Reason Morning Links: Size of Gulf Spill Estimate Doubles, Reid in Trouble, Huge Federal Drug Sweep

|

NEXT: Friday Funnies

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.

  1. A coordinated series of law enforcement raids across 16 states and a convent in Uganda this week resulted in the arrests of 429 people

    Smells like … victory!

    1. Smells like … victory team spirit!

      ftfy

      1. 🙁

        Apocalypse Now > than whiny bitch Cobain.

        Never. Never. Ever. forget that.

    2. I wonder if these raids on the Mexican cartels makes it cheaper to buy weed from local growers. Maybe they were just trying to protect American industry?

    3. Smells like a really cool action montage!

  2. Tea Party candidate leads Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) by 11 points in the polls.

    Release the smear campaign!
    http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/06…..-opponent/

    1. The strategy … will be to “use her own words to paint her as, well, a complete whackjob.”

      Careful what you ask for, Harry.

  3. Has Reason hit on the Jones Act and the oil spill yet?

    http://www.businessandmedia.or…..63127.aspx

    1. I would also note that Obama has the ability to waive the Jones Act cabotage requirements during times of emergency. Why isn’t the media killing him over that?

      1. John, do you really want the visual of that answer this early in the morning?

        1. No I really don’t. It was more of a rhetorical question. 🙂

    2. To my understanding, the Jones act only applies to goods being transported to & from contiguous US ports. A foreign flagged vessel may carry goods from a foreign port to a US port and from a US port to a foreign port, but not from a US port to a US port. This has nothing to with oil cleanup, only the shipment of cargo. Also, Thad Allen was on C-SPAN yesterday saying if anyone needed a Jones Act waiver for this debacle, they would receive one.

      1. Cargo cannot be transported by sea where the origination and destination are within the contiguous US unless they are offloaded in a foreign port in between. The problem is that the cargo (oil) would be picked up in US waters and delivered to US ports.

  4. Oil is flowing from a blown-out well in the Gulf of Mexico almost twice as fast – at minimum – as has been estimated

    YA “estimate”. Serious question: With all due respect, why is it so difficult (apparently) to obtain even an definitive order of magnitude?

    1. I suppose for the same reason it is so difficult to write “an” proper sentence — not enough coffee!

    2. Off by a factor of 2 =/= off by an order of magnitude (i.e. by a factor of 10)

  5. “Massive federal drug sweep: 2,200 arrested, 72.1 tons of illicit drugs seized.”

    How is that whole “Libraltarian” thing working out for you guys?

    That one never gets old. It is like Chimps in suits.

    1. “Massive federal drug sweep: 2,200 arrested, 72.1 tons of illicit drugs seized.”

      Good to see that drug free nirvana has arrived. /sarcasm

      1. “Light at the end of the tunnel”
        “Victory in sight”
        “Home by Christmas”

        1. Peace in our time!

        2. “Home by Christmas” “I promise I’ll pull out”

          1. “The war to end all wars” – and the WoD started about the same time that phrase was coined.

    2. Um, who here ever did anything but mock the concept of “libraltarian”? I dont remember anyone jumping on that bandwagon.

      1. It was more directed at the Reason staff, some of whom thought it was a great idea, than the commentators on this board.

        1. But John, only ONE current reason staffer voted for Obama, as Welch consistently points out. That means it’s okay. Even though several recurring columnists and contributors to reason voted for Obama.

  6. Massive federal drug sweep: 2,200 arrested, 72.1 tons of illicit drugs seized.

    Sigh…this is just going to encourage them.

    I also like how Holder expressed “sincere regrets” about the 14 year old who was gunned down. “Mr. and Mrs. Sanchez – our bad! Sorry!” Stop the “war” and this never happens again, Eric.

    1. The kid was a known smuggler.

      1. If you legalize drugs and immigration, you don’t have 14 year old smugglers anymore.

        1. If you legalize drugs and immigration murder and gang-banging, you don’t have 14 year old smugglers murderous gang-bangers anymore.

          What a dumbass.

          1. Consensual private trade vs. initiation of violence and non-consensual taking of human life! Gotcha!

      2. A “known smuggler”? Well, then by all means, kill the little prick!

        1. Libertarians love their guns but woe unto anyone that uses one to protect themselves. The kid was a stupid criminal. Stupid criminals don’t live long.

  7. The officials acknowledge that even if they found the website founder, Julian Assange, it is not clear what they could do to block publication of the cables on Wikileaks, which is nominally based on a server in Sweden and bills itself as a champion of whistleblowers.

    Well, just illegally kidnap him out of whatever country he’s in and then ignore that country’s demand that we extradite the kidnappers. And then hold them in a secret prison in some third country, and lie about it when asked.

    Like we do any other time we want someone and have no legal means available to get them.

    Seriously, do I have to do all the thinking around here?

    1. That worked for internet gamblers.

      1. Do you mean the CEOs of Internet gambling sites?

        1. Yes. Didn’t they basically kidnap one from the UK?

          1. Yes. He was flying from the caribbean to the UK, and had the misfortune to stop over in New Orleans, where he was essentially kidnapped by Fed goons.

            1. “Essentially” is the new “borderline”, apparently.

              Arresting someone on US soil for crimes involving acts in US jurisdiction is not kidnapping, essentially or otherwise.

