Reason Morning Links: Google's Wind Farm, AGs Announce Mortgage Probe, L.A. Proposes New Food Truck Regs


NEXT: It Can Happen Here

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “Google proposes plan to flush $5 billion down a toilet,” would have been a better headline.

    1. Especially if that toilet gets flushed by a tsunami.

    2. 5 billion could get you 75% of the way to nuclear reactor. Sure you’d still have to staff the thing, but it’s at least 15x more megawatts. But that’s not google’s game, they don’t want to be Montgomery Burns.

      1. The Simpsons: Evil and unfunny.

        They’re like the George W. Bush of sitcoms.

          1. Greatest hyperbole in the History of Man!!!

            1. The greatest event since the first moon landing!

              1. It’s a got a good beat and you can dance to it.

                I LOVED IT! I’m going to see it TWICE MORE!!

                1. I laughed, I cried, I kissed $10 bucks goodbye!

      2. “The system’s backbone cable, with a capacity of 6,000 megawatts, equal to the output of five large nuclear reactors…”

        The article doesn’t state just how much it would cost to build the turbines that would generate that power, but wind is comparable w/ nuclear, IIRC. The ocean is the perfect place to build these farms, because the wind almost never stops blowing.

        I understand the urge to criticize government green boondoggles. This is a potentially rational plan with a fairly sound basis, and from what I read, won’t cost taxpayers anything if it fails.

        1. Wait. The cable can carry 6 GW. That’s not nearly the same thing as saying the wind turbines will generate 6 GW. Its a nice piece of infrastructure, but don’t conflate capacity and production.

        2. The ocean is the perfect place to build these farms, because the wind almost never stops blowing.

          By that logic, Episiarch’s house would be the prefect place for a turbine as well.

          1. That’s why there’s a methane collector there.

        3. The thing about wind power is that it’s not completely reliable. There has to be a coal or nuclear plant on standby to provide power during the down times, so why not just build a nuclear plant?

          1. Brett L – I didn’t. (Re)read my second paragraph. The original article isn’t entirely clear about the costs of the cable vs. the turbines, but in a previous article, the costs of nuclear vs. wind were not that far apart.

            MSL: The point about building wind farms at sea is that there are many areas where they are always reliable – the wind doesn’t stop blowing.

            1. Wind turbines offshore are more expensive than the ones onshore because of all the cables needed to bring the power onshore. Plus they’re an eyesore and kill lots of birds. I thought liberals were supposed to care about asthetics and wildlife.

              1. Right now I don’t see any ocean.

                Therefore the aesthetics don’t matter.

              2. I expect they cost more to maintain and repair offshore as well.

                And saltwater is pretty hard on lots of things.

                1. ?So is radiation and superheated water.

                2. I expect they cost more to maintain and repair offshore as well.

                  And saltwater is pretty hard on lots of things.

                  So the question is whether the increased costs justify the greater and more reliable power output, plus the lack of NIMBY problems, than land based turbines.

                  It’s not cheaper to build them on land if you can’t get approval to build them.

              3. Wind turbines offshore are more expensive than the ones onshore because of all the cables needed to bring the power onshore.

                That’s different than being on land, how? Other than the buildings with turbines on them, you still need cables to reach from where ever the NIMBYs allow a farm to be built, to the customers who want the power.

                My question though, what happened to tidal power? I guess the twice-a-day aspect makes the availability even worse than wind or solar.

                1. In “The Wind Power Scam” and also in “Power Hungry”, I read that the infrastructure costs are much higher for offshore than for onshore installations.

            2. That is not what I have read. Offshore wind farms will reduce fluctuations in power generation, but they do not eliminate the problem completely. There is still a need for other energy sources to back them up.

              1. Other energy sources or practical forms of energy storage. The latter is all the rage in the research world just now.

              2. MSL, I think we were talking at cross purposes. My understanding of wind is that at below a constant WS of ~15 mph, wind power is useless.

                A couple miles out in the ocean (at the latitudes in the project), the wind speed is a near constant 20-25 mph. There will be dips, and times when power production is perhaps 75-85% of maximum, but I was thinking you were referring to the “cut outs” – the total loss of any generation capacity when wind speed drops too low. These are common at many land wind farms.

                Bookworm, the “kill lots of birds” is BS. It happens, but that’s been way overblown. (And if the birds just stayed in the ocean, they could avoid that fate). Gilbert: true, but once again, this is (TMK) a private initiative. If they want to see if the costs are worth it, or develop corrosion-resistant turbines, more power to them.

