Reason Morning Links: Kyl To Block Arms Treaty, Four Loko Caves, Mark Twain's Autobiography in Stores
- Sen. John Kyl (R-Ariz.) will block arms treaty White House negotiated with Russia.
- Harry Reid says he's willing to consider extension of Bush tax cuts.
- FDIC launches criminal investigation of failed banks.
- Four Loko says it will voluntarily remove caffeine from its controversial drinks.
- White pages may come to an end in Maryland, Virginia.
- Mark Twain's autobiography finally hits shelves.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Sen. John Kyl (R-Ariz.) will block arms treaty White House negotiated with Russia.
It appears at some point the Obama Administration and Congressional Republicans are going to have to negotiate a little treaty of their own.
I hope not. I like it when government is gridlocked good and tight.
The article doesn't say, but WTF does Kyl hope to accomplish by this?
This appears to be either obstructionism for the sake of obstructionism or some sort of favor for the nuke arms industry.
Ever seen "Seven Days In May"?
Of course.
It's the archetype of all of the Hollywood "heroic peace-loving President saves America and the World from evilrightwingconspirators" movies.
It may not be surprising that I sided with the right wing conspirators for most of the film. Until they started killing innocent people, at least.
Interesting, as the government has increasingly taken the stance that no one is innocent anymore.
Kyle and a lot of other people think Obama's goal is to unilaterally end the US's nuclear deterrent. Not ratifying this is just fighting him on the beeches.
"fighting on the beeches"?
Is he going to make the fir fly? Or spruce up the treaty? Is he trying to be poplar? Or just making an ash of himself? Yew just can't tell why he's birching about it.
But was he pining for days-gone-by?
Or the fjords?
http://host.madison.com/wsj/ne.....002e0.html
Had it not been for New York's strict gun laws, the would have been Andy Sullivan.
Allegedly set off by Bristol Palin's appearance on "Dancing with the Stars," a rural Black Earth man kept police at bay outside his home for 15 hours Monday and Tuesday before he surrendered to police.
"Steven N. Cowan, 66, railed at the television as the daughter of former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin appeared on the ABC program, his wife told police Monday after she fled from the town of Vermont house, according to a criminal complaint filed in Dane County Circuit Court."
Clearly one of those violent rat-bagging tea-fuckers.
Why New York? I thought the Gyneybogger shuttles between DC and Provincetown.
I thought he lived in NYC.
Was Cowan drinking Four Loko?
Seeing Nancy Pelosi has the exact same effect on me.
Lisa Murkowski and other Republicans say they will continue to use earmarks despite moratorium.
"Even with McConnell's support, proponents of the earmark ban appear to be at a loss as to how it will be enforced against their colleagues who are determined to seek pork-barrel projects."
Easy. Don't put earmarkers on the committee to resolve House and Senate bills. Strip the earmarks in committee. Wow, that was hard.
Are earmarks and pork-barrel projects the same thing though?
I thought pork-barrel was shoving something into a completely unrelated bill so that your district gets a new park or statue. Conversely, I thought earmarking was just using already appropriated money for your district's pet projects.
Please, correct me if I'm wrong.
They come from the same root. Earmarks are how you tell whose pigs belong to whom. There may have been a distinction, but it is long gone.
One party state of incumbestan. That nasty fucking bitch.
There are actually people out there who read Lonewacko's blog.
http://valley-of-the-shadow.bl.....ogger.html
http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/109971/
And the Reason comentariot gets instalanched. Hit the "widely shared" link. It is worth doing.
My greatest achievement.
I think "Shut the Fuck up" is the google automatic fill when you type "Lonewacko"
I'm so proud of y'all.
Hahaha, that is glorious.
That's great. Congratulations to LW for getting the recognition he's craved.
I swear I can remember him being a little less, well, doctrinaire back in the earlier days of Hit & Run.
Yes, the unhinging process took a few years to complete.
Are we collectively responsible?
Libertarian society is to blame!
That's bullshit. LW's a white suburban punk just like me.
This is the amazing writing of the guy that is promoting Lonewacko:
I gues I will be font changing during the week. This is Calif9rnia and Los Angeles week...
Blogger has spellcheck, damnit!
Did you recently use Lonewacko as a source for an argument?
