New Yorkers Complain About Snowplow Retaliation, Former Va. Governor Says He’s Done Nothing Illegal, US Army Wants Convoy of Autobots (Not Really): P.M. Links

  • The Army's going to have to start putting magnetic backing on the medals.Credit: metaphorge / Foter.com / CC BY-NC-SAResidents of New York’s Upper East Side complained that the new Bill de Blasio regime is punishing them for being rich by being slow with the snowplows. The mayor defended the city’s response, saying there’s always going to “isolated incidents” where there will be temporary issues.
  • Former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, facing federal charges for accepting more than $100,000 in gifts from a business executive, has denied he’s done anything illegal and argues the charges are an example of government overreach.
  • Georgia lawmakers are mulling legalizing medical marijuana. Meanwhile, an Oklahoma state senator wants to just legalize entirely.
  • The U.S. Army is trying to figure out how it may replace some troops with robots in order to deal with cutbacks. They’re focusing on trying to automate transportation, not combat, at least not yet.
  • According to a study, the effectiveness of anti-smoking public service announcements is ruined when they are posted in a format online that allows for commenting, even if the comments are positive. Why won’t people just shut up and let their betters lecture to them? (Hat tip to Mark Sletten)

Get Reason.com and Reason 24/7 content widgets for your websites.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, and don’t forget to sign up for Reason’s daily updates for more content.

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||

    According to a study, the effectiveness of anti-smoking public service announcements is ruined when they are posted in a format online that allows for commenting...

    Second hand snark ruins everything.

  • Rufus J. Firefly||

    Hello.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Hey-diddly-ho, neighborino.

  • Rufus J. Firefly||

    Get lost, Flanders.

  • kinnath||

    Second hand snark ruins everything.

    Outstanding

  • CE||

    Just think how much more effective these Reason stories would be without the comments. Oh wait...

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    The U.S. Army is trying to figure out how it may replace some troops with robots in order to deal with cutbacks.

    I guess drones don't count as robots.

  • Juice||

    I can't see robots being cheaper than humans.

  • Matrix||

    Maybe. No training cost. No housing, food, etc. Also no benefits paid. No hospital payments. No lifelong VA benefits. No GI Bill.

  • pan fried wylie||

    Denying robots benefits is racist.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Robot soldiers. Hope they aren't hackable.

    Drones are mostly pilot-controlled, right? So not robots.

  • kinnath||

    We currently require humans to push the button to fire a weapon, but UAVs can be made to fly themselves with very limited oversight from a remote pilot.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Didn't we have a story here about the development of an autonomous drone?

  • kinnath||

    Surveillance drones routinely fly 30 hour loops around an area of interest without human intervention. This is not new.

    New would be autonomous vehicles operating in the same airspace as commercial jets in the US. I think 6 airports were announced as new testing locations for UAVs.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    I will have to look this up, but I thought they were working on giving autonomy to Reaper or Predator drones.

  • kinnath||

    There are different levels of autonomy.

    The basic level of autonomy would be to upload a flight plan in to the navigation system and let it go.

    Much more complicated is having the UAV recognize traffic and take action to avoid that traffic in flight (this is a critical piece for operation in the US).

    I am not aware of anyone letting drones pick targets and fire weapons.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    This story about lethal autonomous robots must be what I was thinking of. I haven't re-read it completely but I guess it's just speculation on the path of the technology.

  • kinnath||

    Eventually, drones may have the technical ability to make even lethal decisions autonomously: to respond to a programmed set of inputs, select a target and fire their weapons without a human reviewing or checking the result.

    "Eventually" is a really long fucking time.

    "may" or may not

    The basic conceit behind a LAR is that it can outperform and outthink a human operator.

    Bullshit

    As an engineer, I don't see anyway to ever prove that a drone is good enough to trust to kill people on its own. However, I can easily see Obama approving them tomorrow.

  • BakedPenguin||

    No, but they are good enough to help in denying accountability, so there's that.

  • Griffin3||

    Doesn't the drone need a way to differentiate between the enemy and the well-disciplined enemy?

  • Pro Libertate||

    The big distinction is when the kill decision is made by the robot/drone.

  • kinnath||

    See above ;-)

  • Pro Libertate||

    If a robot kills without authorization, can I charge it with murder?

  • kinnath||

    No, but you can sue the shit out of some deep-pocketed corporations.

  • Pro Libertate||

    If the drone is operated by Uncle Sam? I think not.

  • blcartwright||

    the corporations who built it or the government who ordered and deployed it?

  • CE||

    Yeah, just upload the kill list with facial photos, and cross-reference to Facebook and Foursquare and hit the launch button on those autonomous drones. What could go wrong?

  • Bobarian||

    With the first generation, the support tail and logistics for drones was such that it took more people to fly them than even helicopters.

    That has gotten a lot better, but they're still manpower intensive for the operational battlefield.

  • blcartwright||

    but those people are "out of harm's way". I believe that why Obama likes them, he can conduct operations without endangering American lives (which would have political cost), which leads to be able to claim a lower level of involvement than is actually occurring (he claimed the US role in Libya wasn't 'hostilities' because there were no overt US boots on the ground - but I think the guy on the receiving end of a Hellfire thinks it's hostile). No body bags, no headlines, no transparency, Obama then is free to just do what he wants.

  • CE||

    They're out of harm's way, until the other side gets drones.

  • Rufus J. Firefly||

    Enjoy De Blahsio New York.

  • ||

    According to a study, the effectiveness of anti-smoking public service announcements is ruined when they are posted in a format online that allows for commenting, even if the comments are positive. Why won’t people just shut up and let their betters lecture to them?

    Why won't they just...butt out!

  • pan fried wylie||

    You properly twisted around your ballcap and crossed your arms emphatically after that statement, right?

  • Andrew S.||

    The U.S. Army is trying to figure out how it may replace some troops with robots in order to deal with cutbacks. They’re focusing on trying to automate transportation, not combat, at least not yet.

    "The wars of the future will not be fought on the battlefield or at sea. They will be fought in space, or possibly on top of a very tall mountain. In either case, most of the actual fighting will be done by small robots. And as you go forth today remember always your duty is clear: To build and maintain those robots. Thank you."

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Residents of New York’s Upper East Side complained that the new Bill de Blasio regime is punishing them for being rich by being slow with the snowplows.

    If he really wants to put it to the one percenters, he should be having his plows pile all the other snow onto their golden streets.

  • John||

    You know that either him or one of his nasty minions did exactly that. That is how these assholes roll. The only surprising thing is that the idiots on the Upper East Side didn't see this coming.

  • ||

    As a former Upper East Side resident, and seeing as the mayor himself is an Upper East Side resident, it would probably come as something of a surprise. Of course, I'm not fully cognizant of how much of an asshole DiBlasio might actually be, because I don't live there any more and it's not my problem.

  • John||

    Everyone I know, and I only know a couple of people, but they do follow this stuff, tells me that DiBlasio is a full on commie piece of shit. He is the kind of person the New York Democrats used to hide from real public roles because he is such an embarrassing shit heal.

  • Rhywun||

    Well, him and his wife thought Cuba was the perfect place to get married.

  • Ted S.||

    DeBlasio is probably living in Gracie Mansion right now.

  • Adam330||

    According to wikipedia, he lives in park slope, not the UES.

  • Rhywun||

    He still lives in Brooklyn - they had him on the news this morning, "just happening" to be shovelling his sidewalk.

  • Killaz||

    I doubt if de Blasio had anything to do with it. He was too busy in a celebratory scissoring with his wife to bother with the petty stuff.

  • Andrew S.||

    DeBlasio was actually a plant paid off by Bloomberg to show New Yorkers that there could actually be a mayor worse than he was.

  • Rhywun||

    It has been less than a month and they are milking this "mandate" they think they have for all it's worth. It started with the inaugural which was basically a Two-Hour Hate for the productive class and it hasn't ended since. Even Sharpton feels it's safe to crawl out from under the rock he's been hiding under for the last 20 years.

  • John||

    How long before crime goes up and the place starts looking like it did in the 80s again?

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    80s, hell--I'm hoping for a full-on, 70s-era Escape From New York/Death Wish kind of dystopia.

  • Gbob||

    I dunno. I want more of a Warriors vibe with every gang dressing in a really cool way. The Reason gang can wear cool monocles.

  • blcartwright||

    Even Law & Order SVU (not one to frequently express conservative views) took several shots this week at 'the mayor' cutting back on the police.

  • ||

    Former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, facing federal charges for accepting more than $100,000 in gifts from a business executive, has denied he’s done anything illegal and argues the charges are an example of government overreach.

