Reason Morning Links: Cocktail Copyrights, Another Round of Mideast Peace Talks, This Hurricane's Name Is Earl

|

NEXT: Become ACLU-Nevada Exec. Dir. & Fight For The Rights of Gun Owners, Elvis Impersonators

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. Report: Economy drives sharp drop in illegal immigration.

    Finally an immigration strategy that works!

    1. Yeah, who needs a fence? All we needed to do was wreck our economy!

      1. The irony here is just astounding.

        1. And think about it. If no one has a job, we don’t have to worry about jobs moving overseas anymore.

          1. Does this mean Bush & Obama out-Tancredoed Tom Tancredo?

            1. Maybe so. I guess we know Barny Frank and Chris Dodd’s secret nativitst plan now.

          2. jobs moving overseas

            Get with it, John. The correct lingo is “shipping” jobs overseas.

          3. Speaking of moving jobs overseas, I expect to be so busy this month that I placed an ad to outsource my blogging.

    2. I just RTFA and it seems like there’s a fair amount of evidence that the drop may have come from anti-illegal legislations/rhetoric actually.

      1. But I thought controlling immigration was impossible?

    3. But that can’t be true. They’re just coming to steal welfare and commit crimes.

  2. Cristina Romer admits the stimulus failed. So much for the Chony talking point that it saved us from a Depression.

    “Calling the economic recovery “insufficient”, she noted that a 0.6% drop in the unemployment rate still leaves unemployment unbearably high. “Real GDP is growing, but not fast enough to create the hundreds of thousands of jobs each month that we need to return employment to its pre-crisis levels,” she said.”

    Then there is this one.

    “To this day, economists don’t understand why firms cut production as much as they did, or why they cut labor so much more than they normally would,” said Romer. “The current recession has been fundamentally different from other post-war recessions? Rather than being caused by deliberate monetary actions, it began with interest rates at low levels? Precisely what has made it so terrifying, and so difficult to cure, is that we have been in largely uncharted territory.”

    http://www.frumforum.com/romer-my-plan-failed-2

    Gee, why did firms cut so much Christina? Maybe your boss and the nuts in Congress passing a hugely expensive and burdensome health care bill and generally making war on the productive might have had something to do with that? Maybe?

    1. I just can’t understand why all my wives keep disappearing!

    2. But economics is an exact enough science to construct an overarching ideology on economic principles and become zealously evangelical about it, isn’t it?

      1. Sorry about your boyfriend getting popped by the Montgomery County cops yesterday Max. Are they going to let you pick up the body today?

      2. ARFARFARFARFARFARFARFARFARFARFARF!!!!!!!!!!

      3. And, which side is it that believes that economics is an exact science, Max?

        Which side is it that believes it can use that “science” to centrally plan and coercively direct the activities of every individual?

      4. …like how I become zealously evangelical about socialism, for instance…

      5. You’re totally missing out on the other half of libertarianism. The principle that persons are free & own their own bodies. Even if Libertarianism doesn’t result in the highest economic output, it’s just the right thing to do.

    3. Romer is considered one of the brightest economic minds in the administration, and she doesn’t understand what caused our new depression?

      Now THAT I find truly terrifying. Go to the ivory tower where you belong Christina honey, and don’t come out.

    4. I’d like to meet just one “economist” that understands finance.

      Word of the day: OVER-LEVERAGED.

      Or is that two words?

    5. Could it be because everyone simultaneously had a moment of clarity, and realized that artificially low interest rates had misallocated capital into real estate development on such a massive scale that a rapid rebound was basically impossible?

      Could it also be that state interventions have kept zombie banks and zombie firms alive, and that every time a business owner drives by a Citibank sign he thinks, “Oh shit I better cut back some more before those guys finally fail”?

      1. That’s too complicated. It’s much easier to just say “deregulation”.

      2. Fluffy, you mean the government run central banks destroyed the world’s economy?

  3. “Hurricane Earl strengthens to Category 4, takes aim at North Carolina.”
    “Discovery Channel gunman killed by police after a four-hour standoff.”

    Can’t the police just shoot Earl?

    Or at least shoot his dog?