Thanks for that link, I never understood the "STFU, lonewhacko" reference, but now I do.
Pretty soon, these training wheels will be coming off.
http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/.....nt_than_us
Soros joins the Tom Friedman China love society. I think this ought to put an end to any idea that Soros does what he does because of his experiences in World War II and fear of right wing government. If he honestly admires the Chinese government, then he really isn't too concerned about the prospect of governments murdering and oppressing their people.
There was a right-wing government in Germany during WWII?
Right wing in the sense that they were nationalists (hyper-nationalists), left wing in most other respects.
OK. They may have been "to the right" of Stalin, but that don't exactly make them right-wing.
Then again, if a nationalist believes that he should run the whole world, is there really a difference?
I actually consider the Nazis to have been just another--albeit unique--brand of socialism. In the end, utopian totalitarianism usually has the same effect.
Agreed.
An argument spelt out with copious footnotes in Jonah Goldberg's book, of course. (A book that he said writing made him more libertarian.)
That argument was made in the 30's and 40's in numerous books, including Hayek's Road to Serfdom.
For the record, I'm not claiming that that view is original with me. I think I first thought it when I read Shirer's The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, but I've certainly encountered the concept elsewhere.
The "Socialism" part of National Socialism kinda gives it away.
fuck off, cunt.
If the progressives Mr. Soros supports want to maintain the "Nazis are right-wing" narrative to tar their political enemies, they should have to live with when it inconveniences them as well.
Extreme right wing is quite similar to extreme left wing. Both are very authoritarian, for example.
The Nazis are more of an extreme right wing government than an extreme left wing government. Big business prospered under the Nazis. The communists and socialists were put into concentration camps even before the Jews.
The attacks on the Communists and the Social Democrats came because they were perceived--correctly--as the greatest threats to Nazi power.
The real distinction between the groups was the "national" in National Socialism. The Nazis pushed a virulent and obsessive nationalism, which has not been a hallmark of communism or socialism.
As far as the economics go, Hitler wanted to maintain an economy that could support a war without having to go to a full wartime economy. To do that, he could hardly afford to totally restructure the economic system. What he could do and did do was exert nearly total control over industry, skipping over the step of actually taking ownership. In some ways, that's what our regulatory state today has created for some industries.
Large business interests initially supported the Nazis to avoid Social Democratic rule, which they viewed as threatening. I'm sure they regretted that one pretty quickly.
Some did.
Good for him. "Oops, I screwed up, time to leave" beats hanging out and helping the insane dictator keep going.
You guys are still in denial about this? Look up who supported Hitler in the U.S.
Of course, totalitarian systems of the left and right have more in common with each other than either has with the left and right poles of liberal-democratic discourse. But that doesn't mean you have license to rewrite history.
Communists and socialists have been bitter enemies in various countries, too. So what?
I loved it when that crazy commie chick was on CNN with The Jacket and chimed in "I support private-public partnership!" Of course, bringing in that other left-wing idea: fascism.
The opposite of government control is the free market, not "pro-business" or what ever you want to hide behind.
I would pay good money to see Soros move to China and try to pull the same sort of crap over there that he pulled on the U.K. and is now trying to pull on America. They would run his sorry ass over with a tank.
I'd shell out pay-per-view money to see that!
[rolling over]
Crunch time for upgrade of internet addresses that are running out
This is described by someone in the article as a "textbook market failure". To me, it seems more like a sort of inverted tragedy of the commons, where all the costs are on the individual, but the benefits are dispersed, and in fact, aren't realized without full participation.
I've got a library hold on volume one of the Mark Twain autobiography. For those who've only read his novels, I highly recommend his other works (essays, travel books, etc.). He was a brilliant writer and satirist.
Roughing It and Innocents Abroad are both fantastic.
Agreed. Life on the Mississippi is another goodie.
Mark Twain's autobiography finally hits shelves
It's about time. Justin Bieber already has two.
Don't miss out on Letters From Earth either.
Letters From Earth may be the most subversive tome I ever read. I was never really able to take religious authority seriously after that.
I have that in my library. Great stuff. Twain was extra bitter when he wrote that, having lost family members and being in massive debt.
As I recall, Twain was forced to file bankruptcy, but once he got back in the black, he paid off his creditors, anyway, despite not having any legal obligation to do so.