                I hate to say it, but I think one criticism he-who-shall-not-be-named made was correct. Libertarians are so used to government green boondoggles that when a private initiative arises, it gets attacked out of a knee-jerk reaction.

                1. “Gilbert: true, but once again, this is (TMK) a private initiative.”

                  But how much are taxpayers subsidizing it?

            3. What about their resistance to/production during something like Hurricane Earl or even a typical Nor’Easter?

              1. Timon, modern turbines have shut down mechanisms for gales.

                1. These shut down mechanisms add to their reduced capacity. The more gales, the less energy produced.

              2. One presumes that the engineers working the project have put a lot of skull-sweat into this question.

                And there are a few medium sized test stands in other know-for-their-bad-weather off shore sties here and there.

                So it is possible that they know what they’re doing.

                But then, I’m not risking any money on the venture.

                1. Maybe it makes economic sense. Maybe it will be a clusterfuck. So what? Except for the amount of government subsidies, who cares? It’s a private company building it.

    3. Ohm, but after reading the article Google is just one investor among many, for the headline I guess. Ever since TMI, power generation is so political. No wonder people dump into wind and solar.

    4. So they’re finally building the Edward Kennedy Power Plant off the coast of Hyannisport? Hells yeah.

    5. Better late than never, sell GOOG now.

  2. Went to see Waiting for Superman last night, because my wife’s employer (school district) got a big donation from Wells Fargo to send any employees who wanted to go.

    It didn’t have any information that hasn’t been on Reason or Stossel’s Stupid in America program, and it didn’t offer any new solutions, yet it’s being hailed as “revolutionary” because…it’s made by a liberal, I guess?

    1. it didn’t offer any new solutions

      I’m sure the film’s “consciousness raising” will soon result in many solutions crawling out of the woodwork.

      1. Meeser Sooperman no here.

  3. Carl Paladino does a better Grandpa Simpson than even I do.

    1. “It was a bunch of very extreme-type people in bikini-type outfits grinding at each other and doing these gyrations, and I certainly wouldn’t let my young children see that.”

      I said “NO!”, kids. It’s just better if you don’t watch C-SPAN.

      1. I shouted “Don’t look Ethel!!” But it was too late. She’d already been mooned.

        Obscure reference of the day…

        1. Ray Stevens would be proud.

        2. I haven’t heard that song in years.

          Off to mp3bear to commit a robbery…

    2. Off-topic, but ordered the Thomas Brookside collection off Amazon this morning for beach reading in a few weeks.

      Will let you know in November what I think.

      1. Wow, thanks!

        I’m predicting one thumbs up and one thumbs down, based on our general posting history.

        1. They’re all on my wish list, but I had to replace my Xbox first. Mindless entertainment before thinking because I am, after all, an American.

        2. I figure for the 2nd, I need to know the enemies’ thought patterns.

          Actually, I enjoy plenty of authors who get the theology all wrong.

  4. Pot calls kettle . . . .
    …Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor’s identity, campaign officials confirmed. Faced with a huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign has also chosen not to use basic security measures to prevent potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing into its accounts, aides acknowledged.”…

    Barack Obama has proved the greatest fund-raiser of all time by a long shot. His campaign has raised more than $600 million – $150 million in September alone. But the campaign has also failed to adopt standard protections against fraudulent giving.

    The average contribution to Obama in September was just under $86. And federal law only requires the disclosure of identifying information for contributions in excess of $200. Campaigns must keep running totals for each donor and report them once they exceed $200.

    The Federal Election Commission says the Obama campaign has reported well over $200 million as coming from contributions of $200 or less. Only a small portion of that sum is attributable to donors the Obama campaign has disclosed.

    No presidential campaign has ever before received such a gargantuan sum of money from unidentified contributors. …

    1. No controlling legal authority…

  5. Dr Lewis’ credentials, of course, pale next to MNG’s:
    The scientific world is fracturing
    …Hal Lewis comes from the elite upper levels of science ? a physics professor at University of California (Santa Barbara), and a member of the Defense Science Board (a group of the top 40 or so, advising the Pentagon)….

    …For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.

    It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist….

    1. This is so yesterday.

    2. For a moment, I thought you were reporting a second person resigning, which would have been awesome.

    3. I subscribe to two skeptical publications, “Skeptic” and “The Skeptical Inquier”. The staffs of both magazines buy into all this AGW alarmism to my dismay. I believe the science has been so politicized. By buying into this unproven alarmism, they are not being scientific and they are not being skeptical as they should be according to the subject matter of their magazines.