    1. Minor league football begins tonight. It would really make the season for me if FAMU beat Miami in more than just the half-time show.

      1. How about BYU’s business acumen lately? Going indy, series with ND and Texas, deal with ESPN. Those are some wheeling and dealing Mormons…

        1. I think going indy will come back to bite them in the ass. Look for them to be back in a conference in 5 years.

          1. The Big XII should think about them, if they still exist by then.

            1. True. I think the only thing keeping the Big XII together is that the SEC couldn’t negotiate 2 guaranteed bids over the summer. Give the SEC 2 guaranteed, UT and OU will be in the SEC in 2011.

              1. UT doesn’t like the share. The SEC shares revenue fairly among teams. UT hates that. They would rather stay in the Big 12 and get a bigger cut of a smaller revenue. Allegedly OU and aTm had offers to go to the SEC. I think they were dumb not to take them. Why live on UT’s plantation? Nebraska and Colorado were smart to get out.

                1. As a Texas Ex, I feel like I’m supposed to slap you with a glove and demand satisfaction — six shooters at high noon. Instead I’ll just say, him that brings the rain should get the biggest drink.

                  1. I can see that point. And there is nothing wrong with it. The other conferences don’t see it that way. I don’t think they would change their rules to take Texas.

                    Honestly, the whole affair shows how gutless A&M is. I think they could have done better in the SEC. They could have sold Texas recruits on playing in the best conference in the country. If A&M had bolted, UT would have joined the PAC 10. Playing in the SEC versus the PAC 10 would have finally put aTm on an equal footing. I guess that Gene Stallings tried to tell them that. But they were too stupid or gutless to listen.

                2. Actually, a big problem is the Texas alumni. Deloss Dodds full well understands any conference realignment that doesn’t have Texas playing OU and A&M every year is a non-starter with the alumni.

                  1. That is where the bluff came in. UT told A&M and OU that they would never play them again in any sport if they went to the SEC. For the reasons you give, I think UT was bluffing.

                3. I actually agree with John here. Texas wants to dominate a conference, why share with Florida and Alabama?

                  I think OK should be pissed, but having had their ass handed to them by TX lately I guess they ain’t in the position…

                  1. They lost last year to Texas. OU beat them the year before and most years in the 1990s. The problem OU has is that they get most of their players from Texas. So, they are wedded to Texas. If they ever moved to the SEC and stopped playing Texas, they would be screwed. The fate of Arkansas football stands as a warning to any OU fan or administrator who thinks they can get by without playing Texas every year.

                    1. Make that in the 00s

                    2. Texas has won the last 4 of 5 from OU and is soon to be 5 of 6. That includes last year and the year before. See, people forget that Texas beat OU’s bitch ass down in the second half of the game in 2008.

                      At least when OU cheated, they won big. The Aggies couldn’t even manage that. I’d have no problem with the Longhorns never playing the Aggies again in any sport forever and ever amen.

                    3. Texas isn’t going to beat OU this year. I hate OU. But they are going to be really good. Texas lost a lot of talent from last year’s team.

                    4. And Texas has to play at Nebraska this year. Oklahoma doesn’t. And I don’t think they will put an extra second on the clock so poor little Mack Brown and Pony McCoy can get the right to be bitch slapped in the title game.

                      The difference in schedule will decide the South.

                    5. It wasn’t an “extra” second. Learn the rules.

                      OU lost a lot of talent. Or made a lot of excuses about having injured talent last year, and Gresham and Bradford (and Gerald McCoy) won’t be there this year either. Landry Jones will be eaten alive and Murray is 2 steps slower than the other times he did jack against Texas.

                      Nebraska got five (5) first downs against Texas. We’ll see how the Huskers shape up without Suh. Barring critical injuries for either team, Texas is going to work the Huskers as usual.

                      Texas was in position to beat Bama while playing a true freshman. Credit to the Crimson Tide for how they played, but saying Texas was “bitch slapped” is just stupid.

                      At least the season is almost here.