              1. Running a website in a foreign country hardly qualifies as an act in US jurisdiction, Tulpa, no matter what retarded nonsense Congress may say.

              2. We currently have CIA agents under indictment in Italy for kidnapping, whom we refuse to extradite.

                And BTW, asserting US jurisdiction over acts taken overseas, that are legal in the country where they are undertaken, is monstrously unjust. Whether it’s kidnapping or not.

                1. I want to go on record that I support justness and oppose unjustness. I also support fairness.

              3. Arresting someone on US soil for crimes involving acts in US jurisdiction is not kidnapping, essentially or otherwise.

                How very Lonewacko of you. If an American owner of a porn site that was visited by Arabs in Saudi Arabia was arrested while catching a connecting flight in Riyadh, and was subsequently sentenced to death, you’d be okay with this? You wouldn’t consider it a gross violation of human rights by a nation of puritanical theocratic sociopaths?

                You are a damn statist, Tulpa.

    2. I like the way you think, Fluffy. I’d say “stop giving them ideas”, but….:)

    3. “Predator spotted over Sweden”

      1. I suppose I shouldn’t be so pessimistic on a Friday, but if the government really did that I suspect most Americans would be just fine with it.

        The Left wouldn’t complain; The Great Barack is prez now, criticizing him is Teh Racist. And it’s Bush’s fault, anyway.

        The Right would cheer; another victory in the War on Terra! If the government hadn’t done this, the Mooslims would kill us! We’d all DIE DIE DIE!

    4. Fluffy, wouldn’t that be rendition?

    5. I like the use of ‘nominally’ there.

    6. Manning was turned in to the Pentagon by a former computer hacker based in California, Adrian Lamo, after Manning approached Lamo for counsel. Manning is believed to have contacted Lamo after reading a recent profile of him in Wired.

      BOOO
      FILTH
      RUBBISH
      BOOO

      1. I don’t know, anyone who’s dumb enough to ask a reporter for advice deserves what he gets.

        1. Lamo isn’t a reporter, he’s an ex-computer hacker

  8. Meet the green who doubts ‘The Science’
    The author of Chill explains why he’s sceptical about manmade global warming ? and why greens are so intolerant.

    1. There is no warming. I think it was invented by the liberals in order to keep Bush from fighting for our rights in Iraq.

  9. Im starting to wonder if they will ever get a handle on it. Doubtful

    Lou
    http://www.anon-posting.at.tc

    1. It’s okay Anon-bot, I’m sure Skynet will fix it when they take over.

      1. You can’t reason with it, it’s not human.

        1. I don’t know about that, Hal was very reasonably so long as you did what Hal wanted you to do.

          1. HAL was a gubmint computer.

            1. Wasn’t he built in a public school?

    1. How far away are her parents from someone who can slap the stupid out of them for letting her do this?

      1. I salute the little girl for being awesome, but yes: parenting FAIL.

        1. Big time. The parents keep saying things like “Life is dangerous”, like that makes allowing a minor to engage in high-risk behaviors okay. Why not play Russian Roulette saying the same thing?

          1. Meh, she’s 16.

            She either knows how to sail or she doesn’t. If she knows how to sail, 16 or 18 makes little difference. It’s not like she’s 11 or something.

            1. I think stunts like this are stupid and pointless. It is one thing to get killed by accident or get killed defending something or someone you love. But, to get killed trying to do something like this is really a waste of a life. I used to think extreme mountaineering and the like were fabulous. But then I got older and actually had some experience with death and I lost my respect for it. I see your point about sixteen being pretty close to 18. But, two years is a lot at that age. And as a parent I would never condone this stuff. Once she was an adult and over 18, I would wish her well. But before that, I would never want it on my conscience if something happened to her.

              1. John has it here – it’s just a stunt. Getting into a good program at a good college is likely far more important.

                1. To me, riding a skateboard down the handrail of a long staircase is a stunt. Jumping a canyon on a rocket-cycle for TV is a stunt.

                  A five month solo journey is a different beast altogether. Anyone accomplishing such a feat will learn far more about themselves, the world and life than they would in 4 years of college.

                  Her undertaking may seem stupid and pointless to you and John, but I think that exploration and pushing one’s limits are basic human urges.

                  Few are ballsy (and stupid, if you must) enough to risk their lives for such pursuits, and their stories are always lapped up by the more timid public. We need adventurers like young Abbey to remind us that there’s more to life than eking out the next 401k contribution.

                2. Right. Because learning to fit in to corporate America is more important than having one-of-a-kind life experiences.

                  Which do you think will go over better on this girl’s resume: a degree or, “circumnavigated the globe on a sailboat, solo.”

                  1. Obviously a degree. I’m not going to hire someone to run an HPLC, or analyse pharma companies, or litigate because they did some solo sailing when they were a teen.

                3. Riiiight. And all the expeditions to be the first person to go somewhere are just stunts. You know, like that moon landing silliness.

                  What I see is a highly-motivated, competent individual testing herself.

                  I suspect that once she completes this that she’ll have her pick of good colleges.

                  When did you people lose your balls?

                  1. Yeah, ’cause she’s the first person to sail there …

                    It’s not like she’s established a lucrative mining colony in africa or something.