    If he's guilty he's one stupid bastard since he could have made a lot more just going on the lecture and book tours like all good pols do when they survive being put out to pasture.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    It sounds as though his wife was a real piece of work.

  • Tonio||

    And not really "put out to pasture" since Virginia governors can't succeed themselves.

  • Adam330||

    There's no dispute the he accepted the gifts. He admits that. He just argues it wasn't illegal. And it seems pretty clear it was legal under VA law. Not so clear under the incredibly fuzzy wire fraud, mail fraud, honest services, etc. laws that the feds use to go after local pols.

  • Tonio||

    Not so clear under the incredibly fuzzy wire fraud, mail fraud, honest services, etc. laws that the feds use to go after local pols anyone they don't like.

  • blcartwright||

    I read Byron York's article yesterday http://washingtonexaminer.com/.....le/2542643

    Seems like the family has a huge spending problem. They admit to being almost broke, out begging for loans - not to pay off past debt, but to go on $20k dress shopping sprees for the wife and $3k for Bob and the sons to spend one day golfing. Is this the kind of guy who should be a chief executive?

    So he ask for and received this business owner buying them shit and giving them airplane rides, in exchange for Gov. Bob pitching the guy's products to relevant bureaucrats. From my reading the Gov didn't order any policies, just suggested.

    Shady, but I don't know enough about the law to know how illegal it is. Maybe Holder is just pissed that Virginia didn't press charges.

  • SIV||

    They’re focusing on trying to automate transportation, not combat, at least not yet.

    David and Tasso will have to wait.

  • JD||

    Fake scandal!

  • Ted S.||

    All of them, or the complaints about PBrooks' refusal to use threading?

  • Andrew S.||

    No, that's a real scandal. I can't be expected to have to look through the rest of the thread to figure out WTF he's talking about.

  • Mike M.||

    Residents of New York’s Upper East Side complained that the new Bill de Blasio regime is punishing them for being rich by being slow with the snowplows.

    I'm sure that Willie Wilhelm (or whatever the fuck his name is) will be treated the same way for this by the "mainstream media" as Christie was for the GWB. Hahahahahaha lolololololol.

  • ||

    Residents of New York’s Upper East Side complained that the new Bill de Blasio regime is punishing them for being rich by being slow with the snowplows. The mayor defended the city’s response, saying there’s always going to “isolated incidents” where there will be temporary issues.

    Ah, there's nothing like a legal monopoly to ensure fairness and eliminate corruption.

  • John||

    We have a bigger Army budget in inflation adjusted dollars than we had in 1986 when there was 18 active divisions and 500,000 troops sitting in the Fulda Gap. Maybe the Army should think about eliminating a few general officer billets and cutting off a few contractors as a way to deal with these horrible cuts.

  • Tim||

    That's crazy talk.

  • Tim||

    They need that new, 84 Ton Bradley replacement more than ever. The gun is 5mm bigger and there's room for an entire squad.

  • DJF||

    They need it to fight the real enemy in the real war. That is fight the Air Force and Navy in the Budget Wars at the Pentagon. Only an 84 ton vehicle is big enough to block the hallways and isolate the enemy.

    Plus the new vehicle will help Army win the next Army/Navy game

  • CE||

    And then 10 years from now, they can sell them as surplus to small towns in New Hampshire to put down violent insurrectionists, like the Free Staters and Occupy Wall Street.

  • Drake||

    I joined in '89 and wonder at the same thing. In the 80's our military easily twice as big and had a steady stream of new gear showing up (Apache, Bradley, Stealth Fighters and Bombers, etc...) and still costs less in real dollars!

    WTF are they doing with all that money (besides the trillion we are wasting on the F-35)?

  • Ted S.||

    So we should take anti-smoking or pro-government PSAs and repost them to sites with comments in order to make them less effective!

  • Bobarian||

    Well making the less effective is pretty damned hard, because they all start off at pretty much asymptotically approaching zero in the first place

  • Bobarian||

    making THEM less...

  • ||

    Governor Moonbeam tells Californians they're welcome for the fiscal rebound he engineered

    California Governor Jerry Brown on Wednesday took credit for his state's fiscal rebound, in a state of the state address that also urged continued restraint to lawmakers seeking to rebuild a social safety net tattered by years of tight budgets and economic malaise.

    Brown said that since 2010, California has added 1 million jobs and extricated itself from "a financial sinkhole that defied every effort to climb out of it." The speech could be a preview of Brown's campaign themes if he seeks a fourth term at the helm of the most populous U.S. state, as expected.

    "To avoid the mistakes of the past, we must spend with great prudence, and we must also establish a solid rainy day fund, locked into the constitution," Brown said.

    He called on regulators to loosen some water distribution rules to help California farmers and cities deal with a nagging drought, which he declared an emergency last week. He also touted changes to the way the state funds education, channeling more money to districts with disadvantaged students and allowing more local control over how the dollars are spent.

    Whistling the past the graveyard.

  • John||

    As long as there are still checks in the checkbook...

  • Aloysious||

    You know, since NYC has too much snow, maybe they can ship the surplus to California to help ease the drought. Team Blue can perform magic by sprinkling fairy dust all around, so this should be a piece of cake.

  • Irish||

    Brown said that since 2010, California has added 1 million jobs and extricated itself from "a financial sinkhole that defied every effort to climb out of it." The speech could be a preview of Brown's campaign themes if he seeks a fourth term at the helm of the most populous U.S. state, as expected.

    Doesn't California still have the third worst unemployment rate in the country and the nation's highest poverty rate?

    Aren't liberals supposed to care about things like that?

  • ||

    Doesn't California still have the third worst unemployment rate in the country and the nation's highest poverty rate?

    Shush!

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    "Doesn't California still have the third worst unemployment rate in the country and the nation's highest poverty rate?"

    It appears not on the poverty rate.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L.....verty_rate

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Pretty close on the unemployment rate though:

    http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm

  • Bobarian||

    On Poverty:

    When you use the 'Supplemental' which takes in housing costs, CA is number 2 right behind DC

  • Irish||

    I believe the Californian poverty rate has been calculated more accurately by people who have taken into account differences in cost of living.

    I don't know if the official poverty rate does that. If you consider the fact that oil in California is unbelievably expensive, real estate is very expensive, and all goods are more expensive due to regulation, I believe that poverty rates which take these things into account show California as being the worst because of the low quality of life for poor people.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Good point.

    I have a question about using something like housing costs to calculate poverty rates. I assume they use some central measure like the average housing costs, but in a state like California or District like DC would not their pockets of big wealth throw that off? I am thinking that there are probably places in California where lots of poor people live and housing and other things are not expensive, and then of course there are places lie Hollywood with obscene costs of living.

  • BigT||

    So CA and DC have the greatest inequality in the nation?

    Why are the donkeys braying at the rest of us?

  • Tonio||

    [W]ould not their pockets of big wealth throw that off?

    Shortest answer: Bad question.

    Short answer: Depends on what you mean by "throw off". If you just want to measure the poor, measure the poor, or the half of the population which earns below average income or something. Also, "average" is a slippery term as it can refer to mean, median or mode.

    Are they not teaching this in EDU/PSY/POLSCI/SOC 101 anymore?

  • Cliché Bandit||

    How does one go about buying a put option on an entire state?

  • CE||

    California is booming right now, no thanks to Brown. Things have gotten so good, the only thing people are complaining about are the fancy Google buses allowing the wealthy and disengaged tech elite to live in formerly eclectic San Francisco neighborhoods, where unemployed social activists have a basic human right to keep renting, even if the landlords want to sell to someone who can actually afford to live there.

  • Coeus||

    I have never seen this much staw in my life.

    Rebecca Watson has a funny response up to the perennial whine from men who believe they are the ones who are truly oppressed because they don’t get all the pussy they are entitled: That it’s all good and well for women to complain about sexist slurs being flung at them, but the real problem is women who call men “creeps” or “creepy”. Engaging these guys is generally pointless, which is why most of her responses are gifs. We’re talking about men who think the world owes them a ridiculously hot young woman as a sex partner without them having to be even remotely attractive themselves.
    *”Dick” is somewhat similar in that it denotes a certain assholey aggression that is assumed to be inherently male. But men are supposed to be aggressive, so it doesn’t have even close to the same sting as “cunt”.

    Also, check out her definition of bitch. Priceless.

  • Ted S.||

    which is why most of her responses are gifs

    As I said yesterday, this is just as abusive as anything the men might have posted about her.

  • John||

    But if one of those "creepy men" told Amanda to go fuck herself, she would die of shock. Who does Amanda think she is kidding? If there is a woman out there more desperate for male attention and to have her ass kissed than Amanda, I am unaware of their existence.