                    6. Nebraska gets its whole defense back. And Suh was incredible, but Crick and Steinkuhler as a team will be just as good. They also have the best CB in the league. This defense overall will be better than last year’s. And the offense is going to much much better. Nebraska playing on a neutral field outplayed Texas. Texas needed a intervention by the referees and a review of a play that wasn’t reviewable to kick a field goal and win. You are delusional if you think you are taking a first year starting QB and “work Nebraska” in Lincoln.

                      And Johnny come lately Texas fans drive me nuts. You have had one decent decade of football in the last forty years. Texas was good in the 60s, sucked for 30 years and then got decent again in the 00s. Have thirty straight years of great football like NU and OU and then come talk to me. Go win multiple national titles and have about half of the ten greatest teams in college football history (which between them OU and NU have) and then come talk to me. For thirty years Austinites showed up in the second quarter and left to go to sixth street by the end of the third. And now they all claim to be football experts and have all this tradition. Give me a break.

                    7. Texas was elite almost without exception from 1963 to 1975.

                      Played for the MNC in the 1977 and, essentially, 1983 seasons and won a crapton of games until Akers got tired of recruiting.

                      Texas sucked through the late 80’s to mid-90’s — though they won the last SWC and first Big 12 titles in 1995 and 1996 — with McWilliams and Mackovic. Still, Texas has 4 MNCs.

                      Texas has won more football games than either OU or Nebraksa and owns the season series against both.

                      You are delusional if you think you are taking a first year starting QB and “work Nebraska” in Lincoln.

                      You ever heard of a guy named Major Applewhite? You should look into his freshman game in Lincoln.

                      Texas needed a intervention by the referees and a review of a play that wasn’t reviewable to kick a field goal and win.

                      Again, learn the rules. Official time is kept on the field, not on the big shiny clock.

                    8. “You ever heard of a guy named Major Applewhite? You should look into his freshman game in Lincoln.”

                      That was when Nebraska had its second worst coach in history. And the only reason Texas owns the series with Nebraska is because they they never played them until the late 90s. Had Texas and Nebraska played every year through the 70s, 80s and 90s, they would have been lucky to win one out of every five years if that. And good for Texas and their four national titles. Just win one more and you will have as many as Nebraska.

                      And Texas wasn’t elite in the 70s and 80s. They had two good years (77 and 83) neither of which resulted in a title. OU and NU in contrast won five National Titles between them and had probably the two best teams ever (78 OU and 83 Nebraska) ever not to win a title.

                      Texas has a respectable tradition. And they have a good decade. But they haven’t had the decade in the 00s OU had in the 70s or Nebraska had in the 90s or Alabama had in the 60s. They are just not that special.

                    9. I didn’t say Texas was elite in the ’80s. I admitted the wheels came off by the mid-80s. It’s clear the program went to hell pretty much at exactly the same time Curry muffed the punt against Georgia in the 1984 Cotton Bowl and showed only flashes until Brown was hired. Of course, that overlapped with the glorious Blake and Schnellenberger regimes in Norman so it isn’t like the Sooners were consistently setting the world on fire at the time, either.

                      Opinion is divided on whether the ’83 Horns or ’83 Huskers were better. It would have been fun to see the Nebraska O against the Texas D. I give Osborne a lot of credit for not settling for the tie in the Orange Bowl, that’s for sure.

                      They are just not that special.

                      Again, Texas has more wins than either Nebraska or Oklahoma and owns each head-to-head. You can make excuses about well this or well that, but those are the facts.

                    10. “Opinion is divided on whether the ’83 Horns or ’83 Huskers were better.”

                      Not outside of Austin they are not. Nebraska would have killed them. Nebraska lost by one point on Miami’s home field and could have had the tie. It was a once in a lifetime upset. Texas lost in their home state to Georgia.

                    11. And Grisham didn’t play last year. He was hurt. So, he really isn’t a loss.

        2. It worked for ND, especially when there were legions of catholics supporting the school because of its religious affiliation (i used to be one). If BYU can make itself the mormon ND, they’ll make some serious ching and raise the school’s profile as well.