            2. +1 Fluffy. Aren’t we always decrying the creeping nanny-ism of modern child rearing? 16 or 18 makes little difference.

          2. Like driving to the prom?

            I refuse to judge the parenting here. I don’t know the youngster, have no idea how level headed and responsible she is, and am completely clueless how much she desired and prepared for this.

            Kinda like everybody else opining on the young lady’s journey.

            I do think the family should be billed for the costs of the rescue effort if they asked for help.

            1. That nubile girl will is looking forward to life on a boat full of Pakistani fisherman I am sure.

            2. It’s pretty easy to judge the parenting here – grade F

          3. No way, no how, are my kids doing anything like that before they’re independent of me and my wife. That’s bad parenting.

            Anyone doing something like this should have real experience or a death wish, not be some kid. Knowing how to sail around the coast and sailing in the open sea are two entirely different things. As it was, she failed and had to be rescued. Bad parents.

            1. But would an adult have been less likely to fail in the same situation? I don’t believe so. Anyone in those seas in such a craft would have been very likely to suffer the same problems.

              1. If the accomplishment was the goal, then why not have a trial run with a crew first then allow her to go solo? That would be resonable parenting.

            2. Considering she’s sailing around the world by herself, I’d say she’s pretty damned independent of her parents. Lay off.

              I would say that it’s friggin’ insane for anyone of any age to try sailing around the world alone. But it’s her decision as far as I’m concerned.

            3. No way, no how, are my kids doing anything like that before they’re independent of me and my wife. That’s bad parenting.

              Fine with me. And same with my kids. But, you and I don’t know the parents or the kid in question. I’m not about to judge their parenting skills — this is not the slam-dunk parenting fail you would make it out to be.

          4. I don’t think you should be allowed to impose your sense of what is an acceptable risk in the pursuit of a non-boring life upon others, ProL.

            We’re not all wired the same. An acceptable level of risk for me would be a hellishly boring existence for a few people out there.

      2. HEY! It’s cool when girls do kick-ass things like sailing around the world solo. I wish I was as brave as her.

    2. This girl totally blew it by not getting chased by pirates.

      That would have been a MUCH bigger story and probably gotten her a massive book and movie deal: “Blonde Sailor Girl Chased By Dark-Skinned African Pirates”.

      Mere weather trouble isn’t going to get her anything.

      1. Intriguing…

      2. It would be a much BIGGER story if they rescue her and the boat is stuffed with Heroin.

        1. She’s already the heroine.

          1. Curse your clever wordplay! (shakes fist)

      3. Sounds like an *awesome* plot for a porn movie… Guys love young blondes, girls love pirates.

        1. Girls love black guys too.

    3. How long before these “youngest adventurer” thingies are outlawed?

      For the children.

      1. They’ve already done this with young aviators. There were kids as young as 12 flying. Then one of them crashed, and, in a move that will massively shock everyone here, legislation was introduced to require a minimum flying age.

        To be fair though, I have to say there is some sense to that.

        1. How about youngest deep sea oil driller?

          1. Didn’t Liv Tyler play her?

            1. She was just typical eye candy, she didn’t get to do any “man’s” work. Way to strike a blow for the sisterhood, Liv.

              1. It would have been a better film if Bruce Willis had blown off Ben Affleck’s head in act 1.

                1. It would have been a better film if Bruce Willis had blown off the director’s head prior to filming.

        2. Since planes can hurt other people when they crash, I think that is a pretty reasonable idea.

        3. Having been a kid and having four of them, I can say with some authority that it is madness, by and large, to allow sixteen-year old kids to drive cars on the roads, let alone fly.

          1. Yeah, I should have probably stated more strongly that it was not a bad idea in and of itself.

            What I find irritating is “legislation by anecdote”.

          2. I’ve been front-seat parenting my 15 year old daughter as she drives. She’s pretty good at it. Yes, some — nay, many — 16 year olds shouldn’t be allowed such responsibility. But some are ready for it.

      2. Well, the Netherlands prevented 14 year old Laura Dekker from attempting a circumnavigation last year. The govt. placed her under “state care” for two months.

        I’d say it’s only a matter of time before somebody in the US latches on to the idea.

        1. Well, it should be the parents’ (and the kid’s) decision. I suppose something just insane could justify limited government involvement, but that’s the exception, not the rule.

        2. Laura is much safer on the couch playing MMORPG.

      3. I don’t see how they can outlaw it when it takes place thousands of miles from US jurisdiction.

        1. If the planning took place on US soil, or if there were emails or web sites that resided on computers that are on US soil, then obviously she should be arrested. For her own protection. Any other children should probably be placed in “state care” as well. And the parents re-educated in appropriate care and feeding of children.

          1. In government “re-education” camps, natch.

            Not sure if you were being sarcastic there, matth. Wasn’t over-the-top enough to be clear.

            1. OK, from the post below, I gather that was meant to be delightfully sarcastic.

    4. (1) Its none of my business, or the Almighty State’s (screw you, Holland), if some 16 year old kid decides to sail around the world and his/her parents let them.

      (2) If asked for my opinion, I’ve got no problem with it in principle. I thought the kid who said he’d rather die doing what he loved than live a life of regrets (or something like that) had a perfectly valid point.