    Yeah Amanda, you just can't stand it when men pay attention to you. Whatever gets you through the night honey.

  • ||

    Your first sentence is missing a fucking preposition. You lose at life.

  • ||

    Okay, that whole list of definitions is awesomely hallucinatory. I have to give her that.

  • Irish||

    *”Dick” is somewhat similar in that it denotes a certain assholey aggression that is assumed to be inherently male. But men are supposed to be aggressive, so it doesn’t have even close to the same sting as “cunt”.

    Wait...her argument is that dick isn't as offensive as cunt because we should all adhere to gender roles?

    Logically, if you're a feminist, shouldn't you argue that men are only more aggressive due to social conditioning and that therefore taking more offense to one than the other is sexist? Is logical consistency too much to ask?

    Also, Rebecca Watson and 'hilarious' are essentially opposites.

  • ||

    I know, I was like, "Uh, men are expected to be dicks, and women are expected to be bitches...yeah, I don't think that's where you wanted to go..."

  • ||

    That picture of her at the bottom is disconcerting in some way that I can't fully articulate. I think it's partly that she looks like the kind of person who gets really excited about meat substitutes, and part of it is that she's developing jowls.

  • Certified Public Asskicker||

    Gah! My first trip to the story had her picture as the Raw Story logo.

  • ||

    And balsamic reductions. You know she gets really excited about fucking balsamic reductions.

  • Certified Public Asskicker||

    Rawstory doesn't include her picture anymore? This will only encourage people to read more of her drivel!

  • Rufus J. Firefly||

    This Amanda chick.

    Is she hot?

  • ||

    Compared to a sea-sick crocodile?

  • Bobarian||

    Like a trash fire...

    That caught on to her face, and her daddy beat out with a garden rake.

  • SIV||

    (Though it’s worth remembering not all women have vaginas.)

    Do they have it removed when they get an addadicktomy?

  • Tonio||

    I believe she is referring to transwomen and perhaps to survivors of some forms of cancer. I know you disapprove of the former, which I won't engage here.

    Really shitty of you to harsh on cancer survivors, though.

  • ||

    Residents of New York’s Upper East Side complained that the new Bill de Blasio regime is punishing them for being rich by being slow with the snowplows.

    Bill de Blasio is obviously a racist for treating the Jeffersons like this after they worked so hard to move on up to the East Side.

  • Rufus J. Firefly||

    They finally got a piece of that pie and have discovered it's stale.

  • Mike M.||

    By the time this stugatz is finished, New Yorkers will probably be pining for the seventies.

  • Rufus J. Firefly||

    He's also a chooch.

  • Steve G||

    Republicans eager to attract black and Latino voters believe they have hit on an ideal magnet: school choice.

    That's right, don't do it because it's the right thing to do, do it because the polls say it'll slice off a few more voters for you. Freaking platform politics...so annoying

  • Virginian||

    Better they do the right thing for the wrong reasons then the wrong thing for the right reasons.

  • John||

    I will take the right thing for the wrong reason. I see your point. But we are way passed expecting anything but the worst motives from anyone in politics.

  • Bobarian||

    We usually get the wrong thing for the wrong reason, so...win?

  • Irish||

    I think the Republicans can also win some non-white votes by turning various groups against the crazy far left progressives who are blatantly hurting the poor with their policies.

    A Republican won a majority Hispanic district in California that went for Obama by something like 25 points and he did it because socialist white people turned off the water for Latino farmers.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    "I think the Republicans can also win some non-white votes by turning various groups against the crazy far left progressives who are blatantly hurting the poor with their policies."

    I don't see that happening, since most GOP anti-poverty techniques involve actions that superficially appear to be 'tough love' at best.

  • CampingInYourPark||

    In short, school choice “is not only great policy but great messaging,” Dowd said.

    http://www.politico.com/story/.....z2rAONit3c

  • Irish||

    I call dibs on naming my band The Progressive Snowplow Retaliation.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Wait a minute, I had something for this...

    Snowletariat Revolution.

  • Raven Nation||

    Hmm, you may be first but, in terms of band names, I'm going to have to go with Irish here.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    You're not going to do much better for a band name than Fist of Etiquette.

  • Raven Nation||

    Well, this is true, but I was judging the two names offered here.

  • ||

    Canadian MP: Revolt Against the Plutocrats!

    2013 is the year the revolt against the plutocrats began. Make no mistake -- this is a powerful and consequential political moment, which is being felt across the western industrial democracies and whose impact is only beginning.

    You see it in the US in the election of Bill DeBlasio as mayor of New York, and, just as significant, his blessing by the Clintons at his inauguration; in California Governor Jerry Brown's successful tax increase on the rich; in the emergence of Elizabeth Warren as one of her party's leaders; and in the despair of leading Republican thinkers, like Frank Luntz, who believe the left has won the national argument on income inequality.

    You see it in France in the new 75 percent tax on the super-rich. You see it even in Switzerland, long the discrete home of the world's money, which has passed a law giving shareholders a binding vote on CEO compensation.

    For anyone who cares about democracy this populist backlash is deeply reassuring. One of the big fears prompted by the economic rise of the plutocrats was that they would inevitably capture political power, too. It is, after all, hard to disagree with Louis Brandeis's warning, at the height of America's first Gilded Age, that "we can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both".

  • John||

    You see it in the US in the election of Bill DeBlasio as mayor of New York,

    You mean that guy who was elected primarily withe votes of rich people in Manhattan in an election with like 20% turnout?

    in the emergence of Elizabeth Warren as one of her party's leaders;

    The woman who made a half million dollar a year salary paid for by the crushing debt of her students, was a slum lord, and made money on the side advising big corporations how to fuck their customers.

    I don't think all of that means what he thinks it does.

  • Raven Nation||

    It matters not what they have done or who voted for them. It matters that they adhere to the correct ideas (see, e.g. Ted Kennedy, misogynist, manslaughterer, a.k.a. a champion of women's rights).

  • blcartwright||

    John Batchelor had a great segment the other night on the 'clothing of the politicians'.

    To contrast himself with Michael Bloomberg, who apparently only wears custom tailor made suits, De Blasio boasted that he buys his suits in a store, off the rack - for $1700 each - in order to connect with 'the common man'.

  • ||

    The Greeks, naturally intelligent and courageous, had been early cultivated by the kings and settlers who had come from Egypt. From these Egyptian rulers, the Greek people had learned bodily exercises, foot races, and horse and chariot races.... But the best thing that the Egyptians had taught the Greeks was to become docile, and to permit themselves to be formed by the law for the public good.
  • John||

    Meanwhile on Planet Earth the Greeks are going full fascist.

  • Tonio||

    Wow, that's some weapons-grade ignorance, or perhaps typical proggie re-writing of history.

  • ||

    I'm double-quoting Bastiat. I've been re-reading The Law and I keep seeing the things he's talking about.

    The passage:

    Bossuet carries this idea of the state as the source of all progress even so far as to defend the Egyptians against the charge that they rejected wrestling and music. He said:
    How is that possible? These arts were invented by Trismegistus [who was alleged to have been Chancellor to the Egyptian god Osiris].

    And again among the Persians, Bossuet claims that all comes from above:
    One of the first responsibilities of the prince was to encourage agriculture.... Just as there were offices established for the regulation of armies, just so were there offices for the direction of farm work.... The Persian people were inspired with an overwhelming respect for royal authority.

    And according to Bossuet, the Greek people, although exceedingly intelligent, had no sense of personal responsibility; like dogs and horses, they themselves could not have invented the most simple games:
    The Greeks, naturally intelligent and courageous, had been early cultivated by the kings and settlers who had come from Egypt. From these Egyptian rulers, the Greek people had learned bodily exercises, foot races, and horse and chariot races.... But the best thing that the Egyptians had taught the Greeks was to become docile, and to permit themselves to be formed by the law for the public good.
  • Pro Libertate||

    Stupid is not new, clearly.

  • blcartwright||

    and if they didn't respect royal authority, off with their heads!

  • Pro Libertate||

    The Greeks were docile? Are we talking about the Greeks who fought wars almost continuously during the classical period?

  • seguin||

    And were constantly overthrowing their governments?

  • Ted S.||

    Those in government are increasingly becoming the plutocrats.

  • Irish||

    You see it in France in the new 75 percent tax on the super-rich.

    In June of 2013, France's unemployment rate hit a 15 year high at 10.8%.

    Since then, it's actually increased further and is now over 11%.

    I question the idea that this new tax was a good thing.