          1. I thought about that angle (the Mormon BYU) too. Do Mormons follow BYU the way Catholics follow ND?

            If so, as long as Mormons keep their breeding policies up BYU could eventually look at a deal with NBC…

            1. That’s the thing: ND gained its following by playing any school that would play them and kicking ass. They were called the Ramblers at one point because they traveled the country so much (in an era when that wasn’t common). If BYU can knock off some of the higher profile competition and get some BCS berths, maybe they can give mormons (especially those who aren’t college educated) a cause to become fans.

              1. I think the ND model is kind of unique. They were good and that created the fan base. Baylor is the only Baptist school that plays D1 football. Yet they don’t have any kind of national fan base. And there are just as many or more Baptists as their are Catholics. There are a lot of BYU alums out there and they are spread out all over the country. But I don’t see how the average Mormon who didn’t go there is dying to root for them.

          2. BYU can’t make itself the mormon ND until there are 500% more mormons in the country.

      2. Fucking threaded comments. Damn you squirrels.

      3. Funny you should say that. My brother and I went to the FAMU-UF game in Gainesville a few years back, and, as I predicted, A&M kicked our ass at halftime. The Marching 100 still rock.

      4. Related: The NCAA is an example of a (admittedly quasi-public) monopoly, with all the negative effects of one. “In theory” schools and fans are able to take their business elsewhere, but where are you going to go? Once a critical mass of people opt in there are tremondous pressures to play in that league (some have said social networking sites like Facebook are like this).

        Discuss?

        1. That is true. But there are other options for entertainment and sports. You are right, it is pretty hard to start your own college football league. But if the NCAA screws up its product, you can play or watch something else. So while they do have a monopoly the effect of that monopoly is pretty limited.

        2. No coercion, no government favoritism, no monopoly.

          It ain’t like the NCAA is the only game in town for football fans. Both high school and the pros have huge fan bases. Also, lots of colleges don’t even bother to field a football team. IOW, who gives a rat’s ass?

          Facebook? What’s it like? Do they give out cookies like the URKOBOLD??

          It is difficult ludicrous to claim someone has a monopoly on an entertainment product.

          1. It’s funny to use Facebook as an example – they beat out myspace and you’re supposed to hold it against them?

            Also, there is LinkedIn and Plaxo for more professional networking. And myspace for social. I’m sure there are more (I’m not big on the social networking via internet sites). If Facebook starts to pull dickish moves some other entity will pop up and take users from them.

      5. Go Rattlers!

  4. Whale put to death with explosives:

    Australian officials used explosives to blow up a terminally ill humpback whale that became stranded on a beach near Perth two weeks ago.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ear…..sives.html

    1. The International Whaling Commission recommends the use of explosives to euthanize beached whales longer than 26 feet.

      Good to know.

      1. So, what, shaped charge over the brainstem or other vital organ? How exactly does one kill a whale with explosives?

        I ask because I’m remembering that clusterfuck in Oregon where they tried to blow up the whale carcass. More explosives is not necessarily better.

        1. Now what do they do with it?

        2. We’re also against killing dead whales.

        3. “More explosives is not necessarily better.”

          This is a damnedable lie. More explosives is ALWAYS better.

          1. “Think you used enough dynamite there, Butch?”

            1. He blew up good. Real good.

          2. Ask the folks who got showered with whale bits.

            Or ask me. EOD got real happy with demo blowing up stockpiles in Iraq in ’91. Nothing like incoming mortar rounds from your EOD teams.

  5. http://hotair.com/archives/201…..it-werent/

    Devel Patrick, “it is a free country. I wish it weren’t”.

    That pretty much says it all about our elite classes doesn’t it?

    1. This is hilarious. Truly an example of someone’s true colors showing through a slip of the tounge.

      1. Patrick is the model upon which Obama was based.

        1. I think it’s the other way around.

    2. Anyone else think it’s funny that John, the D.C. based lawyer, is always bitching about east coast elites and the educated class? It’s like listening to Charlie Morton complain about bad pitchers.

      1. If I ever have real authority and tell everyone how sorry I am that it is a free country, you can feel free to ad homonym all you like. Until then, you are really just making a stupid mundane point.

        Further, where does it say that you can’t criticize and loath other people who do the same thing you do? By that logic, no one could ever criticize a group from the inside.