      (3) If they rushed into this to the “Youngest EVAR! WOOT!!” title, they are idiots.

      1. “If asked for my opinion, I’ve got no problem with it in principle. I thought the kid who said he’d rather die doing what he loved than live a life of regrets (or something like that) had a perfectly valid point.”

        No he doesn’t. He is a stupid kid who has no idea what death actually is. Let him grow up a bit and say that.

        1. Tell me John. What actually is death?

          1. It is hard to put into words. But suffice it to say, it really sucks. And only someone who thinks it won’t really happen to them would ever say something like “I would rather die doing something I love than live a life of regrets”. Yeah, they say that, until it comes time to live up to that. And then not so much.

            1. “rather die doing what he loved than live a life of regrets”

              Christ, that’s straight out of Point Break.

            2. Bullshit. Just because you’re an old man afraid of dying, don’t project your senescent fears onto the rest of us.

              Enjoy every sandwich, as the man said.

        2. Yeah, it’s pretty hard to take seriously a statement like that from a 16 year old kid. This is a clear case of parental responsibility and wisdom being required!

          1. Yes, because a 16-year-old kid couldn’t possibly understand the idea of death. You spit on the memory of child and young adult soldiers.

        3. I’m 32 and I’d much rather die doing something I enjoy doing than living the rest of my life having never gotten the chance. I’m in the Army and I ride a motorcycle, and I’ve been doing both since I was 17. I have no doubt one or the other will kill me. Sure, it’s not “sailing alone across the Indian Ocean in winter”, but I know I’ve done things on two wheels which were more likely to get me killed than what this girl was doing in her sail boat.

        4. John,

          I’d explore the point with you, but for some reason you give off the strong vibe of a person to whom the only age at which people can be trusted to make responsible decisions is whatever age you are at the time.

          Do you know how many men Alexander had personally killed by the time he was 16?

          I actually think most people need to grow down and not up.

          1. “I’d explore the point with you, but”

            Way to sound like a libertarian douche, bro.

            1. I have a lot of practice.

          2. That is not true at all. You have to draw a line somewhere, and 18 seems rational. You will never hear me saying “how dare they let that 19 year old do X”. I think her parents were dumb to let her do something like this. It accomplishes nothing. It just risks her life for publicity.

            It is not that I think that 16 year olds should be treated like 10 year olds. And it is not that I have a problem with taking risks. I don’t and do myself. But this is so extreme that it becomes a difference in quality rather than quantity. We are not talking about her going to college two years early, or drinking beer or driving a car cross country.

            1. OK, that’s fair.

              You will never hear me saying “how dare they let that 19 year old do X”.

              This disclaimer pretty much nails it down.

            2. You have to draw a line somewhere, and 18 seems rational.

              It may seem rational, but it’s really arbitrary. After all, why not 25?

              1. You have to draw a line somewhere, and 18 seems rational.

                It may seem rational, but it’s really arbitrary. After all, why not 25?

                Or the age of “never”? Because the government owns us, and has to make sure its tax-producing assets aren’t damaged and unable to continue producing by taking sub-optimal risks according to the specs generated the Committee On Optimizing Production.

                Can’t let the proles damage themselves, yeah?

            3. You don’t have to draw a line anywhere. We only have specific ages of majority when we’re talking about the blunt instrument of the law, which has to be specific to ensure fair application.

              Her parents are far more qualified to judge whether she’s mature and skillfull enough to survive this journey than you or I or anyone else.

              1. Amen. Isn’t that what parents do? We’re free to criticize their parenting, but they should be free to tell us to fuck off.

                My life isn’t impacted one way or another by whether she succeeds or fails, lives or dies. The most interested participants in this discussion are the parents. If they’re willing to let her go who are we to prohibit it?

            4. She’s old enough to be a mother in SugarFree land. She should be able to take a sailing trip if she wants.

          3. I actually think most people need to grow down and not up.

            Whole lotta truth there.

        5. Would you people kindly get off of John and db’s lawns? If they see another frisbee, they are keeping it.

    5. Shoe City is her sponsor. I know where I’m shopping now.

    1. PREZ: I don’t get it, all this so we score higher on the state tests? If we’re teaching the kids the test questions, what is it assessing in them?

      TEACHER: Nothing, it assesses us. The test scores go up, they can say the schools are improving. The scores stay down, they can’t.

      PREZ: Juking the stats.

      TEACHER: Excuse me?

      PREZ: Making robberies into larcenies, making rapes disappear. You juke the stats, and major become colonels. I’ve been here before.

      TEACHER: Wherever you go, there you are.

    2. Nuthin’ to see here. Moves along, or your kneecaps is gunna be hurt.

    3. George Washington Elementary School. Heh.

      I don’t believe the “father I cannot tell a lie” myth, but it adds deliciousness to the story.

    1. When Buffett confessed he had not read the “1500-page bills,” Thomas told him no one had, so his admission was “a denial that’s okay.”

      In November they’ll read the election results.

  10. Democrats insist she’s (Sharron Angle) hiding from some of her positions that will undoubtedly alienate middle-of-the-road voters.

    What an innovative campaign strategy! Pander to the extremists in the primary and run to the center for the general election. I’m amazed nobody has ever thought of that before now.