      1. Wow, skeptic magazines believe in basic scientific concepts. What a tragedy!

        1. Nobody disputes that CO2 adds to the greenhouse effect which adds to global warming. The issue is how much will it add to global warming. Too much stock is placed in the climate models which leave out so many variables, in fact, there are so many unknown variables as to make the models virtually worthless. Some climatologists believe there are other factors that are much more important in determining climate than CO2 such as oceanic currents and cosmic rays and the earth’s varying orbit, etc.

          1. In general I find right wing attempts to block out reality highly entertaining. This particular example is no different.

            1. Please identify the exact economic costs associated with projected warming through 2050 as well as the exact economic costs associated with whatever plan you advocate to correct the problem.


              1. Or just tell me what the optimal earth temperature is. Show your work.

                1. Or give me the percentage of warming due to human versus natural fluctuations, the calculations supporting these, and the range of values for these in peer-reviewed journals.

                  Is it 90% human caused? 10%? 1%? 0.1% Don’t know?

          2. “Nobody disputes that CO2 adds to the greenhouse effect which adds to global warming.”

            I do.

            1. Do you have data to back that up, Pip?

            2. The question isn’t whether tiny changes in the atmospheric composition will affect temperature. The question is how much compared to natural fluctuations.

              I’ve yet to see any scientist give the breakdown between those two sources of variability in temps.

        2. Re: atheist,

          Wow, skeptic magazines believe in basic scientific concepts. What a tragedy!

          World, meet a halfwit that believes AGW is a “basic scientific concept.”

          Which means he understands little of what “basic,” “scientific,” and “concept” mean.

          1. Wouldn’t that also mean there’s very little point debating him?

            1. But all the more reason to mock him.

      2. Which one of those is Michael Shermer’s magazine? I’d expect a little better from him.

        1. “Skeptic”

    1. NOW loves whores? Finally, I have something in common with those people.

      1. I believe they identify with them. All of their principled members having left after the WJ Clinton Sellout.

      2. No, they’re endorsing the guy whose wife called his opponent a whore.

    1. Also, when played backwards the tape reveals that Obama’s birth certificate is fake.

      1. Don’t worry fluffy, it appears than an FBI informant who had been threatened by the “peace protesters” is the one who fired the pistol. RTFA. It is in the Washington Post for God’s sake. It doesn’t gore any of your sacred cows. So, it is okay for you to believe it.

        1. I read the full article and refrained from socking it to the FBI because this possibility had previously been investigated and discarded.

          This sound guy’s analysis reads an awful lot like bite mark analysis to me.

          Since you’re right that even if this FBI undercover fired the shots I would still get to blame The Man, surely you can see that I have no incentive to be skeptical here other than plain old skepticism.

          1. I think it makes perfect sense. I have never believed that the Guardsman fired those shots for fun. Something happened to trigger it. And the untrained dipshit with the piston there taking pictures is a perfect candidate. That sounds more plausible than the Guardsman. And of course the FBI discarded it. It would have put them on the hook for the whole thing. No way were they going to investigate that possibility.

            1. IMO, Kent State was a test to see how far the state could push people around without starting a nationwide riot.

              More of those kinds of incidents to come.

              1. I think it was more of a test by the protesters to see how far they could go. They found out.

      2. And if it doesn’t make sense that it was the FBI who fucked the whole thing up, nothing makes sense. Of course it was the FBI. Has there any tragic event on American soil in the last 70 years that an FBI fuck up hasn’t played a role in?

        1. The Bills will never win a Super Bowl as long as I’m alive.

          1. If it came out tomorrow that Scott Norwood was on the FBI payroll investigating steroids, I wouldn’t be shocked.

            1. What about Earnest Byner?

          2. The Smoking Man must be killed so that the Bills can win!!!1!!! AFTER HIM!!1!!1

            1. Damn right. Fry that mother fucker.

          3. Thurman Thomas’ helmet is out there.

        2. I agree, but those are three letters I never put together in an internet post. The other three letter agency I never post begins with an I.

          1. IRS, INS, no, I got it! ICP!

          2. We’re on to you, Ard

        3. I think you may be right.

        4. Has there any tragic event on American soil in the last 70 years that an FBI fuck up hasn’t played a role in?

          I’m gonna go with “your birth”, though I can’t conclusively rule out that said birth was due to a FBI agent fucking your mom. 😉

  6. Washington Post pulls a comic strip that doesn’t depict Muhammed.

    But does it depict Arth…*static*

    1. I understand the decision was made because the strip doesn’t depict Muhammed in the act of f****** a s****.

      1. First ya poke ’em, then ya roast ’em.

        1. Freeing a slave.

          1. Fishing a Shark.

            1. flipping a steak.