A Connecticut Yankee In King Arthur's Court is almost as much so. The only thing he hated more than established churches was monarchy, I think.
The only thing he hated more than established churches...
As opposed to the unestablished ones? That's right up there with hating "organized religion." "I'm all for unorganized religion, but if you organize, I'm out!"
I think non-denominational churches would fall under the "Unestablished" category. Also, there are a lot of churches (including my dad's) that don't have their own church building, but rather rent out space in various places.
An established church is a state church, dipshit.
fuck off, cunt.
As Craig Fehrman points out in Slate here, http://www.slate.com/id/2272634/, Mark has been "selling" his autobiography for the past 100 years. I read (some) of the 1959 edition. Parts weren't bad, but another Huckleberry Finn it isn't.
Right, there have been previous editions that have included some portions of what's being published this year, but this is the first time the complete work has been published. He's important enough to make that a noteworthy event.
STOP SPELLING MY NAME WRONG!
Reading Mark Twain's books, it's not the parts I don't understand that trouble me, but rather the parts I do understand.
I'm beginning tyo think well of this Douthat character.
Their [Simpson and Bowles] proposals certainly weren't flawless, but they did manage to include good ideas from right and left alike. And it's illuminating, and very depressing, that Democrats were so immediately outraged by a plan that reduces corporate welfare, makes Social Security more progressive, slashes the defense budget, raises the tax rate on millionaires' summer homes ? and does all of this while capping the government's share of gross domestic product, not at some Scrooge-like minimum but at the highest level in modern American history.
Crunch time for upgrade of internet addresses that are running out
This is described by someone in the article as a "textbook market failure". To me, it seems more like a sort of inverted tragedy of the commons, with all costs borne by the individual, but the benefits being shared, and only truly realized with full participation.
Crunch time for upgrade of internet addresses that are running out
This is described by someone in the article as a "textbook market failure". To me, it seems more like a sort of inverted tragedy of the commons, with all costs borne by the individual, but the benefits being shared, and only truly realized with full participation.
Crunch time for upgrade of internet addresses that are running out
This is described by someone in the article as a "textbook market failure". To me, it seems more like a sort of inverted tragedy of the commons, with all costs borne by the individual, but the benefits being shared, and only truly realized with full participation.
An article about the coming conversion from IPv4 to IPv6 (stupid spam filter is giving me grief)
This is described by someone in the article as a "textbook market failure". To me, it seems more like a sort of inverted tragedy of the commons, with all costs borne by the individual, but the benefits being shared, and only truly realized with full participation.
http://www.theage.com.au/techn.....17v26.html
An article about the coming conversion from IPv4 to IPv6 (stupid spam filter is giving me grief)
This is described by someone in the article as a "textbook market failure". To me, it seems more like a sort of inverted tragedy of the commons, with all costs borne by the individual, but the benefits being shared, and only truly realized with full participation.
Reason, your spam filter is fucking worthless. Seriously, just get a damn captcha already.
No! I am dyslexic and wouldn't be able to post anymore!
Captcha is the devil I tell's yah. Plus my pc makes no noise so can't even read it to me! No No No! Anything but captcha!?
...bzzt
I told them at the time of the survey/change that this new format only made sense with accounts. I like the ability to joke handle, but would give it up so that I could have things like, oh, messages marked as read, so that I can quickly find new messages.
With the old unthreaded system it was easy, just go to the bottom.
Sometimes a blog is just a blog.
Then dont thread it.
The best system I've encountered is the ability to easily quote/reply (without using html-fu).
Give me a "reply/quote" button that way we all know to what one is replying, without having to do scrolling acrobatics to see later posts. But for goodness sakes, can we get rid of the fucking threaded bullshit.
but I like changing my name, I used to be phalkor, then I was something else, and I've finally settled on waffles. Geez, I've been reading H&R since 2007. In internet time, that's a long time.
Keeping the same handle over the weeks and months and years means you have to take responsibility for all the really stupid things you wrote and wished would disappear from the internets but they never will you know.
I've wanted to change my handle for some time now, but I haven't for this very reason - I don't want anyone to think I'm running away from some of my less-well-thought-out comments.
Don't change, man!