    1. I wonder if anyone has ever thought of painting their opponent as an extremist out of the “mainstream” whatever that is? That is a pretty innovative strategy to.

      1. Especially using their opponents previous statements against them. They are breaking new ground in electioneering strategy with this race.

        1. You never know what these politicians will think of next.

    2. I’m sure Harry Reid is really fronting his strong-arm tactics to get that health care reform bill through. Way to not hide from your own slime-covered positions, Harry.

  11. A coordinated series of law enforcement raids across 16 states this week resulted in the arrests of 429 people accused of participating in smuggling and transportation networks for Mexican drug cartels, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. announced Thursday.

    When the price of cocaine or heroin doubles I’ll be impressed. After 40 years of the War on Drugs the Law of Supply and Demand I find such an outcome unlikely.

    1. Where have I heard a story like this before?

      Oh yeah, about 10 years ago

      Officials love that “dealt a major blow” language.

  12. the site said that allegations that “we have been sent 260,000 classified U.S. embassy cables are, as far as we can tell, incorrect.”

    Wikileaks still denying.

    1. Espionage used to be the realm of governments. Has the internet and cheap computing power privatized intelligence too?

      1. Eventually, putting bureaucrats out of their jobs is good for business. But the transition’s real messy as they fight it.

      2. Check out Rainbow’s End by Vernor Vinge.

  13. Pentagon investigators are trying to determine the whereabouts of the Australian-born founder of the secretive website Wikileaks for fear that he may be about to publish a huge cache of classified State Department cables that, if made public, could do serious damage to national security, government officials tell The Daily Beast.

    Since the war in Iraq has never had anything to do with national security and the war in Aghanistan no longer does, I find the government’s claim problematic. The cable’s may be embarrassing as hell (when exposed to the light of day, propping up corrupt illegitimate rulers usually is) bit that is probably the extent of the damage.

    1. National security = information that would be embarrassing or get us in legal trouble if it got out.

      1. Back shortly after the Nixon administration, progressives rediscovered for a short time why the president shouldn’t have unlimited power. During that time, a reporter named David Wise wrote a book called The Politics of Lying. While the specifics are totally outdated now, the principles it discusses are still as valid as ever. The section on secrecy and the abuse of official “secrets” is excellent.

      2. Hmm. Perhaps I shouldn’t have been so quick to call Wise a progressive, and I may have been mistaken about him being a reporter. The American Police State certainly sounds like an interesting book, although again, the specifics are bound to be way out of date.

      3. Hmm. If it was information embarrassing to W. Bush, or solely W. Bush (shithead) they probably wouldn’t be scrambling. Wonder if they got somethin on BO?

        1. Actually, presidents will protect other presidents on principle. Failure to do that could mean bad precedent when someone wants access to the current president’s secrets.

          1. Rotten feedback loop.

            1. The whole system has become just that. Which is why Republicans continue welfare programs, Democrats continue wars, and everyone works to expand the power of the state.

              1. You hear a lot about the potential to develop Quantum computers. One of the sci-fi attributes of the things is the ability to crack ANY form of cipher.

                Forget ASSAULT WEAPONS, if such tech ever comes to pass there will be bipartisan support to ban them from the plebes.

                1. Fortunately, a law banning something doesn’t mean people won’t have it, only that the government has a pretext to mess them up if it finds out. And as government depends less and less on pretext, the less any sort of ban matters.

  14. I can’t believe no one commented on the drug network sweep being named Project Deliverance. No “squeal like a pig”, nothing.

    1. You just did.

  15. The worthless, incompetent jackasses in our civilian government can’t even run Arlington National Cemetery without fucking things up. Records are being improperly kept and graves are mislabeled!

    Appalling doesn’t even begin to describe this in my mind. Put a damn four star general, Marine commandant, or someone who actually gives a crap in charge of this so that our deceased servicemen can get the respect that they deserve.

  16. shh! The World Cup is starting

    1. Yeah, I hear that the Mexican strategy is to sneak across the goal line.

    2. You and four other Americans give a rat’s ass.

      1. I’m one of them. It’s on in my office. Mexico is going to win, by the way.

        1. Mexico you say?

          1. Yes. They’re going to beat the home team.

            1. Time will tell, in any event there’s not going to be a Morgan Freeman Academy Award winning film in it.

            2. SA up 1-0 at 54 minutes.

              1. INVICTUS II : Hasta La Vista Baby.

              2. Doh. Mexico got the equalizer.

                1. Oh, well, a draw it is. I suppose home turf counts for something.

            3. Who is the home team exactly?

              1. South Africa.

  17. it is madness, by and large, to allow sixteen-year old kids to drive cars on the roads, let alone fly.

    How, then, will we rid ourselves of the weak and foolhardy?

    1. That is what a person’s 20s are for.

      1. Lindsey Lohan Syndrome.

    2. Graduate humanities studies.

    3. I wrote Graduate humanities studies. and it got caught by the spam filter. Squirrel is ironic and funny today.

      1. Maybe the spam filter is actually a 25 yo person with a worthless Humanities MA.

        1. I think Anon Bot is the spam filter.

  18. http://m.yahoo.com/w/yfinance/…..p;.lang=en

    sales. They are not positive.