        1. “you can feel free to ad homonym all you like”

          1. What about my statement was an ad homonym? Ad homonym means you are attacking the messenger and inferring that the argument is false because of that. I never attacked the messenger. I said

            1. I am not a politician and do not claim to regret this being a free country so I am not like Patrick and therefore not being hypocritical.

            2. Even if I was in the same group as Patrick, there is nothing that says you can’t attack members of a group or even the group itself when you belong to it.

            Nothing about those two arguments attacked the messenger. If you want to slam on me, at least try to be funny or make a valid logical point.

          2. “Ad homonym” may be my favorite Johnism. It’s beautiful because homonym is a homoynm of hominiem.

            1. Joe’s Law strikes again.

              Your correction requires a correction.

              1. That’s too much effort. Besides, I’m not trying to correct, I’m just pointing out some beauty.

                1. People think what you type out in annoyance on some internet board is some kind of window to your soul. I actually write quite well. I just think faster than I type and don’t type well. When I am writing something that matters, I like everyone proof read. I suppose I could do that here. But why bother? It is not like the trolls whose skin I seem to get under better than anyone else, wouldn’t find some other thing to bitch about.

                  1. I actually write quite well. I just think faster than I type and don’t type well.

                    I’d call that not writing very well. But that’s just me.

                    1. “I’d call that not writing very well. But that’s just me.”

                      It is just you. There is a difference between writing something for publication and proof read and something tapped out in the heat of the moment.

                      And it is funny how I get under people like your’s skins. For a poor writer, I seem to get my point across.

      2. He can’t be that elite, his spelling and grammar are atrocious.

    3. It says a lot more about the intellectual dishonesty of the conservatives who are taking it out of context to make actual criticisms of the guy, rather than simple snarky jokes.

      In context, it’s obvious what he intended to say (he wished [the Glen Beck rally] weren’t [held where it was]) — it’s no worse than Bush’s gaffe suggesting that his administration was constantly looking for ways to harm Americans.

  6. # Discovery Channel gunman killed by police after a four-hour standoff.

    Then they went to his house and shot his dog…right?

    1. In newsrooms all across the country, reporters are feaverishly trying to link this guy to the Tea Party. Or at the very least uncover that once, he drank a cup of Lipton.

      1. Beats trying to uncover that time someone jammed their balls in his mouth.

      2. Well, they can’t have people realizing that he was an Al Gore fan. That just fucks up the liberal narrative that this sort of thing is always cooked up by right-wing “gun nuts”.

      3. The shooter was most definitely a conservative.

        1. conservationist maybe.

    2. Then they went to his house and shot his dog…right?

      Yes, they went right over and shot his dog.

    3. No! They shot the squirrels, of course.

  7. http://www.ky3.com/home/video/…..50443.html

    Anti Obama billboard creator gets death threats. I am starting to feel left out. Is there anyone in the country besides me who has never had a death threat?

    1. I haven’t had one lately. Does that make you feel better?

    2. I’ll keel jooo! You ebil fascist communist socialist scumbag!

      Welcome to the club.
      Feel better?

      1. Hey, the guy DESERVED death threats.

  8. SSRN: The Political Economy of the Subprime Mortgage Credit Expansion
    We examine how special interests, measured by campaign contributions from the mortgage industry, and constituent interests, measured by the share of subprime borrowers in a congressional district, may have influenced U.S. government policy toward the housing sector during the subprime mortgage credit expansion from 2002 to 2007. Beginning in 2002, mortgage industry campaign contributions increasingly targeted U.S. representatives from districts with a large fraction of subprime borrowers. During the expansion years, mortgage industry campaign contributions and the share of subprime borrowers in a congressional district increasingly predicted congressional voting behavior on housing related legislation. The evidence suggests that both subprime mortgage lenders and subprime mortgage borrowers influenced government policy toward housing finance during the subprime mortgage credit expansion. …

  9. Hurricane Earl strengthens to Category 4, takes aim at North Carolina.

    Charlotte is on my list, Randy.

  10. Police officer driving off the road in a public park runs over a homeless woman with his cruiser. Charges? Do you even need to see the link?