  • ||

    leading Republican thinkers, like Frank Luntz,

    wat?

  • Rufus J. Firefly||

    Chrystia Freeland? She's the latest wealthy, empty-headed in the Canadian liberal ranks. She was an editor at the Financial Post and was quite possibly the least informative panelist on the McLaughlin Group. She made Clift look sane.

  • New West Republic||

    The scary thing is she'll probably get a cabinet post after the next election.

  • Rufus J. Firefly||

    Yes along with a remedial, vapid boy-leader in Trudeau who seems to struggle with buttoning his shirt.

  • New West Republic||

    I had "idiotic man-boy" in my head, but vapid boy-leader also works. That is all I will say about the next PM of Canada as I can only afford so much alcohol (a lot, actually, but I need to start saving up for 2015)

  • Rufus J. Firefly||

    "Tax the income-rich, corporate persons and politically-active religious organizations until their collective leaders' eyes bulge out. Then I'll believe that there is a real revolt against the super-rich..."

    Sure thing, Bryan. Whatever you say, buddy.

  • paranoid android||

    "Tax the income-rich, corporate persons and politically-active religious organizations until their collective leaders' eyes bulge out. Then I'll believe that there is a real revolt against the super-rich..."

    Income-rich? he wants to tax the people who work and make the most money, but specifically leaves out the idle-rich types who sit around on piles of daddy's money never producing anything? Is he a redistributionist who wants to cut the capital gains tax?

  • Rufus J. Firefly||

    I think he's just a sockpuppet spewing out the usual socialist memes.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Georgia lawmakers are mulling legalizing medical marijuana.

    It's almost as though the states are legalizing weed just so they can get ahead of the wave with onerous regulations.

  • SIV||

    Exactly

  • Coeus||

  • Certified Public Asskicker||

    Her answer was Justin Bieber. That should be the outrage.

  • ||

    Like you wouldn't fuck Justin Beiber. You know his cocaine is awesome and his hands are soft, so what's the problem?

  • ||

    You make some good points...

    But still. He is Justin Bieber...

  • ||

    See, there you go being a woman whose assertiveness or even aggression would be considered normal or even admirable in a man, but because she’s a woman in a sexist society, it’s considered unseemly. Again.

  • ||

    Wait, so am I a bitch, cunt, or dick?

  • Irish||

    None of those words are vile enough for whatever it is you are.

  • John||

    All three. That makes you transgendered. You are a protected class now.

  • ||

    That's easy. Just ask yourself which one is the worst.

  • John||

    My wife and I were talking the other day about women athletes. Feminists and PC obsessed sportswriters fall all over themselves talking about how various female athletes are tough. The funny think about that is that probably the toughest and most courageous female athletes are figure skaters. Figure skating is like gymnastics only instead of falling on a padded floor you fall on ice. An elite figure skater has fallen thousands of times and endured huge amounts of pain and still manages to have no fear of falling as they do about 20 mph on the ice and jump a couple of feet in the air. That is a hell of a lot more courageous and tough than Abby Wambach cheap shotting some Chinese player half her age. But since figure skaters are good looking, no feminists can ever admit they might be actual athletes and really tough.

  • John||

    I mean half her size.

  • ||

    Do the feminists talk about Rhonda Rousey? I'd imagine not, for some reason.

  • John||

    Doubtful. For some reason only soccer players and homely black women who play tennis count as "athletes" for feminists. The pretty girls are just benefiting from the patriarchy or something.

  • BakedPenguin||

    Check out this list of "hot" women tennis players.

    My suspicion is that the guy who compiled it is gay (NTTAWWT), someone I sent it to replied that he could also be super-PC. Even for the ones he got right, he picked lousy photos.

  • John||

    The Williams sisters are not hot by any definition. That doesn't mean there are not hot black athletes. Sloan Stevens is pretty cute.

    Anyone who claims the Williams sisters are hot is either making up for something or trying to make some kind of other point.

  • Rufus J. Firefly||

    They're hot in a 'crack my walnuts' sorta way. Hot like some people find Michelle hot.

  • blcartwright||

    Of the 20 I found maybe one that caught my interest, another 3 or 4 not bad (in that particular selection of photos)

  • Certified Public Asskicker||

    I think we can all agree that Alex Morgan is the greatest female soccer player ever. Yes, yes we can.

  • John||

    They should require her to paint her uniform on every game.

  • Raven Nation||

    Downside is that she earned a degree in political economy from Berkeley. As long as you didn't get into political conversations with her...

  • John||

    OH God. Thanks for ruining that Raven Nation. I bet she is insufferable.

  • Raven Nation||

    See, "the effectiveness of discussions about hot female athletes is ruined when they are posted in a format online that allows for commenting."

  • ||

    Meh, for Alex Morgan I would just smile and nod as she goes on about a living wage or anti-corporate nonsense or whatever.

  • ||

    Well journalists go on and on about how tough and courageous figure skaters/gymnasts are too.

    Also, I would definitely describe Wambach's style of play as tough/physical which is a good thing for women's soccer. That combined with the increasing skill level like Marta makes the game far more tolerable to watch (during the summer when the men's season is over, there are no national tournaments, no sports but baseball and the lastros are still terrible).

  • John||

    I look at her as being a cheap shot artist and a bully. I don't get why people like her so much.

    And journalists go on and on about how figure skaters are so graceful and such. None of them would ever say one of them is tougher than Wambach even tough Wambach wouldn't last ten minutes on an ice rink.

  • Irish||

    I don't know how you can say Wambach is a cheap shot artist or bully.

    I just think she's very strong and physical compared to most women.

  • ||

    Vinnie Jones wouldn't last 10 mins on a rink either but that doesn't mean he wasn't a tough player, and he actually was a (awesomely) cheap bully at times.

    There is a role for strong physical players in the men's games as well and not just defensive players. There are tons of forwards of otherwise dubious skill who have made a living for themselves by being big and strong players who can hold up the ball to distribute and help with goals through headers. They are called Target Men, which is exactly what Wambach is.

  • Ted S.||

    Yeah, it was only three weeks ago that somebody tried to "out" Aaron Rodgers.

    (Apologies for the memory-hogging nature of the link.)

  • Virginian||

    Male athletes are never viewed as sex objects? Seriously?

  • ||

    Not enough leg in her pic. I'll fix that.

  • Aloysious||

    Thank you.

  • Certified Public Asskicker||

    Why wasn't her answer, Certified Public Asskicker, the occasional commenter at Reason.

    *Sobs, thanks Warty for picture*

  • Ted S.||

    Oh god, it's the whole "I watch tennis looking for a reason to masturbate" portion of the thread....

  • Certified Public Asskicker||

    Ted, we are jerking it to the great tennis we are watching.

  • Bobarian||

    I like to listen to female tennis players while I masturbate

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nSehJDh8F4

  • BakedPenguin||

    If it makes you feel better, Ted, I masturbate to women's golf. hth.

  • Dave Krueger||

    The U.S. Army is trying to figure out how it may replace some troops with robots in order to deal with cutbacks. They’re focusing on trying to automate transportation, not combat, at least not yet.

    This is great news. Maybe I'll enlist again. I'm old, but I could drive one of those things if they make the interface look like a video game and allow me to pause the war for bathroom breaks.

  • Bobarian||

    "they make the interface look like a video game and allow me to pause the war for bathroom breaks"

    Sounds like the Air Force to me.

  • ||

    Esquire out-derps Gawker in hysterical reaction to Florida gun laws

    It is hard not be somewhat in awe of what the NRA has done since we all had that "teaching moment" in Newtown, Connecticut. It has quadrupled-down and, in many cases, it has won. At the very least, it has more than blunted what seemed then to be irresistable momentum toward a sensible national regulatory policy regarding guns. I don't recall who first mentioned it, but there's a lot to be said for applying to the NRA what Lincoln said at Cooper Union on a completely different issue.

    These natural, and apparently adequate means all failing, what will convince them? This, and this only: cease to call slavery wrong, and join them in calling it right. And this must be done thoroughly - done in acts as well as in words. Silence will not be tolerated - we must place ourselves avowedly with them. Senator Douglas' new sedition law must be enacted and enforced, suppressing all declarations that slavery is wrong, whether made in politics, in presses, in pulpits, or in private. We must arrest and return their fugitive slaves with greedy pleasure. We must pull down our Free State constitutions...

    We must not simply let them have their guns. We must love their guns the way they do. That's what the country has learned from its teachable moment.

    Gun owners are like slave owners, QED.

  • John||

    I don't even bother to argue with these clowns anymore. I just laugh at their tears. They are so angry and butt hurt. They knew that those dead kids at Newtown were finally going to give them what they wanted. Fuck off losers. You lost.