I have no idea what you're talking about.
http://www.theage.com.au/technology/t.....17v26.html
An article about the coming conversion from IPv4 to IPv6 (stupid spam filter is giving me grief)
This is described by someone in the article as a "textbook market failure". To me, it seems more like a sort of inverted tragedy of the commons, with all costs borne by the individual, but the benefits being shared, and only truly realized with full participation.
theage.com.au/technology/technology-news/crunch-time-for-upgrade-of-internet-addresses-that-are-running-out-20101116-17v26.html
An article about the coming conversion from IPv4 to IPv6 (stupid spam filter is giving me grief)
This is described by someone in the article as a "textbook market failure". To me, it seems more like a sort of inverted tragedy of the commons, with all costs borne by the individual, but the benefits being shared, and only truly realized with full participation.
Harry Reid says he's willing to consider extension of Bush tax cuts.
In exchange for not investigating how he actually got the win in Nevada.
He won the usual way... cheating.
All the cool politicians do it.
Cheating is about only way anybody can win in Nevada.
Actually, it's more likely that Reid just had the house advantage.
Pro Lib-
I think I like Twain's essays and nonfiction better than the novels. It has been a long time, but Life on the Mississippi and Roughing It in particular.
I always enjoyed The Awful German Language
I won't say that I like them better, but they are great in their own right.
Mark Twain didn't write or say anything. Neither did Einstein or Winston Churchill.
Are you saying that you don't like Twain?
Most quotes attributed to Mark Twain (and the others) turn out to be from someone else, so I'm just taking the limit.
Okay, I see. That's true enough. Though like those other two gentlemen, he has plenty of good quotes that are his.
I thought he was going the "Mark Twain was a pen name... Samuel Clemens wrote everything" route.
The War Prayer is a great little piece. I think warty's shared it here before.
Several times.
I've been reading Personal Recollections of Joan of Arc lately. It's completely unlike any of his other books, and it's heart-breaking when you realize that his character Joan is actually his daughter who had recently died.
I think this ought to put an end to any idea that Soros does what he does because of his experiences in World War II and fear of right wing government.
Defamation!
That great and generous Nazi was deeply traumatized by the best time of his life, and he would never spend his fortune in an attempt to re-create it, because old rich guys never do that.
FDIC launches criminal investigation of failed banks tries to put all the blame for the financial market collapse on small banks, totally ignores role of Congress, GSEs, the Fed, and big banks that can afford to pay protection money.
Doesn't this mean that the regulators themselves were negligent in not catching this before the collapse? When will the officials who were turning a blind eye to these illegal activities be investigated?
They can not be held accountable. They are federal employees. Seriously.
Whoops, my bad.
The agency responsible for dealing with bank failures is stepping up its effort to punish alleged recklessness, fraud and other criminal behavior
As Karl Denninger says, "Stop the looting and start prosecuting!"
Now, if only the government will keep us informed about the particulars ....
If you want to read something completely puke-inducing, read kindly old Grandpa Buffett's gurgling and cooing mash note to "Uncle Sam" in the NYT.
Fuck that guy.
Agree. He sold out to the big government devil a while ago. Screw him and his phony regular guy persona.
Penn Jillette gets hi felt up.
http://www.pennandteller.com/0.....alvip.html
That's gonna create some bad P.R. for the TSA. Penn Jillette pissed off is not a good thing to happen.
No clue how that hi snuck in there. More coffee needed...
She said, "... if you give me your itinerary every time you fly, I'll be at the airport with you and we can make sure it's very pleasant for you."
It just gets better and better!
It's from 2002. The TSA hasn't learned shit and I guess Penn didn't file a lawsuit.
ya. but still funny
Oh yeah. I didn't catch it back then and I read it on Drudge today. I was LMAO. Gotta love Penn for it.
THREADJACK ALERT!!!
Chicago's public pension funds are near insolvency, the result of years of being used as a bargaining chip by politicians and union leaders...
http://www.wgnradio.com/news/c.....9372.story
From the city of Hope and Change.
You can't threadjack the Morning Links. Its like taking a bull session off-topic.
Are you saying that the Morning Links are just a pretext? A sham?
It'll be under control soon.
Looks like the FDA is going to announce that caffeine and alcohol in the same container is a health risk.
Not sure how they justify outlawing this combination in drinks that are prepared in a hygienic, quality-controlled environment (the 4 Loko factory), but not in drinks that are prepared in a grimy neighborhood dive.