    1. No. But I looked anyway.

      Wow! The State Police investigated and determined that a “brother in blue” was not deserving of a negligent homicide charge. Maybe if he’d fired a couple rounds into her first and then backed up over the corpse a couple of times they’d have concluded some illegal behavior was involved.

      But probably not.

      1. At least they had a separate agency perform the investigation. And the reporters quoted quite a few actual facts about the case. It’s possible that it was just a tragic accident, if the lady was under a blanket and it really just looked like an empty blanket lying around.

        1. The park is across the street from a homeless shelter, and it’s well known in the area that the homeless sleep there. It’s a junkie paradise, and that’s why the officer was patrolling the park in the first place. To cruise off the pavement and over any blanket at this particular park is grossly negligent. Had any “civilian” done so, he would be behind bars already.

  11. http://volokh.com/2010/09/01/o…..confirmed/

    Obama bans imports of rifles.

    Hey Brink Lindsey how is that whole Liberaltarian thing working out? Every time I read something like this I want kick that guy in the nuts.

    1. Meh. This is protectionist at worst. Keeping the prices artifically high on old rifles. Speaking of which, the gun show’s in town this weekend. I need new hardware. Taking wishlist suggestions…

      1. It is going to prevent the South Koreans from importing a bunch of old M1s. It is total bullshit. And I don’t think it is protectionist as much as anti gun superstition.

        1. The South Koreans aren’t going to be able to sell us guns we gave them? My heart is broken. Seriously, in Obama’s list of bad decisions, this is small potatoes. My rage-o-meter hardly even twitches.

          1. Well yeah compared to bankrupting the country. But it just is more evidence that liberals cannot be reasoned with on guns. And more reasons Lindsey needs to be kicked in the balls.

          2. Once you give someone a gift, it is their property.

            It makes no difference whether we gave them the guns or sold them to them.

            1. The rifles were given to S Korea with a bunch of conditions attached. One of the conditions is that the US has right of first refusal on their disposal.

              I read in one of the threads somewhere on this thing that it was the Bush administration that first decided not to take them back. When the rejection of the import license application first occurred, I can’t say.

              Normally such weapons would be aquired by the Civilian Marksmanship Program. For the last few years all but a few select samples from there have been M-1s from the Danes quite a few of which had been rebarrelled by Baretta.

              A few years ago I came across some M-1s bult by Baretta for the Italian military on a Canadian surplus site. They could not be imported to the US because of a Clinton era law that forbids the importation of foreign-built weapons built on US designs.

        2. I agree, it is just anti-gun knee-jerking. This administration’s contempt for the Constitution and for the average American knows no bounds.

          1. I’ve long said that many liberals have a form of insanity about guns that comes from near total ignorance of them. Having not been around them they seem to think they are going to suddenly go off and kill a dozen people or something. It’s a big problem. Re-education is needed…

            1. My theory is that it has to do with liberalism’s connection with urbanism and the Northeast which have a lower cultural tradition of gun owning. Hopefully it is a phase…

              1. The thing that seems to astound foreign visitors to the U.S. most seems to be the ubiquity of guns. The subject (along with U.S. foreign policy) always seems to come up around the dinner table after a couple bottles of wine, especially when I note that, yes, I too, have a modest collection of firearms myself.
                And I’m always astounded by how unique we have become in that regard.
                I was chatting with some South African photo-safari guides who noted it takes them months and months to get permission to carry a new rifle (for protection) out into the bush.
                Wacky world, this.

                1. And I seem to be bursting at the “seems.” I blame the weak office coffee.

            2. I think owning a gun and knowing how to use it is probably the ultimate expression of individual responsibility and autonomy. That’s why liberals are terrified of the things.

              1. That does make sense.

              2. Yeah, but the South African gun laws date back to apartheid. Not exactly liberals there.

                The main reason was that the white South African government wanted to make sure blacks didn’t own guns. Common thing that, the Jim Crow south did the same thing, same reason.

          2. Don’t they remember they have an election in 2 months? This is the worst time to get the gun rights people stirred up, especially with things just now settling down from the 2008 elections.