  • Irish||

    It's Charles Pierce. I actually knew it was Charles Pierce immediately because he's easily the dumbest person at Esquire so anything mind numbingly idiotic that comes from that magazine has to be Pierce.

    He's also been losing his mind over guns for a full year now and has been slowly dissolving into madness as the progressives lose.

    He also has the Prog Disease of assuming that whatever is said among his circle of dipshit friends is what the entire country wants. Example:

    At the very least, it has more than blunted what seemed then to be irresistable momentum toward a sensible national regulatory policy regarding guns.

    First of all, solid spelling with 'irresistible' dibshit. Hint: There's no A and spellcheck would have told him this.

    Secondly, there never was any irresistible momentum. There were progressives in the media desperately attempting to push for policies that even a large portion of the Democratic base didn't want. When Dems are getting killed over gun control in 60% Hispanic districts in Colorado, it's time to realize this is never going to happen.

  • John||

    Charles Pierce might be the dumbest person writing in the media today. I am serious, in a world that includes people like Sad Beard and Amanda Marcotte, Charles Pierce is a giant among giants in the field of applied stupidity.

  • ||

    what seemed then to be irresistable momentum toward a sensible national regulatory policy regarding guns

    Hahaha. Ha. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA

  • John||

    Don't argue with the voices in Pierce's head Nikki. They have never steered him wrong yet.

  • Tejicano||

    What shipdit here didn't get was that the "irresistable momentum" he was feeling was headed in the opposite direction from his wishes.

  • Coeus||

    Why does everyone keep talking about the NRA in conjunction with this new flordia law?

  • Rufus J. Firefly||

    "It continues to astonish me that anyone could grow to nominal adulthood without picking up on the fact that reality differs in some significant respects from a Jerry Brukheimer movie, and base their views of social policy accordingly. But then the world depicted in Red Dawn is also quite remote from the one actual human beings live in, and the same could be said for "24," yet whole swaths of our political culture haven't yet figured out that those aren't rigorous pieces of documentary filmmaking either."

    Derp, derp, derpity, derp, because.

  • New West Republic||

    The original Red Dawn or the remake? Because I couldn't suspend disbelief enough to view as anything but comedy the occupation of even a moderately well-armed populace by a bunch of 4 foot something malnourished dwarves.

  • BakedPenguin||

    Dwarves are smaller, and harder to hit. Seriously though, I think even a successful invasion of South Korea would stop at Seoul. Once the NK troops saw all the food and stuff in the stores, discipline would disappear.

  • Tejicano||

    I think the best way to interdict any southward invasion by NK troops would be to set up and leave open big groups of troop kitchens with feasts of any kind of food and drink a Korean would love. Once we take the edge off their fanatacism make it clear that what they are experiencing is what South Koreans call "Wednesday".

  • Almanian (sans exclamation pt)||

    Wow - nothing here but a bunch of JERKS, as usual. Ima go stand by Postrel at the bar and look cool....

  • ||

    Psst. *passes Almanian vial of GHB*

  • Almanian (sans exclamation pt)||

    OH! No thanks! I have my own Great Highland Bagpipe! Thanks! Really!

  • Coeus||

    At least he handed it to you, and didn't pour it into your drink while you weren't looking like he usually does.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, facing federal charges for accepting more than $100,000 in gifts from a business executive, has denied he’s done anything illegal and argues the charges are an example of government overreach.

    That boot is not so awesome when it's on YOUR neck, you say?

  • ||

    Along with #FULLCOMMUNISM, Ludditism seems to be in vogue these days as well

    Today, this critical agenda is being pursued by the adherents of the “degrowth” movement—popular in Europe but enjoying very little traction in the United States. The goal of this movement is not just to scrutinize the ecological wisdom of continuing in the current pro-growth mode but also to question the wisdom of using indicators like the GDP to assess and formulate public policy. As Yves-Marie Abraham, a Canadian sociologist and one of the proponents of the degrowth agenda, puts it, “[T]his is not [about] the decline of GDP, but the end of GDP and all other quantitative measures used as indicators of well being.”

    This is not the time or place to assess the merits of the degrowth agenda with regard to the economy. But it's hard to deny that it has presented many interesting intellectual challenges to mainstream economics. A robust defense of the pro-growth agenda today requires addressing concerns over climate change as well as explaining why there's no simple linear relationship between growth and happiness. If more growth doesn't make us happier, why should it guide our economic policy?

    What we really need is a government and economy run by sociologists.

  • John||

    This is not the time or place to assess the merits of the degrowth agenda with regard to the economy. But it's hard to deny that it has presented many interesting intellectual challenges to mainstream economics.

    Challenges that are so interesting and valid that I seem to have forgotten what they were or am unable to defend the ones I can remember.

    Is there a more pathetic intellectual cop out than the old "position X has made some interesting challenges to mainstream thought..."?

    Why doesn't he just say "trust me"?

  • Killaz||

    This is precisely why I'm an anarcho-capitalist. A proper defense consists of being able to see what threat lies around the corner, and being able to prepare for it. Once that threat commits an aggressive act being able to respond in kind. Government is the entity that is preventing you from doing that. You spot these loons as a threat, you are discouraged by law to stock up on heavy armament, from forming your own core of concerned neighbors and fellow citizens who only want to maintain their lives at their current prosperity without the threat of that being taken away from them. Government is also the means these loons will use to make that happen so their aggressions have the sway of law behind them.

  • John||

    Here is the problem with that, what if you get it wrong or the guy you deal with's family and or friends don't see it that way?

    Suppose I am living in anarcho capitalist land and all of my neighbors and I get along fine. Okay. But what happens when one of my neighbor's son turns out to be a sociopathic asshole (those do exist even if they are rare) and rapes my daughter? I go to his family and demand justice. His family being parents, are blind to the fact that junior is a sociopath and deny he could do such a thing. What then? Well, I am not happy with my daughter having to see her rapist every day so I put a bullet in junior's head. Justice done, right? Well except that junior's family doesn't view it that way and are pretty angry. And in revenge they kill my son. Well now my family not so happy about that. And what do we get? A big long blood feud and effectively two gangs at war with each other and not because we were all pscho killers. We get that because we had no way to get justice except by revenge.

    We don't have criminal laws because they are necessary to keep us from raping and murdering and such. We have laws to keep the victims of those crimes from seeking revenge and starting a cycle of violence like I describe above. If the state does it, the family hates the state not the victim and there isn't a cycle of violence.

  • Killaz||

    An entity as boundless as the state is necessary to prevent something that is likely to occur to you as you being struck by lightning? Whereas, it is a certainty that those with agendas will use the state as a means of aggression against us all? Preventing distributed justice is an overstated priority.

  • Killaz||

    I'll say, that was very well thought out, and deserved more than a few sentences in response back from me, but I have to go eat now.

  • John||

    And when you realize that the purpose of criminal laws is to keep the victim from seeking revenge, the lunacy of victimless crimes because all that more apparent.

  • Killaz||

    If our limited government Republic evolved into an even more libertarian minarchist state instead of this thing we have now, I don't think anarco-captalism would have any appeal. However, there has to be a flaw in the very idea of limited government that we do have this thing, and not the other thing which is theoretically where we should have been heading over the two and half centuries.

  • cryptArchy||

    Limited minarchist government will never work. Government is much like a parasite, and will always crave more and more power

  • Coeus||

    It would if we rebooted it every 20 years or so, as intended.

  • blcartwright||

    or "I realize my policies will decrease everyone's standard of living (in the name of fairness, the environment, etc) so let's first abolish any measures of well-being so you want be able to tell how much you're being screwed"

  • The Late P Brooks||

    I can't be expected to have to look through the rest of the thread to figure out WTF he's talking about.

    Lie still. I think I can hear the waahmbulance coming.

  • Almanian (sans exclamation pt)||

    WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!!?????!11

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Glenn Beck Says Unearthly Forces Keeping The Blaze Off Cable

    "Beck told Perkins that The Blaze is the only “non-partisan” and godly network available. “What’s missing is a very small government voice that also truly respects God,” Beck said. For instance, he said, The Blaze will report miracles as true: “I refuse to read on my own website or see on my own network the phrase, ‘Some believe this is a miracle.’ If we’re going to print it or we’re going to say it, it’s either a miracle or it’s not. I believe in miracles. Do we believe in miracles or not? As a company we do, as a nation we used to and if we’re going to survive, we must.” Later, Beck suggested that demonic powers are trying to keep his television network off of cable, telling Perkins, “You also have other forces at work that aren’t necessarily earthly forces that would like to see voices silenced.”

    http://www.rightwingwatch.org/.....FiV5d.dpuf

  • John||

    Considering that Beck makes more money than God, can he send some of those demonic powers my way? We should all be so lucky.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    I often find Beck's show entertaining, but when he gets sentimental and/or religious, it gets pretty weird.