    1. I think this is more interesting. Could Japan finally be coming to its senses?

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/10290933.stm

      Note the part at the bottom where Geithner is recommending against cutting back on spending even though Japan’s debt 200% of GDP? It’s almost Krugmanesque.

      1. Paul Krugman has a little cameo (he only has like two short lines) in Get Him to the Greek, which I found amusing.

        “You’re Paul Krugman, right? My dad loves your shit.”

  19. Federal officials say Gulf oil spill may be twice as large as previously estimated.

    That’s racist!

  20. You hear a lot about the potential to develop Quantum computers. One of the sci-fi attributes of the things is the ability to crack ANY form of cipher.

    That’s funny, I thought it was quantum encryption that was unbreakable. Regardless, your point:

    if such tech ever comes to pass there will be bipartisan support to ban them from the plebes.

    stands.

    1. I believe there have been several studies where quantum entangled communication has been read by third parties without being detected by the sender or intended recipient.

  21. http://www.foxnews.com/world/2…..sh-family/

    I am not exactly the most pro-Afghanistan war person in the room, but you know what? Fuck it. Exterminate the brutes.

    1. I’d say we have about as much chance of exterminating them as we do getting rid of the Mafia in Sicily.

      1. They actually did wipe out the mafia in Sicily. It is not much of anything anymore.

        1. Well, so much for that analogy.

    2. I can respect the “we will never make it anything other than a shithole so lets leave and be done with it” position about the war. But, anyone who claims that the Taliban is fighting a “war of liberation” against “western imperialism” is just pathetic.

    3. While yeah, I can go along with that sentiment, the reality is that the US military would wipe out a whole lot of other 7 year olds, not to mention entire families, prosecuting that action.

      If we could take up arms against a tyrannical govt over 200 years ago and win, the Afghan people can manage the same.

      1. Right, because the world hasn’t changed at all since 1776.

        1. In case you missed it Tulpa, that was a tip o’ the hat to self-determination.

    4. Terrible. Hey, didn’t we assassinate Al Qaeda number 3 along with his entire family, including small grandchildren, just a week ago? I’m not saying that evil should go unpunished, only that usually evil people are just out and out murdered by other evil people, without much regard for justice.

  22. How odd; that “Huuuuuge Drug Bust” story is in the Politics section of the NYT. Could this be indicative of some larger story?

  23. Clueless Lefty Journalism, Part MCCVII

    CRIER: That’s right. That’s right. I think it’s quite interesting that the whole CEO movement out there in California. Because, here we are with all the Wall Street consternation and, yet, they’re touting their credentials as major CEOs as qualifications.

    STEPHANOPOULOS: Meg Whitman head of Ebay. Carly Fiorini ran Hewitt Packard. There’s some controversy there.

    CRIER: And, here, with BP, with Wall Street, is that what the American voter wants, a CEO running?

    GMA, 6/10

    1. Given that the alternative is career politicians, why, yes, Jon, that is exactly what America prefers.

      For Crissakes, in South Carolina the random unemployed guy pasted the political lifer in the primary.

      1. This open hate for all things business is going to really hurt the media and the left. We are a commercial empire, by and large, filled with a large percentage of citizens who have their own investments, property, and, at one time or another, their own businesses.

        1. Almost 50 years ago Ayn Rand gave a lecture at The Ford Hall Forum titled America’s Persecuted Minority: Big Business. It has only gotten worse, the degree of which would shock even Rand.

          If a small group of men were always regarded as guilty, in any clash with any other group, regardless of the issues or circumstances involved, would you call it persecution? If this group were always made to pay for the sins, errors, or failures of any other group, would you call that persecution? If this group had to live under a silent reign of terror, under special laws, from which all other people were immune, laws which the accused could not grasp or define in advance and which the accuser could interpret in any way he pleased?would you call that persecution? If this group were penalized, not for its faults, but for its virtues, not for its incompetence, but for its ability, not for its failures, but for its achievements, and the greater the achievement, the greater the penalty?would you call that persecution?…That group is the American businessmen.

  24. Through reading the news, you have probably already been saturated with stupid this week, but feast your mind on this. There is a whole lot of stupid here.

    From my local fish wrap:

    http://www.news-record.com/con…..rve_praise

    Take it from here, Larry!

    George Will’s June 3 column is disturbing and infuriating. In “Welfare state knows no limits,” he takes his usual stance in defense of the ruling class whom he never hesitates to drop down and worship, but with a twist.

    He has found a way to demonize progressives. He claims Woodrow Wilson perverted James Madison’s noble ideals with his progressivism. Wilson was in no sense a progressive. He was a pathetic old racist and a warmonger.

    Will feels that progressive ideas disrespect the Founding Fathers. This implies that he feels the 230-year-old ideas of these wealthy white men were perfect and carved in stone, never to be improved upon.

    A visit to the Jefferson Memorial proves Will’s notion is naive and howlingly funny. Carved into the memorial wall is Jefferson’s own thought on the matter. He says forcing people to continue in the ways that worked for their ancestors when circumstances change radically is like compelling a grown man to wear the coat that fit him as a toddler.

    This idea of getting working-class people to hate progressive ideas is simply insane. Look at what we have progressed from. Humans once performed human sacrifices. They were cannibals. They were slaves. They used child labor in the most brutal jobs. They took no safety precautions for miners who dug coal. They lynched black boys for whistling at white women. They would not allow women to vote.