              1. Seriously, what do you mean by “s****”? All the good words have four letters.

  7. Board of Elections gaffe may nullify New York soldiers’ overseas absentee ballots

    The Board of Elections is facing another “royal screwup” – this time for failing to ship absentee ballots to New York troops serving overseas.

    “Our troops sacrifice their lives to protect our freedoms. They should never, ever be denied the right to vote,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer, who pushed a 2009 law establishing deadlines for mailing absentee ballots.

    New York election officials were required to ship the ballots to U.S. citizens living overseas by Sept. 17. Because New York primaries were held Sept. 14, the feds granted local officials an extension until Oct. 1.

    Several New York counties blew past the extension – including the city’s five boroughs…..z129LO3mCD

    1. “Outside the context of a free society, who would want to die for the right to vote?”

      – Ayn Rand –

    2. Are there criminal penalties for breaking this law or is that just for little people?

    3. “Our troops sacrifice their lives to protect our freedoms. They should never, ever be denied the right to vote,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer, who pushed a 2009 law establishing deadlines for mailing absentee ballots.

      I can say this because I know I’ll win hands down anyway.

  8. Inspire magazine, which includes articles like, “Make a Bomb in the Kitchen of Your Mom.”

    Al-Qaeda could kill two adulteresses with one stone — be more Onionesque *and* improve readership — by including centerfolds of virgins.

    1. … wearing burqas.

  9. Is New York the Last Redoubt for the Democrats this year? It seems that’s the only place that the GOP isn’t making a dent.

    1. Just a matter of time.

      ** sobs, rummages through fabulous wealth for consolation **

    2. Maybe if you mean NYC. New York state has 7 to 8 D seats where the incumbent is in trouble, according to RealClearPolitics.

  10. Why David Brooks is the NYT’s pet ‘conservative’.

    1. Because he complains that pubsec union employees’ pensions are driving government spending? Sure, he frames the issue in a way that Times readers would be concerned about (“government can do less useful stuff” versus “government can stop stealing our shit”), but as his articles go, that isn’t too terribly shit.

  11. Uh…

    All of which made Violent J’s announcement a few years ago really quite astonishing: Insane Clown Posse have this entire time secretly been evangelical Christians. They’ve only been pretending to be brutal and sadistic to trick their fans into believing in God. They released a song, Thy Unveiling, that spelt out the revelation beyond all doubt:

    Fuck it, we got to tell.
    All secrets will now be told
    No more hidden messages
    ?Truth is we follow GOD!!!
    We’ve always been behind him
    The carnival is GOD
    And may all juggalos find him
    We’re not sorry if we tricked you.

    The news shook the juggalo community to its core. While some fans claimed they’d actually had an inkling, having deciphered some of the hidden messages in several songs, others said they felt deeply betrayed and outraged: they’d been innocently enjoying all those songs about chopping people up and shooting women, and it was Christian rock?”


    “Did you anticipate this kind of reaction?” I ask them.

    “No,” sighs Violent J. “I figured most people would say, ‘Wow, I didn’t know Insane Clown Posse could be deep like that.’ But instead it’s, ‘ICP said a giraffe is a miracle. Ha ha ha! What a bunch of idiots.'” He pauses, then adds defiantly, “A giraffe is a fucking miracle. It has a dinosaur-like neck. It’s yellow. Yeah, technically an elephant is not a miracle. Technically. They’ve been here for hundreds of years?”

    “Thousands,” murmurs Shaggy.

    “Have you ever stood next to an elephant, my friend?” asks Violent J. “A fucking elephant is a miracle. If people can’t see a fucking miracle in a fucking elephant, then life must suck for them, because an elephant is a fucking miracle. So is a giraffe.”

    1. this may be one of the all-time great trolls. Juggalos, oh man. I still haven’t seen one in the wild, but they must exist, musn’t they?

      1. Oh they exist. I’ll bet you you’ve seen a juggalo sticker on a car or two.

        1. My eyes are oddly attracted to bumper stickers and I don’t think I’ve ever seen that.

    2. We’re all living in The Onion‘s world now.

    3. “Gravity’s cool,” Violent J says, “but not as cool as magnets.”

      ICP is cool, but not as cool as Deicide.