  • John||

    He seems like a legitimately strange guy. I remember when he started out on CNN I think it was. He was sort of your typical cable yelling guy. Then he kind of got a bit better and seemed to have found his niche. But right after he got big he started getting stranger and stranger. Getting an audience seems to have gone to his head and not in a good way.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I think he's just like that. I don't see him as much different than when he was a local radio guy here.

    His big break, if I recall correctly, was the whole Schiavo business.

  • John||

    He got big that recently? Why does it seem like he has been around since the 90s?

  • Pro Libertate||

    That was about ten years ago, wasn't it?

  • John||

    I don't remember.

  • Pro Libertate||

    He was still here doing local radio for a while after he was doing some national stuff. Can't recall exactly when he finally rose to the heavens and CNN. Which struck me even then as an odd destination for him.

  • Irish||

    Do you remember the first episode of his Fox show when he inexplicably had a split screen where one of the screens was just a close up of his eyes?

    I can't find it online right now, but when he was asked why he did something so strange, he said it was because people don't look each other in the eyes anymore so he wanted his audience to look him right in the eyes.

    It was really bizarre.

  • Irish||

    Beck's VERY crazy but I don't actually think he's as bad as people make him out.

    The other day he said "No one who hates gay people should be a fan of mine."

    That's pretty brave from a guy who has such a right-wing fan base and it's refreshing to hear from someone that religious.

  • Pro Libertate||

    He's at least not a shill--I think he says and does what he wants, without worrying how the GOP will do next election. Unlike, say, Hannity.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    I agree. At times I have heard him express quite moderate, even 'liberal,' views on hot button social issues.

  • Notorious G.K.C.||

    It's brave not to hate gay people? Unless he was using "hate" in the prog sense - "disagrees with someone politically" - then hate is rarer on the Right than you might think. Though it exists, hence Beck's warning, I presume.

  • Irish||

    If you read the comments on a legitimate right wing blog, there is still a lot of anti-gay animus.

    Homophobia is absolutely rampant at Breitbart.

  • Notorious G.K.C.||

    Let me go check...

  • Notorious G.K.C.||

    OK, I found some gay-baiting at Breitbart. Beck's non-friends.

  • Cytotoxic||

    'Breit-tard' once had an article sympathetic to Russia's anti-gay law. Nativism/xenophobia and homophobia are problems on the non-establishment Right and that's why us Libertarians need to take charge. We are adults and they are our children.

  • Almanian (sans exclamation pt)||

    I believe in miracles.

    Where ya from? You sexy thang you...

  • Bobarian||

    As brain worms go, you could do a lot worse than planting that one.

  • paranoid android||

    Not if you forever associate it with bastardizing the works of Isaac Asimov.

  • Matrix||

    Former president of Trader Joe's to open up a store selling expired food.

    Wants to help out families who have difficulty affording healthier food.

    Concern troll regulators to put a stop to it in 3... 2... 1...

  • blcartwright||

    When I was young and poor we always went to the Hostess store where they sold bread and donuts that were past their dates.

  • ||

    Grieving woman who lost husband and son in murder/suicide involuntarily committed, then gets billed

    A mother who has been hospitalized against her will for five weeks following a murder-suicide involving her teenage son and her estranged husband says she and her insurance company are being billed for her unwanted treatment.

    "I am not ill; I am simply a mother who is grieving the tragic loss of her young son," Christina Schumacher told the Burlington Free Press this week. "No mother should ever have to experience this loss."

    Schumacher's situation is an example of a broader concern, said state Rep. Anne Donahue, a longtime advocate for improving treatment in Vermont for the mentally ill.
    [snip]
    Christina Schumacher, 48, was admitted against her will to the secure psych ward at Fletcher Allen Health Care in Burlington the day after the bodies were found. She and friends dispute her need to be confined and said the hospitalization was done without a judge's review.

    The involuntary admission, which initially was designated for 72 hours, was ordered by a doctor because mental-health workers believed she "poses a danger to herself and others," court records show.

    This is stuff that used to be a plot device in Victorian-era novels.

  • ||

    Yeah, not only is she getting billed, she's also still fucking imprisoned.

  • John||

    Even the Victorians didn't send you a bill. We really are worse than even our worst predecessors.

  • Drake||

    Billed and separated from her daughter.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    And the bartender says, "ORDER A DRINK OR GET THE FUCK OUT."

  • Notorious G.K.C.||

    "Look here, upon this picture, and on this"

    On the left - Ilyse Hogue, head of NARAL Pro-Choice America.

    On the right - Lila Rose, head of the pro-life group LiveAction.

    http://bit.ly/1dVyBqB

    Yeah, it's shallow, but it's H&R.

  • ||

    Hasn't it long been established that women on the right are much more attractive than women on the left?

  • Irish||

    Hasn't it long been established that women on the right are much more attractive than women on the left?

    There are exceptions, but I'd say this is true as a general rule.

    I will say that I'm strangely attracted to Wendy Davis and this is a young Gloria Steinem from when she went undercover as a Playboy Bunny when she was like 23.

  • Coeus||

    I will say that I'm strangely attracted to Wendy Davis

    Enough to put her through college?

  • OldMexican||

    ZING!!!!

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    "Hasn't it long been established that women on the right are much more attractive than women on the left?"

    I have always been suspicious of that claim given the skew of younger voters to the left.

  • Irish||

    Yes, but we're comparing like to like.

    If I'm talking about a hot conservative, I'm going to be comparing her to hot liberals her own age. It's not like I'm comparing Jedidiah Bila to Nancy Pelosi. I'm comparing Bila to other 30-somethings.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    What I am getting at is this: the percentage of hot to not younger women is higher than same for older women, and younger women tend to vote Democrat, so it seems unlikely that there would be less hot lefty women than righty women.

  • paranoid android||

    The hot lefties get disqualified for not shaving their underarms.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    We must travel in different circles. I can not remember the last time I saw a woman who had hairy armpits.

  • BakedPenguin||

    I don't know if libertarian women are better looking, but I will say that the ones we get here are far more awesome than other political stripes.

  • Banjos||

    THIS IS WHY THERE ARE NO...oh wait.

  • Notorious G.K.C.||

    "the findings of a recent National Journal poll [are] unsurprising: voters aged 18-29 were much more likely than those over age 50 to say they would support a ban on most abortions at the 20-week mark. The poll also found that women are more likely to support the ban than men, and that independents are much closer to Republicans on the issue than Democrats."

    http://www.usnews.com/opinion/.....o-abortion

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Er, while I realizing you guys are pushing this, I do not see how someone who would allow abortion on demand up to the 20 week mark could be considered 'pro-life.' So I am not sure that statistic proves much.

  • Notorious G.K.C.||

    I was responding to the comment about "the skew of younger voters to the left." It doesn't translate into being more choicer, which was what you appeared to be getting at.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    I meant voting Democratic.

    I would also have to see the poll in question, since it could be like the one discussed here:

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/sal.....legal.html

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    According to this poll 18-29 year olds are more likely to identify as pro-choice than as pro-life while the reverse is true for those over 50.

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/162.....views.aspx

  • Notorious G.K.C.||

    I prefer the questions about specific policy preferences to the questions over labels. The abortion status quo doesn't poll particularly well, particularly among young voters.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    I think there is something profoundly dishonest for pro-lifers to be putting this 20 week ban out there. You are against abortion at any point. The second such a ban goes into effect you would get to work on a 15 week limit, then a 12, etc. It reminds me of the anti-gun people who would love to see DC type laws but who keep putting forward background check laws. The minute such laws would be enacted they would start on pushing laws that would make the background checks moot.

  • Notorious G.K.C.||

    You have unveiled the sinister hidden prolife agenda! I hope the word doesn't get out about how the prolife movement is...prolife!

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    What is 'sinister' seems to me that you are not putting what you actually want out there, because you know it is unpopular and extreme. It is not like a majority of people who consider themselves 'pro life' just think later term abortions are wrong and need banning, instead most pro-lifers are against even very early abortions. A much more honest measure from your side is the personhood amendments.

  • Coeus||

    I think there is something profoundly dishonest for pro-lifers to be putting this 20 week ban out there.

    Absolutely correct. But that's the way our current government is set up to work. Libertarians do the same. We're for tax cuts, but we'd prefer and push for an elimination of income tax.