  12. Discovery Channel gunman killed by police after a four-hour standoff.

    We’ve all agreed to use this incident as an indictment of global warming alarmists everywhere, right? I haven’t been keeping up with comments.

    1. I’m sure most everyone here when he heard there were explosives and hostages involved was thinking ‘please God don’t be a ‘bagger, please don’t be a ‘bagger’. Would prefer not to see that Janet Napolitano and his ugly ass face calling for the end to extremist rhetorc on the Newshour tonight. ‘Awaken by Al Gore’, Yes! Yes!’

      Or, something like that.

      1. No. Because the first concern of most people was probably about how it was going to end, and only found out through news coverage that he was a whacked-out enviro. This whole “blame our intellectuals” for the work of the insane is unfair to both sides, unless the actions are directly encouraged. I blame the sketchbags in the academic/political grievance profession for contributing to this crap of “ownership” for ideology run amok.

      2. Riiight, because the first instinct of everyone is not self preservation but doing or at least empathizing with what is the interest of the common good. But, I wont call you a monster as you imply I am for being honest (which is an alien concept and thus monstrous for many), given what you did, rationalizing away culpability, is man’s most natural second instinct.

        1. If you’re watching on TV, you’re not worried about preserving self-interest, because you’re probably far, far away. And if you’re worried about abstract political fallout vs. actual human beings, your priorities are out of whack, not monstrous.

          And no, I’m not rationalizing away culpability. I made an important distinction. You didn’t read, or didn’t understand.

          1. If you’re watching on TV, you’re not worried about preserving self-interest

            Instinct doesn’t go away due to proximity. You are born with it, you die with it.

            And if you’re worried about abstract political fallout vs. actual human beings, your priorities are out of whack, not monstrous.

            If you were a member of a persecuted minority you would better understand why you never want to see one of your own blow shit up, be it blacks in the South of the 60’s, Jews in Germany in the 30’s, ‘baggers in our time, or in my case, the lizard people throughout all of human dominated history.

            And no, I’m not rationalizing away culpability. I made an important distinction.

            No, you didn’t, I accomplished a better sorting out of what you said than you did as it was a muddled train of thought (you’re welcome!). Once the grist was cut I found your mindset on display there to be inexcusable post Genealogy of Morals. It was as if you were plucked out of 1871, and Queen Victoria was the very marm who gave you rote instructions.

            Human?

            No thanks, I’m full, but thanks for the offer.

  13. I imagine the right leaning folks here get up about 3 a.m., drink some coffee, then trudge down to their mother’s basement to check our Breitbart et al., to find the links of Truth and Justice to link at their various stopping points. Having seeded the wacky libertarians over at H & R they smile gleefully, content with the idea that they have done their not small bit in the War, but also knowing the battle never really ends…

    1. I imagine you waking up at 9 am (no productive job), showering (maybe), and rubbing one out (while thinking of something witty to start the morning trolling with).

      1. You imagine me masturbating?

        Ooookay.

        1. I see you masturbating.

          1. Yuck, the reincarnation of Janet Reno? Bleh!

    2. Hey guys I just peed in the corner. Isn’t that cool?

      1. In a circular room, no less, you master of Herculean feats.

    3. Please stop farting.

    4. Why would I get up at three when mommy doesn’t make me breakfast until five?

    5. Wrong. I’m 45 and I live in my parent’s basement and smoke pot and play my guitar and Xbox until at least 3 AM. Then I get up and complain that the government won’t give me free healthcare, the way my parents give me free rent.

    6. I imagine the right leaning folks here get up about 3 a.m., drink some coffee, then trudge down to their mother’s basement to check our Breitbart et al., to find the links of Truth and Justice to link at their various stopping points. Having seeded the wacky libertarians over at H & R they smile gleefully, content with the idea that they have done their not small bit in the War, but also knowing the battle never really ends…

      That is actually some funny stuff. It didn’t hit home at first, but then I gave it a second consideration, what if I made just a few different choices in life. Didn’t buy those rental bungalows when I the opportunity came my way, there would have been a few bad years there. Hippie mum would have loved nothing better than for me to have moved back in and waited on me hand and foot. brrbrr . . . Curses for scaring the shit out of me, MNG.