    4. Wow. I’ve now gained a strange new respect for ICP. And giraffes.

      1. What? No love for the Proboscidea?

    5. Great. Ken Shultz is going to have a mini-O over this.

    6. ICP is one of the great trolls in history. It’s right up there with Andy Kaufman.

    7. “Gravity’s cool,” Violent J says, “but not as cool as magnets.”

      Wait…if I interpret their lyrics correctly…are they working on a Grand Unified Theory now? Holy crap!

      1. Giraffes – how do they work?

        1. Not as hard as Proboscideas.

    8. I just want to know why an elephant is not “technically” a miracle. What “technical” thing is it that makes an elephant not a miracle while a giraffe is?

      Wait, but then he says an elephant IS a miracle. I’m so confused.

      1. Oh man. OH MAN. This is GOLD.

        “Ah!” I gesticulate. “If you’re explaining to your five-year-old son what fog is, then why do you not want to meet scientists? Because they’re just like you, explaining things to people?”

        “Well,” Violent J says, “science is? we don’t really? that’s like?” He pauses. Then he waves his hands as if to say, “OK, an analogy”: “If you’re trying to fuck a girl, but her mom’s home, fuck her mom! You understand? You want to fuck the girl, but her mom’s home? Fuck the mom. See?”

        I look blankly at him. “You mean?”

        “Now, you don’t really feel that way,” Violent J says. “You don’t really hate her mom. But for this moment when you’re trying to fuck this girl, fuck her! And that’s what we mean when we say fuck scientists. Sometimes they kill all the cool mysteries away. When I was a kid, they couldn’t tell you how pyramids were made?”

        “Like Stonehenge and Easter Island,” says Shaggy. “Nobody knows how that shit got there.”

        “But since then, scientists go, ‘I’ve got an explanation for that.’ It’s like, fuck you! I like to believe it was something out of this world.”

    9. OMG. I just recently had to explain what a Juggalo was to an old friend. It was in reference to this story:


  12. Why are you complaining about Carl Paladino? He’s such a perfect libertarian that he wants to bring back debtor’s prisons!

    1. Please don’t be his porn.

      1. What if “Please don’t be his porn” IS his porn?

        Bum dum dum!

        1. Even I don’t believe in a soul, I still want to save yours.

          1. Ten bucks says atheist is okay with Jerry Brown’s “whore” comments.

    2. atheist arrived at the schoolyard just as classes were ending. As he’d done so many times before, he singled out a cluster of kindergarteners. The sight of his penis always drew looks of confusion on thier cherubic faces, which was why he was confident they would never tell an adult about his “hobby”. He began to masturbate slowly, drooling a little with every stroke. Then he began to chant, “Ride the snake, ride the snake. To the lake, the ancient lake, baby. The snake is long, seven miles. Ride the snake…he’s old, and his skin is cold.”

      With a shudder and a spastic burst, atheist spilled his sterile seed onto the handle of the teeter-totter. Then, as always, he became overwhelmed with a sense of shame. “This was the last time.” he muttered as the tears began to fall, “I swear on my mother’s grave it’s the last time. I LOVE YOU, MOMMY!”

  13. What I love about Paladino is here’s a guy preaching about morality when he not only fathered a child out of wedlock but takes European vacations with this child and his mistress while still married to his wife.

    Where are all the conservatives screaming about family values?

    Strangely silent.

    1. To be fair, you can have all the vacations, mistresses, and coked up sex parties you want and still not want to see men in speedos grinding on each other.

      1. Well, if you don’t like dudes in speedos, you really shouldn’t tkae your mistress to Europe. It’s the wanger-hanger capital of the world.

    2. I find it amusing when libertarians pretend to criticize conservatives. Without conservative backup, you’d be about as popular as neo-Nazis.

        1. You’re highly entertaining.

          1. You’re actually violent J, aren’t you? You sound as dumb as an ICP member.


      1. That is probably true. But it is only true because liberals don’t give a shit about civil rights, freedom or anything beyond brute government power. You would think a group of people committed to equal rights, freedom and ending things like the drug war would get some backing from liberals. But since liberals are predominately ignorant, backward, power loving pricks like you, they don’t.

        1. Perhaps you should lock them up. I suggest a privately run concentration camp.

          1. Only governments have concentration camps.

              1. Re: atheist,

                Hey, idiot – I.G. Farben was as “private” as Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac are “private.” Also, the Jewish prisoners were supplied by the government.