  • ||

    Is it dishonest to try and get medical marijuana laws passed because you know it will be a gateway to getting recreational marijuana laws passed?

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Actually that is a pretty common charge leveled against proponents of medical marijuana.

    Let me ask you, what do you think of gun control proponents who are on record wanting DC type laws pushing 'common sense gun reforms' that, upon their passing, they would immediately go to work against in replacing? And to be more specific, what would you say about one of them who points to polls supporting this or that 'common sense gun reform' as evidence that 'gun control' was popular?

  • Coeus||

    Actually that is a pretty common charge leveled against proponents of medical marijuana.

    And for the most part, they are correct. The issue is, if you believe that something will be beneficial, does it make you a hypocrite to have other goals that are more extreme?

  • Banjos||

    They can't have an abortion ban law upheld that bans abortions past viability of the fetus. Thanks to medical technology, the definition of viability keeps expanding. These laws are trying to keep up with the definition of viability in order to stop as many abortions as possible. Dishonest? Maybe in the sense of an anarchist voting.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    These laws are not about that. The supporters are very clear that they are to roll abortions back to where they would like it, near total bans. I imagine Eduard would concede that in his case. But here is an easy way to see this: ask anyone who identifies as 'pro life' if they would be totally satisfied with a law that allowed abortion up to viability. I doubt many, if any, would say 'yup, I just want to keep the law up with changing viability!'

  • Banjos||

    I still fail to see the point you are trying to make. Should I be outraged when a gun grabber tries to push for regulations that limits guns as if it is unexpected?

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    What I am getting at is that while I understand the strategy of chipping away at something, I do think there is something dishonest about saying that a 20 week abortion limit is a 'pro-life' position or that popularity for it shows that more and more people are 'pro life.' The vast majority of people who identify as pro-life want to see early term abortions banned. The minute they got this 20 week limit they would start working against it to get it down to 18, then 15, then 5, etc. When someone says they are pro-life and for this what they are really saying is 'I do not want this at all, I would consider this a Holocaust, but I am for it because it would be a slightly smaller Holocaust than without it.'

  • Coeus||

    When someone says they are pro-life and for this what they are really saying is 'I do not want this at all, I would consider this a Holocaust, but I am for it because it would be a slightly smaller Holocaust than without it.'

    Right. So why is that dishonest? Are libertarians pushing for marijuana legalization dishonest because they want all drugs legal?

  • Banjos||

    Ah, got it. It's labeling more people as being pro-life that you disagree with. How would you label these people who now agree with late term abortion bans? You can't label them pro-choice, because they believe there are limitations on that choice.

  • Coeus||

    I don't know if that flies, though. Is it dishonest when Reason lists a pole for pro marijuana legalization and titles it "More people than ever before want to legalize drugs?"

    Cause it ain't all drugs, but you still call them "pro-legalization".

  • Tejicano||

    I haven't followed the abortion debate as closely as the gun debate but something I hear a lot from the anti-gun crowd is how they are only asking for "X" (be that ending face-to-face transactions, total gun registration, or whatever) and we are being unreasonable. They claim they have no intention to go further and how confiscation is not happening (while it actually is in places).

  • Cytotoxic||

    "they are not significantly more likely than the general public to support the legality of abortion," and that "millennials have largely positive top-of-mind associations with same-sex marriage but have largely negative top-of-mind associations with abortion."

    Anti-choicers are desperate for a bone and this is it. That's not gonna overturn RvW.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Well, some cherry picking there. It is not like Carol Tobias is easy on the eyes.

    http://www.christiannewswire.c.....16709.html

  • Bobarian||

    Not shallow enough...

    Got any full length pictures?

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    For that you have to check out the magazine 'Hot & Horny Abortion Activists' on sale in Barnes & Nobles and adult bookstores across the nation.

  • Notorious G.K.C.||

    Would these count as full-length pictures?

    http://blog.heritage.org/2014/.....hing-life/

  • Notorious G.K.C.||

    More full-length pictures - fully clothed, because of the winter weather

    http://www.lifenews.com/2014/0.....abortions/

  • Invisible Handjob||

    Resolved: Obamacare Is Now Beyond Rescue

    Author won a debate vs Jonathan Chait and Douglas Kamerow on this question.

    On odds they would win this debate:

    ... we were debating on the Upper West Side. Now, I grew up on the Upper West Side and love it dearly. But for this particular resolution, it’s about the unfriendliest territory this side of Pyongyang.

    "Here's whats ahead" section nicely sums up the coming shit storm, which all seems reasonable given the incentives in the ACA. My fav:

    Summer 2014: Insurers get a sizable chunk of money from the government to cover any excess losses. When the costs are published, this is going to be wildly unpopular: The administration has spent three years saying that Obamacare was the antidote to abuses by Big, Bad Insurance Companies, and suddenly it’s a mechanism to funnel taxpayer money to them?

    Oh, the coming cognitive dissonance on the left. Heads will explode.

  • John||

    McArdle knows which way the wind blows if not much else. I would consider her a leading indicator of beltway conventional wisdom. If McARdle is admitting Obamacare is a hopeless cockup, expect a lot of others in the beltway media to follow.

  • Irish||

    McArdle knows which way the wind blows if not much else. I would consider her a leading indicator of beltway conventional wisdom.

    John, I know you have a bizarre hatred of Mccardle, but she's been pointing out flaws in Obamacare for like 3 years.

    It's not as if she just suddenly decided there were problems.

  • John||

    She has been soft peddling its flaws for three years and failed to point them out back in 09 when it mattered and they were obvious.

    McArdle is just what I said she is; a leading indicator of conventional wisdom.

  • Irish||

    She was criticizing Obamacare LONG before any liberals would admit there were problems or the rest of the media was looking into things.

    She was ahead of the pack in Obamacare criticism, and rewritting history to make it seem as if her criticism only occurred once it was 'conventional wisdom' is disingenuous.

  • John||

    No. I said she soft peddled it. And she did. McArdle is the queen of "well the right has a point but not as good as they think it is" kind of writing. And I said she is a leading indicator of that. So she is a bit ahead of the curve in that she is usually one of the first mavens of conventional wisdom to adopt the new conventional wisdom.

  • Acosmist||

    YES, thank you. This is exactly what McArdle does - on the one hand 2 + 2 = 4, BUT...(long explanation that ends up saying it's 5).

    She's...really quite terrible, when it comes down to it.

  • Invisible Finger||

    I have to admit I did consider "invisible handjob" as my handle before settling on mine.

    But the government doesn't jerk me off, instead it tells me to go fuck myself,

  • Steve G||

    An Iranian-American engineer accused of attempting to ship stolen documentation on a high-tech military plane to Iran has been indicted, US authorities say.

    This is just delicious. A US-naturalized Iranian tries to ship home F-35 tech data. Almost as surprising at the Chinese guys doing it with nuke info. Our background checks are joke.
    And, wouldn't digitizing the info be a whole lot easier to send?

  • John||

    No one with ties to a country like Iran or China should ever get a security clearance. I don't care how patriotic they are. If they have family in a country like that they are very easy to turn. China has to make it clear that they can either play ball or grandma is going to the gulag. But in the name PC we grant such people top clearances all of the time.

  • Drake||

    It's more important to protect their feelings than our secrets.

  • Invisible Finger||

    More like in the name of "we can't find enough Americans to do the job at this pay."

  • Cytotoxic||

    Chinese and ME people are too smart to say no to. What the US government should do is pre-arrange fake data.

  • Tejicano||

    The US intelligence community should institute a program to actively look for people with clearances who are being courted by foreign powers. Make it part of the system to expect it will happen and get in front of it. Expecting it will not happen is
    silly and unrealistic.

  • ||

  • BigT||

    No one with ties to a country like Germany or Japan should ever get a security clearance

    What's old is new again!

  • John||

    It is what it is. If you have family in China or Iran, how are you expected to be able to resist their coercion? Moreover, if you are in such a situation, why would you want a clearance? Why would you want to give the government back home a reason to screw with you?

  • Obese American||

    Fuck off you racist prick. What about Russian ancestry? How many generations do we go back? Let's increase the police state you fucking thug.

  • Drake||

    Thanks for playing today's butt-hurt PC bureaucrat.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    I do not care much for obese's language, but I think you missed what he was getting at there by quite a bit.

  • John||

    There is nothing to get at it. It nothing to do with your race. You could be a blue blooded American, but if your wife's family is in China or Iran, you have no business getting a clearance. Why wouldn't the intel services of such country use leverage if they had it?