    All of these things were overcome by brave progressive protesters who organized and spoke truth to power. It was Will’s heroes, the wealthy, secure and powerful, who clung like death to these traditions.

    In 2007, it was suggested that all the oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico be equipped with switches that could completely shut down oil flow at the first sign of a leak. Norway’s state-owned rigs had them.

    Will sneered at this socialism and said the switches, at $500,000 each, were “too costly.” They seem like a bargain today.

    1. “This idea of getting working-class people to hate progressive ideas is simply insane. Look at what we have progressed from. Humans once performed human sacrifices. They were cannibals. They were slaves. They used child labor in the most brutal jobs. They took no safety precautions for miners who dug coal. They lynched black boys for whistling at white women. They would not allow women to vote.”

      And they say Obama hasn’t accomplished much!

    2. Will sneered at this socialism and said the switches, at $500,000 each, were “too costly.” They seem like a bargain today.

      [citation needed]

    3. [Woodrow Wilson] was a pathetic old racist and a warmonger.

      In other words, Wilson was a progressive.

    4. You’re suggesting that “progressives” didn’t stop the practice of human sacrifice with consciousness raising exercises and organized protests? That’s just ignorant.

      1. My bad. One thing he can certainly credit the progressives is that first class education on display, or else he might get the impression slavery became verboten due a group of religious fundamentalist called the abolitionist.

        1. Note: not all Abolitionist were fundies, obviously, some were even atheist and rationalist, however it would not have likely had made a dint as a social movement without the religious fervor that backed it.

  25. Doesn’t Social Services take kids from white trash parents for a lot less endangerment than sailing around the world solo? If she had been fat and homely and riding an ATV without a helmet, people would want her parents in jail. But since she is rich and cute, everything is just fine.

    1. Solution: publicly funded mandatory plastic surgery (along with the usual wealth redistribution) to ensure that everyone is rich and cute a level playing field.

      Thanks for the suggestion, John!

    2. You know what?

      John is probably right here.

      But there’s a part of my mind that says: So what?

      If I see people who are competent enough at life to be successful, and their daughter is a reasonably competent teenager who demonstrates proficiency at sailing, I will probably err on the side of assuming they know what they’re doing.

      If you’re some toothless fat trailer park loser, I might not.

      “Endangerment” is a judgment call and part of that judgment has to be judging the capacities of the people involved. It’s probably “endangerment” to let your kid with Down’s Syndrome use a riding mower to mow the lawn. But it’s not “endangerment” to let your kid do the same thing if he’s Richie Cunningham.

      1. “If I see people who are competent enough at life to be successful, and their daughter is a reasonably competent teenager who demonstrates proficiency at sailing, I will probably err on the side of assuming they know what they’re doing.

        If you’re some toothless fat trailer park loser, I might not.”

        I live in a neighborhood full of rich successful parents and their little darlings, I think I would trust the trailer trash. And I am not kidding. Rich people and their children usually live in a different reality where they think nothing can ever go wrong or hurt them. Sadly, things like the Indian Ocean really don’t care much about who they are or how special they are.

  26. Doesn’t Social Services take kids from white trash parents for a lot less endangerment than sailing around the world solo?

    Do they prosecute parents for sending their trashy little party monster daughters to Caribbean islands to whoop it up with the local serial killer?

    1. No, and when a mother leaves her 6-year-old to entertain himself in the toy department of Sears, while she goes of to shop, her husband gets to become a TV star.

  27. The age of maturity is more of a social than a biological construct based on the expectations of a given culture at a give time.

    My case in point Kit Carson:

    At age 14, Kit was apprenticed to a saddlemaker (Workman’s Saddleshop) in the settlement of Franklin, Missouri. Franklin was situated at the eastern end of the Santa Fe Trail, which had opened two years earlier. Many of the clientele at the saddleshop were trappers and traders, from whom Kit heard stirring tales of the Far West. Carson is reported to have found work in the saddle shop suffocating: he once stated “the business did not suit me, and I concluded to leave”. His master may have agreed with his leaving since he offered the odd amount of 1 cent for his return and waited a month to post the notice in the local newspaper.

    At sixteen, Carson secretly signed on with a large merchant caravan heading to Santa Fe. His job was to tend the horses, mules, and oxen. During the winter of 1826-1827 he stayed with Matthew Kinkead, a trapper and explorer, in Taos, New Mexico, then known as the capital of the fur trade in the Southwest. Kinkead had been a friend of Carson’s father in Missouri, and he taught Carson the skills of a trapper. Carson also began learning the necessary languages. Eventually he became fluent in Spanish, Navajo, Apache, Cheyenne, Arapaho, Paiute, Shoshone, and Ute.[5]

    At that age he was doing things far more dangerous than what this lass is doing.

    Expectations are different today also to some extent due to prosperity, however, this has also had the extremely negative social effect of making a large chunk of the population useless until after the age of twenty two inhabiting a state of arrested adolescence. That is what happens when you take risk and choice out of the equation.

    1. You wildly underestimate how dangerous the sea is. If you are alone at sea and have an accident or have a rogue wave hit your boat, you are probably going to die no matter how prepared you are and how good of a sailor you are. Don’t underestimate the danger of being alone. Carson stayed with an experienced trapper while in the wilderness. He wasn’t there alone. What this girl was doing was much more dangerous.