Are you suggesting that they may ban the bourbon and coke?
"" but not in drinks that are prepared in a grimy neighborhood dive.""
Does the FDA have jurisdiction over bars and resturants?
Once the Obama EPA ruled that carbon dioxide is hazardous to human health so they could regulate it under the Clean Air Act, it was clear they would say anything, and redefine any word they needed to, to make their beliefs the law of the land without passing through Congress.
I've been saying it, this is the beginning of the War on Caffeine. Red Bull and other energy drinks will be outlawed, or at least, illegal to sell in bars, soon enough.
If they come for my morning coffee, there will be blood shed.
People will be snorting black market caffeine cut with baby laxative in five years. Mark this post!
It's all part of a Mormon conspiracy to reintroduce prohibition of alcohol and add prohibition of caffeine.
Will they also re-legalize ephedrine (Mormon Tea)?
If the feds have no authority over alcohol, then from the FDA's perspective, isn't it just caffeine?
OBEY
The TSA has launched an investigation of a passenger in San Diego who left the airport after opting out of an invasive body scan and criticizing the proposed alternative pat-down.
John Tyner, a 31-year-old software programmer, recorded the encounter on his mobile phone and posted it to his blog. From there, it quickly went viral, tapping a groundswell of frustration over TSA's procedures.
But far from backing down, the TSA told local reporters that it's now investigating the passenger, who may face an $11,000 fine if the agency sues him.
"What he's done, he's violated federal law and federal regulations which states once you enter and start the process you have to complete it," TSA's San Diego security director told the Fox 5 News.
Baboons.
With guns.
Even Baboons are not this arrogant.
I'm not flying anytime soon. My wife is at DCA now and intends to "choose" the pat down. Curious as to what others are planning to do.
I keep going back and forth about it. On the one hand, it is not like they give a shit if they inconvienence people. So it seems pointless. On the other hand, if even 20% refused to walk though those things, the air traffic system would grind to a halt and something would get done about it. So I am not sure.
Tiebreaker is cancer. Groping probably wont give me cancer. Plus I always favor the possible chaos option.
The dosage is .02 micro-sieverts
Compare to Natural Radiation Hazard at Aircraft Altitudes
Looks like you get more radiation from flying on the plane.
Sure, but the risk of being on a plane with a terrorist is remote too, and that's the proper comparison, the actual supposed alternative.
I don't think anyone should accept the logic of "well, you accept larger risk A, so it's nonsensical to refuse smaller risk B." Most risks people take come with rewards at the same time, and the benefits may be larger for some with larger risks.
Oh god, I am in NO WAY defending this bullshit! It's been my number one issue to be outspoken about the last two weeks. I just want to be accurate about some of the details.
The primary risk of back-scatter scanners is not to our bodies, but to our souls.
Yeah, I've suffered from sould cancer for many years now.
But you're getting that regardless. Why increase the dosage even more?
It's a tiny fraction of the larger dose. I think it's about 1% as strong. Someone can check that math.
I swear to Zod I'm going to drop trou in the middle of the screening area.
"Here you go boys! Have at it!"
She may not have to choose - they still have lines that go through the standard metal detectors. At least they did last week.
The Congress Creatures and their staffs fly in and out of DCA. I would imagine it won't change anytime soon. We can't have people who matter being subjected to this can we?
Run through the checkpoint naked.
I rarely fly. My next trip isn't till April, by which point I expect Napolitano to be under the bus with tread marks on her face. But if I still have to choose twixt porno scan and gate rape, I'll choose gate rape and I will refuse all offers of privacy. I will say - politely - that I'd rather be molested in full view of witnesses.
I'm not particularly modest and to be honest, having some renta cop wannabe feel me up's not gonna leave me psychologically scarred. But I do plan to make it mighty goddamned uncomfortable for HER.
I've been to medical school. I don't care about people putting their hands all over my body.
Any way that I can inconvenience a federal employee is worth it, and if I can make them uncomfortable too than all the better.
It's not the "I" problem for me, but the problem of subjecting my child to either treatment. I can passively be a dick to the TSA screeners as my own personal form of protest.
My 3 year old cannot, and furthermore, I can't in good conscience subject him to the violation by some government goon, nor can I rationalize having some dickface look at my child's digitized naked body.