                1. Wrong, I.G. Farben was a corporation like any other. It got in good with the Nazi government just like corporations usually do… it is after all in their self-interest. But nice “No true Scotsman” fallacy.

                  1. Re: atheist,

                    Wrong, I.G. Farben was a corporation like any other. It got in good with the Nazi government just like corporations usually do.

                    Doesn’t this undermine your original counterargument, atheist?

                    1. No, just a statement of reality. Wouldn’t expect you to understand.

            1. You just need to follow I.G. Farben’s lead, is all. Think outside the box.

              1. Only governments could get away with that.

                  1. Regarding Blackwater, it was government that got us involved in that useless unecessary war.

                    1. But corporate mercenaries that did and are still doing much of the killing.

                    2. Which would not have even been there if our government had not started up that war in the first place.

                    3. So? The point is that corporation are perfectly capable of massacres, mass imprisonments, etc.

                    4. And any time it happens, I am sure that will be there to defend it, or to claim that it never occurred.

                    5. Apparently, you don’t really know what a libertarian is. We are opposed to corporatism whether it’s practiced by Republicans or by Democrats like Obama. Business should not be allowed to get away with crimes and they should not be given special favors or subsidies.

                    6. We are opposed to corporatism whether it’s practiced by Republicans or by Democrats like Obama.

                      Dude, wouldn’t even exist if it wasn’t for entrenched corporate influence on US politics. It owes its entire existence to one rich family’s desire to pay less in taxes.

                    7. Only when the government allows it.

        2. What are the chances “atheist” and “John” are the same person and that John has been doing an ISP on our asses the whole time?

          Bum dum dum!

          1. So CN, you think if I wanted to liberal troll I wouldn’t do a better job than that? You really know how to hurt a guy don’t you?

            1. Or, I could be suggesting that, as “atheist” in real life, your “John” character is actually a superb conservatarian troll. So take it as a compliment. (Of course, then you’d actually be “atheist,” so I guess it’s not much of a compliment after all.)

              1. I like that you try to work out every detail of your delusions, using perfect logic.

                1. At least he’s using logic unlike you.

              2. I miss Cesar.

                1. Agreed. Troll quality may be at an all-time low. No subtlety any longer, just sub-crayon HURR DURR.

                  1. I don’t think they are trolls. Liberals really are this stupid. If you don’t believe me, go read the Wonkette comments on the whole baby stealing thing. This is how most liberals think and argue, especially ones under the age of about 35.

                    1. Whatever they are, they are childish little attention-whores that should be ignored. Unlike that mysterious rash, they will go away on their own.

                    2. John, you always were my favorite.

      2. Re: atheist,

        Without conservative backup, you’d be about as popular as neo-Nazis.

        Oh, atheist – that was a really stupid comment. You’re giving us atheists a bum rap. Please, say something smart, for once in your puny, insignificant and pitiful life…

        1. Perhaps you should ask the Atheist Pope to excommunicate me.

          1. But he won’t, after I snuggled his scrotum in my mouth and let him put his papal staff in my rectory.

          2. I must be arguing with a child.

            1. What kind of hat would the Atheist Pope wear?

              1. I found it! Science, this Internet thing is the tits!

                1. That hat says princess on it very clearly. The Atheist Pope would have a hat that said “pope”, you big dummy.

                  1. But what if the Atheist Pope were also a princess? Who’s the big dummy now, huh?

              2. I’m thinking asshat.

            2. Or somebody with the brain of a child.

  14. The Pretzel Controversy Continues

    MercurialGirl 10/11/10
    I went to the website and I am so rage filled I don’t even know what to do with myself.

    Gnatalby 10/11/10
    @MercurialGirl: Ugh, my priorities are probably out of whack, but if there was one thing they could do that would piss me off more than a pro-ana ad campaign, it’s capping that off with “Lighten up.”

    Fuck you, Pretzel Crisps, it’s my time, and I’ll get pissed about what I want to be pissed about.

    1. Any self respecting ad-rotator would put a Midol ad on that page.

    2. We should all be thankful that women’s rights around the world are so well respected, and oppression of women is so rare, that the only fight left is over a bag of pretzels.

      1. The right to have a vagina means nothing without the right to be a fat cunt without thinking people are repulsed by you.

  15. Insane Clown Posse have this entire time secretly been evangelical Christians.


    1. There is good money to be made as a “Christian artist”. That South Park episode where Cartman does love songs to Jesus, could have been a “Behind the Music”.