  • Tejicano||

    One problem with this - how do we get enough people working in our intelligence services who really understand Iran or China if we don't hire a few people from those countries?

    What the system lacks - which I point to above - is a system that expects people with clearances to be approached by foreign powers and start using that to our advantage.

  • kbolino||

    Let's increase the police state you fucking thug.

    Wouldn't restricting how many people can get clearances actually reduce the size of the police state?

  • John||

    Fuck off Mary.

  • ||

    I don't get to comment or read much these days but I had to take a break and throw this in, once again for the sole purpose of causing jealousy.

    Last Friday I was able to acquire a beautiful, mint Winchester '94 in 32 win special, and today managed to find ammunition for it.

    I missed the thread on the left coast academics who cooked up a bullshit study showing guns make people less safe, so here; I have 'em, I'm keeping them and that is all there is to it. Fuck Tony and his ilk.

  • Tejicano||

    Sweet! A new rifle AND the ammo to shoot in it. Nice to hear.

    Guns make people less safe - specifically, criminals and people who would try to take my guns are less safe while I have guns. Feature, not bug.

    I have a recommendation for Tony which would involve him earning bus fare to get home after his donkey gig in the Mariscal (Juarez red light district).

  • Aloysious||

  • Coeus||

    Why do feminists so often substitute snark for any actual argument?

    Organizers say it’s simply the reality of today’s world. Many participants are invited to Davos based solely on their job function—like the president of Harvard University, who is currently a woman. When the people in those roles change, so can the demographics of Davos.

    “We’re on the front line of reflecting the world as it is, not how we want it to be,” says Adrian Monck, a managing director and head of communications for WEF. Monck says the organization would prefer that its meeting in Davos were more evenly distributed by gender, but its hands are tied by a different imperative: bringing together the world’s most powerful and influential people. Presently only 16.9% of Fortune 500 boards of directors are comprised of women. Fewer than 5% of the Fortune 500 are led by women.

    Yeah, what do you want from him, feminists? He’s only the managing director of Davos. What do you want him to do, manage and direct the conference into making some rules about gender representation? Why would he do that when he’s “on the front line “of representing the status quo? Trust us, ladies, he doesn’t want to be sexist: he’s only sexist because the world is.
  • blcartwright||

    because they are liberals.

  • New West Republic||

    Why is it that when I see "Canadian sociologist" I read "Canadian socialist"? And fuck the degrowth agenda and turning away from quantitative measures of well-being. I've seen the degrowth agenda in action forty years in this formerly blighted area of Canada, which praise Jesus now smells of money, new cars and opportunity instead of rust, boredom and dirty hippies.

    And muh feelz don't pay the fucking bills.

  • BakedPenguin||

    Why is it that when I see "Canadian sociologist" I read "Canadian socialist"?

    Because of the 1:1 correspondence ratio?

  • New West Republic||

    I dunno, couldn't we count one sociologist as two or more socialists? They're often teaching classes to the young, dumb and craving cum.

  • Coeus||

    Wreckers!!! Everywhere we look it's wreckers!!!

    Just because this was predicted and has now come to pass, doesn't mean that we have to acknowledge that we were wrong. It's those damn wreckers!!!

  • Banjos||

    This can't be! I was told by multiple progs that that would never happen and that I was fear mongering.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    GOProud founder leaves GOP - party "brain dead".

    “I just came to the realization that the Republican Party doesn’t represent my principles and values,” LaSalvia told POLITICO. “I’m a small government conservative and they’re for big government. They’re happy to have big government as long as they’re in charge, More importantly, I don’t tolerate bigotry of any kind, whether it’s anti-gay bigotry, anti-Muslim bigotry. And they do and that’s just not OK with me.”

    http://www.politico.com/story/.....02468.html

    What took you so long?

    Independent now!

  • kbolino||

    Leaving the GOP does not mean embracing the Democrats, a lesson you would do well to learn.

  • kbolino||

    I learned everything I know from P Brooks.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    When did I say that?

    I specifically advocate for no party affiliation in fact.

    I don't have one. I voted for one GOPer Reagan 84 and twice against the Big Gov GOP (04, 08). In other elections I voted LP.

  • Cytotoxic||

    So your Obama fellatio is an act?

  • Cytotoxic||

    I voted for one GOPer Reagan 84 and twice against the Big Gov GOP (04, 08).

    Oh hilarious. In '08 he 'voted against the Big gov GOP' and of course, for the Big gov Dem. 1/10 you're a retard.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Fed Govt barely grew under Clinton and Obama and has skyrocketed under Reagan/Bush.

    That be a fact, hoser.

  • paranoid android||

    But even if I accept it as true that the government has barely grown at all under Obama, who was the immediate successor to Bush, then that just means that Obama's levels of spending are in fact higher than the already grotesquely inflated expenditures of the Bush administration.

    You seem to think that this is an argument for Obama as the "small-government" choice, but that strikes me as an untenable position, so I'm left with the conclusion that you're arguing in bad faith.

  • Coeus||

    2007 total spending: 2,728,686

    2012 total spending: 3,537,127

  • paranoid android||

    But no, you see, since much of that increase was part of a one-time expenditure at the end of Bush's term (an increase which Obama supported at the time) which Obama later normalized into the budget by spending even more in other areas, that makes Obama the heir to Barry Goldwater, or something.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    that makes Obama the heir to Barry Goldwater

    Compared to Bush? Absolutely he is.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Final year of Bush spending =
    $3.5 trillion.

    Source = CBO Jan 07, 2009. (no partisan sources)

  • Coeus||

    OMB may be partisan but probably not the way you're thinking.

  • Coeus||

    So what was the trick to boost the last year of bush's spending up so much higher than the official numbers? Do we count some of the emergency spending signed by Obama in his first year's as Bush's?

  • Coeus||

    Wait, I see what I did. Shoulda gone with 2008

    2,982,544

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Final year of Bush spending =
    $3.5 trillion.

    Actually, Bush never signed the FY09 budget before he left office.

    PB = never correct.

  • Coeus||

    just read a breakdown. averaging to 7% growth per year under bush, and 4% growth per year under Obama. So I guess shrike's right. Obama is a true fiscal conservative. 4% growth per year, and he won't shut up about all the "drastic cuts". Definitely a fiscal conservative.

  • Coeus||

    Tha fuck?

    Prosecutors declined to charge an Ohio State Patrol trooper with a history of domestic violence who admitted to a sexual encounter with a boy.

    State trooper Ricky Vitte Jr. told his wife that he had watched a pornographic video and masturbated with the boy five years ago, according to a report issued by the Sandusky County sheriff’s office.

    Investigators said Vitte told his wife he was attempting to teach the boy about sex, The Sandusky Register reported.


    “Rick’s reasoning is the fact that he did not want (the boy) to feel pressured on feeling the need to have to have sex with someone, when he can fix those needs by masturbating to porn,” wrote Deputy Sean O’Connell after speaking to the trooper’s wife.

    Vitte claimed a dresser blocked their view of each other as they masturbated, according to the report.

    Authorities said he engaged in such activities twice with the boy about five years ago.
  • paranoid android||

    State trooper Ricky Vitte Jr. told his wife that he had watched a pornographic video and masturbated with the boy five years ago, according to a report issued by the Sandusky County sheriff’s office.

    What is it about Sanduskys?

  • New West Republic||

    damn you Marvin

  • New West Republic||

    Well, it is Sandusky county

  • Coeus||

    Sotomeyer is turning out to be pretty damn good on a lot of things

    Lawyers for California and the Obama administration, defending the traffic stop based on the anonymous tip, said keeping the public safe from drunken drivers outweighs the intrusion of a traffic stop. They said a tip about someone driving recklessly would be enough because reckless driving often follows having had too much to drink.

    But Justice Sonia Sotomayor said people use the term "reckless" differently, suggesting she might not accept the governments' argument.

    Sotomayor gave as an example her mother, who doesn't like it when the justice tops 50 miles per hour behind the wheel. "She thinks that when I'm going 51, I'm speeding and reckless," Sotomayor said.
  • Whahappan?||

    Obama must really be having second thoughts about nominating the "Wise Latina."

  • blcartwright||

    Last year my family was driving to the next county for Christmas dinner. For 15 miles we followed a guy who was all over the road, so my daughter called 911 on a cell phone. The guy was going down the main street of a small town IN THE WRONG LANE. I believe even Justice Sotomayor would call that reckless. We went through three counties while were on the phone with 911, I even got the the guys license number when he managed to stop at an intersection, but no police ever arrived.

  • RishJoMo||

    That guy just does not have a clue man. I mean like really.

    www.AnonWork.tk

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