It's a lose-lose situation.
If I have to fly with my family (and being that my wife is Brazilian with every family member she has is in Brazil) I will be arrested and charged (and likely beaten and tased and maybe shot). I simply can't justify telling my 3 year old "no one can touch you there except for the nice government storm trooper".
Fuck that. If anyone else who engages in such behavior is to be arrested for molestation, there is no fucking way that I carve a "government exception".
Fuck the TSA.
Fucking joke handles.
Our War on Terror at work.
As we know, just calling it a "War on" [insert perceived societal ill here] works. It has done wonders on drugs and poverty. Does anyone even remember that we used to have those things in our society?
"What he's done, he's violated federal law and federal regulations which states once you enter and start the process you have to complete it,
[citation needed]
There is no statute that says that. There is I am sure a regulation that says so. Now the issue of how in the hell an unelected federal agency can create a civil or criminal penalty out of thin air via rule making is something the public might want to consider.
You'd be shocked at the number of times somebody has told me my client has to do something because "its the law", I have said we will certainly comply with the law if they can provide a copy, and somehow, no copy of a law or regulation is ever provided.
No I wouldn't. You would be shocked the number of times other government lawyers have told me that my client has to do x or y and I have said "show me where it says that" and there answer is some bullshit policy memo their client wrote up or nothing at all.
I have found that lawyers are actually the worst about reading and following the rules.
And as I am sure you know, the best way to deal with a bureaucrat is to be painfully polite and ask them to show you were it says that. They almost never know their own rules or where to even find them. And the rules, since they are written by a very defined process with a lot of cometary and oversight, are almost never as draconian as the bureaucrats think they are.
Back when I was in-house in financial services, I used to regularly ask regulators to show me the blackletter law/regulation authorizing whatever power grab was in vogue at the moment. Usually worked, though it was a message that had to be delivered civilly to avoid revenge being taken out on our branches.
A now deceased lawyer friend of mine always used to say that if you have any trouble with a government agency, just ask them to show you the form/statute (as applicable) they are working from and you will probably never hear from them again.
Certainly true.
Of course, many people comply anyway.
Which also means that any negative publicity for the PATRIOT Act that exaggerated it in order to try to help get people opposed to it, actually helped law enforcement get away with things. I've seen plenty of cases where people tried to exploit that hysteria by making it true-- claiming that the PATRIOT Act authorized them to do things that it didn't.
""[citation needed]""
Ask, and you shall receive.
http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/.....policy.pdf
C, E, or *
The * on the last line is pretty funny and should be laughed out of court.
Normally, I would say this is the kind of bullshit you get when one party holds 2/3 of government. But in this case, it's more of a unchanged shitty diaper thing after America collectively crapped on its self after 9/11.
That would be a policy document, which is not even promulgated regulation. Leaving aside the fact that this is not legally binding:
I don't think C or E cuts it - I don't see how you can be in a "sterile area" or "secure area" until you are on the other side of the screening facility. If you refuse screening and leave, you haven't entered a secure area.
Needless to say, "*" does not cut even the most watered-down French's mustard.
""I don't think C or E cuts it - I don't see how you can be in a "sterile area" or "secure area" until you are on the other side of the screening facility""
Which is probably why they are using the catch all *. But I can't see a judge taking that seriously. The counter claim that Tyner might file has a better chance of being successful. That outcome would be funny.
A quick scan of the legislation reveals no sanctions on passengers, and no legal authority for the TSA to promulgate rules putting sanctions on passengers.
So, [citation] still [needed].
A quick scan of the TSA regs in 49 CFR Part 1540 indicates that, as I suspected, the regs are aimed towards keeping people out of the "sterile area" unless they have gone through the entire screening process.
There is a regulation that states:
"No person may:
(1) Tamper or interfere with, compromise, modify, attempt to circumvent, or cause a person to tamper or interfere with, compromise, modify, or attempt to circumvent any security system, measure, or procedure implemented under this subchapter.
(2) Enter, or be present within, a secured area, AOA, SIDA or sterile area without complying with the systems, measures, or procedures being applied to control access to, or presence or movement in, such areas."