      1. In my darker moments, I’ve thought about following Cartman’s plan.

        1. I’ve got a better idea.

  16. My paper also chose not to run the cartoon in question. I’m told the editors didn’t understand the point. Sadly, I believe this.

    1. Not only can you not depict him, you cannot, evidently, even say his name. Added to the list of forbidden words (the n-word, the w-word, the b-word) we now have the m-word. Congratulations, “free” press.

      1. That’s “m-word(pbuh).”

  17. What the fuck is the deal with this pretzel story? Since it’s Gawker (dba Jezebel), I have no intention of damaging the delicate tattered remnants of my tiny little brain by looking at it myself.

    If the pretzels don’t have enough calories, dip them in cream cheese. C’mon, Velma; it’s not that hard. You wash down your double triple cheddar bacon burgers with Tab, right?

    1. Pretzel company runs ads that offend feminists, feminists freak out disproportionately. It’s the banal nature of it all that makes it so funny.

      1. And yet, NOW is okay with Jerry Brown. Add in all the outrage over how women are treated in Muslim countries, and NOW is exposed as a bunch of man-hating hypocrites.

    2. The outrage appears to be entirely directed at the marketing strategy of associating women whose hips are wider than their waists but narrower than their shoulders with a product.

    3. Au contraire, Monsieur Brooks – that was the running joke when I worked at Bruger King in high school.

      Take one fat woman (always a woman), add “double Whopper?…with cheese….large fry…large onion ring…AND A TAB.”

      It became a running joke. We called Tab “The Neutralizer” – “Better make it a large, ma’am – a medium stops working at a Whopper and large fry.”

  18. Style editor Ned Martel said he decided to yank it, after conferring with others, including Executive Editor Marcus W. Brauchli, because “it seemed a deliberate provocation without a clear message.” He added that “the point of the joke was not immediately clear” and that readers might think that Muhammad was somewhere in the drawing.

    Where’s Fred Phelps when you need him?

    1. Ned Martel said he decided to yank it


    2. “the point of the joke was not immediately clear”

      Is Dilbert in danger now?

      1. Mankind will not progress until the death of the last Family Circus fan.

        1. You have articulated an important truth this day.

          1. I think Marmaduke is funny.

            1. 1 An I r in ur sandz looking at ur waterz: an OH NOES! A monstar camez out. He can has severn hedz an ten hornz: an can has ten crouwnz.2 An teh monstar I saws It iz layk big spotteded kitteh, an It can has pawz layk bear, an It can has mout layk big neck-fur kitteh. An Teh dragn gaved it teh powurz an teh chairz an teh autoritiez.3 An I sawz teh munster hurtz in teh hed: An laterz teh monstar hed he getz bettar: An evry pepls goes layk: OMFG! in wunder.4 An evry1 goes wrship teh munster an Evry1 goes wrship teh dragn bcuz he r haveing teh powurz. Any1 stolez hiz cheezburgerz? No wai!

                1. sorry, I meant to say, I think Joe Mathlete explains today’s Marmaduke is funny.

            2. Marmaduke isn’t fit to lick the balls of Fred Bassett.

    3. readers might think that Muhammad was somewhere in the drawing

      1) “I spent four and a half hours looking for him. Thanks a lot for wasting my time!”

      2) “I’m *sure* that’s Him, just without the Beard!”

      Anyway, he had better mean an *image* of Muhammed. The notion that Muhammed himself is in a drawing is *doubly* blasphemous.

      1. The Richmond Times-Dispatch ran the cartoon. I saw it and was mildly surprised, actually, but I suppose I shouldn’t have been, because I’m acquainted with a couple of the editors and they’re generally libertarian/conservative leaning and are more committed and dedicated to actual free speech than most of the rest of the daily papers.

  19. Los Angeles County is moving to submit its flock of 9,500 food trucks and carts to the same health department rules as restaurants ? including requiring them to prominently post a letter grade based on food inspections ? in what may be the ultimate sign that this faddiest of food fads is going mainstream.

    An epic whiff. You could feel the breeze in the upper deck.
    Whoever wrote that is ready to take the next step; a slot at MSNBC.

    1. There was a show on Food Network this fall called “Food Truck Race” or something. Most of the food trucks were from LA. Watching it I thought it was pretty cool that LA has so many high end food trucks. Sure enough, the government now must destroy it. God forbid anything positive be allowed to happen in California.

  20. New York City requires food trucks and carts to get permits and subjects them to annual inspections, city officials said. But New York imposes a strict cap on the number of food carts, issuing just 3,100 two-year permits and 1,000 seasonal permits; there is a waiting list, officials said.