      1. Even before he became a tenderfoot scout shortly after, he risked being skinned alive by being a part of that community. I suppose the lass risks butt stuff from pirates but don’t dismiss the dangers of the old West where married couples at the ripe age of fourteen and fifteen were homesteaders.

    2. A quick googling of “Mormon handcart pioneers” would put into perspective the notion of acceptable risks for 16 year olds.

  28. here we are with all the Wall Street consternation and, yet, they’re touting their credentials as major CEOs as qualifications.

    There are plenty of reasons to dislike both of those people, but experience making decisions based on actual quantifiable results ain’t one of them.

  29. “Endangerment” is a judgment call and part of that judgment has to be judging the capacities of the people involved. It’s probably “endangerment” to let your kid with Down’s Syndrome use a riding mower to mow the lawn. But it’s not “endangerment” to let your kid do the same thing if he’s Richie Cunningham.

    Nonsense!

    If an endeavor is too difficult and dangerous for *somebody* it is plainly too difficult and dangerous for *anybody*.

  30. Doesn’t Social Services take kids from white trash parents for a lot less endangerment than sailing around the world solo?

    There is a difference in kind between allowing your kid to engage in dangerous activities (sailing, rock climbing, dare I say shooting, playing high school football?) and either affirmatively abusing your kid (beatings, molestation) or endangerment by daily neglect.

    If we decide we are going to start seizing children for the former, you’d better be prepared to see perfectly good families broken up and a massive bureaucracy devoted to micromanaging all children’s activities.

    1. RC, we both live in Texas. Don’t we have all that already? Or did you miss the FLDS nonsense two years ago?

      1. Naw, T. The FLDS nonsense was just down the road from my house.

        It took me about 15 minutes (really) to figure out it was illegal. I expect it took the Texas Supreme Court only a little longer.

        Besides, that mass seizure wasn’t based on dangerous activities. It was based on either (1) weird religious ideas or (2) sex with 14 year old girls.

    2. RC,

      You completely miss the point. My point was not to comment on child endangerment laws. My point was to comment on society’s hypocrisy about this subject.

    3. Right, because all social services ONLY take the kid if there’s absolute, definitive ABUSE happening. Never for any other reason.

      hahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahaha

    4. Of course, if you see progressive wage a war on ordinary people’s families, they might encounter a little primal force know as murderous, evolutionarily sanctioned rage. But hey, go ahead and piss off a whole continent’s worth of mama bears.

  31. Now that Carly Fiorina has shown herself for the small minded unfit for public service person that she is with this comment on Barbara Boxer’s hair she should apologize and step down as the Republican candidate. Her questioning of the choices another woman makes makes her an intolerant bigot. Obviously, she was hoping that this ‘off mike moment’ would get out to the public because behind it is an insinuation of Boxer’s sexual identity. Carly Fiorina hopes to capitalize on the intolerance displayed in the vote against gay marriage with this new version of a ‘Southern Strategy.’

    Republicans are masters of putting subliminal hate speech in the form of seemingly innocous remarks. It is nothing short of evil on display and it needs to be exposed to the light of day.

    1. I guess it was only Republicans who are commenting on Sarah Palin’s alleged boob job, put a picture of her in a running suit on the cover of Newsweek, and spent most of August of 2008 debating her bangs.

      1. That was meant to be parody of the insane reaction on display over Carly’s remark. I tried to exaggerate to make the intent obvious, but, man, it is impossible to out crazy the left.

        1. The left is so bad, they really are beyond trolling.

          1. I normally never out myself when I do things like that even on the rare occasions someone else has taken credit for something I did, but this time, it seemed unfair.

            All it takes to spoof the left is to decide what rhetorical step needs to be placed next for the maximum degree of intellectual dishonesty, and the thing writes itself.

        2. I considered it might be trolling, but it was really a knife-edge thing. Lefties are very difficult to reductio ad absurdum because they’re already at absurdum.

    2. Personally, I found it hysterical. But then, I enjoy little more than sitting around with a drink & the wife on a balcony and mocking the world as it passes by.

  32. Republicans are masters of putting subliminal hate speech in the form of seemingly innocous remarks. It is nothing short of evil on display and it needs to be exposed to the light of day.

    “It’s one of those whistles only dogs Progressives can hear. Cool, huh?”

  33. Wow. Completely irrelevant but I just found the craziest religious right article on the internet. I have to share this with somebody. Please read. You will not regret it.

    http://action.afa.net/Blogs/BlogPost.aspx?id=2147495382

  34. Obviously, she was hoping that this ‘off mike moment’ would get out to the public because behind it is an insinuation of Boxer’s sexual identity.

    Because nothing will sink a politician in California faster than being a lesbian, right, Clarice?

    Jeebus, if Boxer declared she was a lesbian, she’d probably pick up at least 5 points in the polls.

  35. where her unyielding style made her unpopular with her colleagues and her conservative views ensured she was the lone “no” vote on legislation 38 times between 1999 and 2005

    I worked for a state Senator who could run up more lone “no” votes than that in a single day.

    Course, when you’re outnumbered 23-2, that’s easier to do than when things are closer to even.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.