to meet the emergency, or are exercising it in what I think is an incompetent way,
    so I shall confiscate your power, and exercise it to suit myself. Hence when a beggar asks us for a
    quarter, our instinct is to say that the State has already confiscated our quarter for his benefit, and
    he should go to the State about it.

    In other words, she notes that people don't help each other anymore, so she thinks the government must make us. She fails to notice that the government caused people to stop helping each other in the first place.

  • OldMexican||

    But winning is not everything, much less the only thing. Competition must go hand in hand with care.


    The author must think that "competition" in the market is the same as shooting your fellow runners with the start gun while on the track, like Sacha Baron Cohen in "The Dictator".

    I imagine an America that invests in the infrastructure of care like we invest in the infrastructure of capitalism


    God forbid we think that the infrastructure of care is also part of the infrastructure of capitalism. No, no, no! Don't soil the concept of care with making it a... business! NO! Yuck! Eww!

  • OldMexican||

    Sorry, should be "BY making it a business."

  • Bill Dalasio||

    The author must think that "competition" in the market is the same as shooting your fellow runners with the start gun while on the track, like Sacha Baron Cohen in "The Dictator".

    Exactly. I think a lot of people misunderstand the notion of competition in a free economy. It's an effect, not an end in itself.

  • ant1sthenes||

    If you actually believe that, you would be the change you want to see before writing an op-ed. You just either selfishly want other people to bear your burdens, or want the thrill of imposing your will on them.

  • John||

    Exactly. Go live a life of service. It is not that hard. There are plenty of ways to do it. As much as I disagree with this women, if it were coming from some Priest working in the inner city or some doctor living in some poor area of Africa, I would have to at least listen to it. But coming from some rich white person? Not so much.

  • Stormy Dragon||

    I imagine an America that invests in the infrastructure of care like we invest in the infrastructure of capitalism: high-quality, affordable child care and eldercare; higher wages and better training for caregivers; support structures allowing our elders to live at home longer

    It seems more to me like this is the infrastructure for AVOIDING care. I don't want to have to be personally responsible for reducing suffering, so lets just make it someone else's problem! I'll just toss in a few bucks and then I can go on ignoring the socially isolated.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    Well, yeah, it is creepy. But, is it me or are our TOP MEN (okay, in this case TOP WOMAN) just in a slump? I mean, I recall when they could at least make a good faith effort at sounding smarter or more educated or more sophisticated than the average person on the street. This, this is crap I'd expect from an aging hippie named Moonbeam.

  • ||

    An Unbelievably Intricate Drunken-Monkey Diorama, Carved by a Prisoner as a Gift to Henry Ford

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/the.....nt_to.html

  • ||

    Holy shit, that monkey bar looks like a fun place to party.

  • John||

    No kidding.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    You pour the veggies and noodles into the cup, then the hot broth rehydrates them.

    That sounds horrible.

  • thom||

    It sounds like instant ramen.

  • OldMexican||

    "Footage of chemical attack in Syria is a fraud"

    Mother Agnes, a catholic nun, who has been living in Syria for 20 years and has been reporting actively on what has been going on in the war-ravaged country, says she carefully studied the video featuring allegedly victims of the chemical weapons attack in the Syrian village of Guta in August and now questions its authenticity.

    In her interview with RT, Mother Agnes doubts so much footage could have been taken in so little time, and asks where parents of the supposedly dead children are. She promises to send her report to the UN.

    The nun is indignant with the world media for apparently turning a blind eye to the Latakia massacre by rebel extremists, which left 500 civilians including women and children dead.
  • The Late P Brooks||

    I imagine an America that invests in the infrastructure of care like we invest in the infrastructure of capitalism: high-quality, affordable child care and eldercare; higher wages and better training for caregivers; support structures allowing our elders to live at home longer; paid family and medical leave for women and men; flexible work arrangements to give breadwinners who are also caregivers equal chance to advance; financial and social support for single parents; higher pay and far greater respect for the caring professions.

    Appeal to MAGIC.

    If we all just sit in a circle, join hands, and think happy thoughts, we will be transported into the post-scarcity realm of peace and light.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Oh come on Brooks, what is so hard to understand about paying caregivers more, while at the same time making child care and elderly care cheaper?

  • Drake||

    The key word in that rambling daydream was "imagine".

    I like to imagine myself in John Ringo or Robert Heinlein novels - fighting aliens in an armored combat suit to preserve a libertarian republic. Imagine that.

  • Virginian||

    I liked Freehold for this reason.

  • db||

    Sounds like cup-o-ramen is just as easy.

  • Brett L||

    If you just hacked your Keurig to not care if you push the button without a cup in the receiver, you could make cup-o-ramen with it.

  • db||

    I bet a piece of tape over the cup sensor would work.

  • Brett L||

    Engineers -- engaging in feature/anti-feature wars since pre-history.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Or just an empty cup.

  • Sevo||

    SF city government isn't about to let Richmond take the gold in 'silly leftist moves':
    "Will SF use eminent domain to help underwater homeowners?"
    There is only one way you can be upside-down in SF RE; how many refi's was that?
    http://blog.sfgate.com/cityinsider/

  • Sevo||

    The market moves faster than ham-handed gov'ts! Gov't officials amazed!
    "Cap and trade may be hurt as emissions drop off"
    "But if prices go too low, companies won't have any incentive to make major changes in their behavior, said Ashley Lawson, a senior analyst with Point Carbon."
    Damn companies are fixing things because of normal market forces and that means the gov't can't threaten them! That's a real problem!
    http://www.sfgate.com/business.....800021.php

  • The Late P Brooks||

    I haven't paid much attention to the America's Cup, but this morning they were talking about it in the context of Stuff Insane Rich People Like, and they showed some film.

    Holy shit. Those aren't boats, those are aircraft. Way cool.

  • John||

    Check youtube. There are some amazing films of those things.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Check out this hydrofoil.

  • CatoTheElder||

    Help Kickstart World War III

    President Obama needs your help starting World War III! Find out how you can help!

    Why? Because Obama.

    Video has good production values. A great link to share for anybody who trolls Huffpo, Kos, and other progressive websites.

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