    “There is a waiting list.”

    No kidding; I wonder if those permits have acquired a monetary value of their own?

    1. Or if you can get to the top of that waiting list by paying off the right person. Seriously, how the hell does some idiot in the NYC government say with a straight face ‘the government must regulate to prevent food truck over supply’? We could have a tragedy of the commons or something.

      1. I was happy to just read that the FB1 is in my parish investigating public corruption. I hope they string them all up.

        1. You in Livingston Parish?

          1. How’d you know?

            1. Everybody knows about what goes on in Livingston Parish, we’re just too afraid to talk about it…

        2. And now I hear the DOJ is going after my energy company. What a strange morning.

  21. And issuing a limited number of permits, only to current operators, is a great way to get those operators to buy into the program.

  22. Hard times on campus.

    And indeed, if your criteria are productivity, efficiency and consumer satisfaction, it makes perfect sense to withdraw funds and material support from the humanities ? which do not earn their keep and often draw the ire of a public suspicious of what humanities teachers do in the classroom ? and leave standing programs that have a more obvious relationship to a state’s economic prosperity and produce results the man or woman in the street can recognize and appreciate. (What can you say to the tax-payer who asks, “What good does a program in Byzantine art do me?” Nothing.)

    President Philip cites as one justification for his action the fact “that there are comparatively fewer students enrolled in these degree programs.” Of course, in a bygone time seats in those programs’ classes would have been filled by students who were meeting quite specific distribution requirements; you remember, two advanced language courses, one course in American lit and another in British lit, and so on.


    But keeping something you value alive by artificial, and even coercive, means (and distribution requirements are a form of coercion) is better than allowing them to die, if only because you may now die (get fired) with them, a fate that some visionary faculty members may now be suffering. I have always had trouble believing in the high-minded case for a core curriculum ? that it preserves and transmits the best that has been thought and said ? but I believe fully in the core curriculum as a device of employment for me and my fellow humanists. But the point seems to be moot. It’s too late to turn back the clock.

    Wear your irrelevance like a pink and green striped Speedo, Professor.

    1. Thanks for that link.

      Two things strike me about that article:

      First, the author complains that the college president held his meeting announcing these reductions on a Friday afternoon, “…when he could be sure no academic personnel would be around.” Wow – way to really show off the sterling work habits of your constituency.

      Second, at the end of the article, he plays the “ancient traditions are being lost” card, and that is really galling. I would imagine that the ratio of the number of students working in the humanities now to the number of students working in the humanities in 1750 runs into the tens of thousands to one. How can anyone claim that the continuity of study in the humanities is under anything remotely resembling threat when that is the case? When we consider humanities study in the aggregate, it really makes no difference at all to the tradition if any given state university offers any given course.


    Anyone read the WSJ story yesterday about Congressional insider trading? Unbelievable.

    1. Unlike many Executive Branch employees, lawmakers and aides don’t have restrictions on their stock holdings and ownership interests in companies they oversee. Congressional rules say that requiring employees to do so could “insulate a legislator from the personal and economic interests that his or her constituency, or society in general, has in governmental decisions and policy.”

      If I don’t get to buy the stock of companies that my boss funnels dirty money to, I would lose touch with the people in my district. Makes perfect sense.

      1. Congressional rules say that requiring employees to do so could “insulate a legislator from the personal and economic interests that his or her constituency, or society in general, has in governmental decisions and policy.”

        Yeah, that’s pretty much the fucking point. Its a textbook conflict of interest, you knobs.

        If they really think that legislators and staff need a direct economic interest in society in general, then they should all be required to put their portfolios in stock and bond index funds.

        1. I favor blind trusts. It should be one of the consequences of a lifetime of “public service”.

  24. I used to know a very wealthy guy who was a Senate page in the early Sixties. He told me the Senators gave him stock tips all the time.

  25. Troll quality may be at an all-time low.

    Say, what ever happened to that “Welcome, MSNBCers!” initiative, anyway?

    Still working out the bugs in the comment moderation and registration systems, I reckon.

    1. I think someone had time to sober up.

  26. More entertaining Atheist

    I think we over-idealize the old trolls. Remember, however tiresome fucksticks like atheist are, at least we don’t have to deal with joe anymore.

  27. at least we don’t have to deal with joe anymore.

    Even on the rare occasions he said something mostly inoffensive, he managed to do it in an egregiously prissy and sanctimonious manner. What a twat.

    1. Whatever happened to joe?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.