  14. So MNG thinks he’s superior to us because we post links to the morning open links thread?

    I guess after a couple years of the Obamassiah, that’s all he has to cling to. Must be tough to see everything you believe in implemented and exploding in your face.

    1. I think it’s a little nutty to get up every day and scour the intertubes for stories which you then relentlessly share with everyone. It’s part of this sad idea that you are swaying folks or something.

      Movement conservatism has done a good job of making it’s peons feel like they are foot soldiers in a crucial battle over America’s soul. It’s just sad to see it manifested every day.

      It’s always a little fun though to peer into the sheer simplicity of the world of a movement conservative, where because I don’t denounce everything Obama as loudly as they do he is my “Obamessiah.” This despite the fact that I quite loudly opposed him during the campaign in 08 and have long declared him to be no favorite of mine, and after I’ve said frequently that I oppose pretty much every major policy he has put forward (Obamacare, cap n’trade, the Afghan surge, etc.). But in their simple lil’ world there are either Obama-haters or lovers. How quaint.

      1. Did it ever occur to you that people who surf this site surf multiple sites, and run across things they find interesting?

        Basically, you argue that posting is stupid, and you are posting here to say that. I’ll let you do the math on that.

        1. Hey, it’s a free country JT. Please, by all means redouble your valiant efforts…

          1. And you’re still posting, despite how useless an activity it is, because……

      2. “I think it’s a little nutty to get up every day and scour the intertubes for stories which you then relentlessly share with everyone.”

        I’m at work. I gotta do something while I’m here.

        1. It’s the relentlessness and frequency that gets me Pip, I don’t see you in that category.

          1. A fanatic is someone who can’t change their mind and won’t change the subject.

            1. Let me be clear. We inherited this mess.

          2. He says that after a week when I haven’t been posting much at all because of work.

            1. I appreciate the posts, JL. I’m sure many here do.

      3. MEOWMEOWMEOWMEOWMEOWMEOWMEOWMEOWMEOWMEOWMEOW!!!!!!!!!!

        1. How cute, cats now!

      4. It’s no nuttier than waking up every morning to come on this site and troll the conservatives.

        1. Dudes, MNG is cool, and if you don’t get it, then you just don’t get it.

      5. MNG is here basically saying that political communication is pointless, pathetic and masturbatory.

        He apparently doesn’t realize that if that’s true, taken to its logical conclusion that would mean that we should engage in political violence instead.

  15. In a spirit of good will toward the Mideast Peace Talks, I contribute my famous Muddy Mary recipe: 2 fingers of your favorite vodka, fill to taste with your favorite chocolate milk.

  16. I know I sure would not want to be in the path of that storm. Wow.

    be-anonymous.at.tc

    1. “My wife has always dreamt that her beauty would be immortal,” Frederic von Anhalt said, “I would like to show the plastinated body of Zsa Zsa Gabor in the context of a scene in one of her films.”

      Then he should have killed her and done this several decades ago.

      1. Then he should have killed her and done this several decades ago.

        Like they did to Heidi Montage.

  17. get up every day and scour the intertubes for stories which you then relentlessly share with everyone.

    Why scour the intertubes when you can go straight to the AFL-CIO website for today’s talking points?

  18. Thank God, and Allah. Finally some peace talks. I hope they are as exciting and effective as all of the other decades before.

    1. They are about as effective as the last round. The death toll so far this week is 5 Israelis. The jihadists increase their attacks during each round of peace talks.

  19. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38…..nd_courts/

    This guy was just a pathetic version of the Unabomber, who also dug on Gore’s “the sky is falling” rhetoric.

    1. …which we Leftist Douchebags take as gospel and a damned good reason to blow shit up.

    2. Pretty sure Teddy K’s rants preceded Algore’s slide into Enviro-champion. By a lot.

  20. Fluffy:

    True, or not?

    Could it be because everyone simultaneously had a moment of clarity, and realized that artificially low interest rates had were continuing to misallocated capital into real estate development the government’s hands on such a massive scale that a rapid rebound was basically impossible?

    Or is this moment of clarity yet to arrive?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.