Based on this regulations, which prohibits "circumventing" the screening process, I could see them deriving a rule that requires you to go through the entire process once you've started it. But again, it is premised entirely on the notion that the person will be entering the sterile area. If you're not going to do that, and instead will just be leaving the airport, I'm still wondering on what legal basis they can force you to go through the screening process.
""Based on this regulations, which prohibits "circumventing" the screening process, I could see them deriving a rule that requires you to go through the entire process once you've started it.""
Assuming that's true, RC's point is there is no authority for them to fine you for it. I would really like to see this go to court.
So if I choose to stay in the security line with my wife before she departs on a long trip overseas, I would still have to be subjected to a personal violation even though I have no intentions of flying anywhere?
How long until we have a clearly written "rule" that states exactly what they are bending their existing rules to mean?
The over/under is 60 days from now.
Fuck the TSA.
""So, [citation] still [needed].""
http://intelligence.senate.gov/laws/pl11053.pdf
See section 1302
Then how sweet would this be if it went forward and declared the entire DHS unconstitutional?
Given, I've been sick the last 5 days so this might just be the DayQuil talking...
Nice, but that isn't a citation to either statute or the Code of Federal Regualations, and it nowhere explains how leaving the airport after choosing not to go through with a TSA grope constitutes a "violation" of anything.
It seems to me the requirement that you complete the security process once you've started it is premised on the notion that you will aftwerwards be getting on an airplane. If you've changed your intent and are instead leaving the airport, under what fucking pretense can they require you to finish the security screening? You're not getting on an airplane - you're walking out and getting back in your car and leaving. It seems to me that under those circumstances, it's wrongful imprisonment.
Fuckity fuck fuck.
""If you've changed your intent and are instead leaving the airport, under what fucking pretense can they require you to finish the security screening?""
Their reasoning is that a terrorst could leave and report back to another terrorist about the procedures.
So what if he goes through the screening process, as they're claiming he would have to, then turns around and leaves the airport?
How would requiring him to complete the screening process prevent him from leaving and telling the other guy about it?
I didn't say their reasoning made sense. For that matter, a terrorist could go through screening and call to report.
Or is it that someone leaving obviously has something to hide, and is probably a terrorist?
If it's not "voluntary", then airport inspection may violate the Fourth Amendment (even under the SCOTUS' warped interpretations in recent times). Not sure if the TSA wants to go down that road.
Why would it violate the 4th? Since we are at war, it's likely to be viewed as a reasonable search.
Show me this "Declaration of War"
Traveling by air is "voluntary", although the search might not be. If you don't want the search, don't fly. That's the position they'll take. And there is plenty of SCOTUS precedent for a lessened or different standard for what is a "reasonable" search at border entries and transportation facilities.
Simply put, we lose; they win; we're essentially fucked anyhow.
That's true, but the precedent is much greater at actual US border.
Except for those retarded California fruit-and-vegetable searches at the state border.
I agree that that's been the justification in the past, but this new stance that you can't even legally walk away from the security checkpoint doesn't fit that. It's not voluntary by any stretch of the imagination if you can't even avoid the search by choosing not to fly.
Well, once they shut down planes and cars, they either get to keep us in one place or herd us around on trains. You win this round, fascism.
RIP, 4Loko. Now I'll have to go back to the old way, dissolving a handful of No-Doz in a bottle of Olde English 800.
Throw in a Jolly Rancher for bonus coloring and flavoring.
Or grain alcohol with Mountain Dew mixed to taste.
On tonight six o'clock news, the scourge of trashcan punch.
The trick with trashcan punch is to let it sit overnight. You can't taste the PGA at all. Makes for some dangerous stuff. I've seen many of people puking their guts out because they drank it like kool-aid.
The wildest parties I ever had in college were punch parties. People do drink it like kool-aid. And they get out of control. And people who don't normally drink drink it like kool-aid. Keg parties are generally lame. But punch parties almost always ended in some kind of insanity.
Article I was reading last week said that 20-25% abv drinks entire the body faster than 40+% drinks.
Apparently the body freaks out at high alcohol doses and slows down absorption. So, that bourbon and coke is going to get you drunk faster than the bourbon on the rocks.
Or, you know, the fruity punch drink works too.
Ingredients:
Watermelon
Syringe
Everclear
Almost TOO easy.
Going to the infield at the Derby?
Got a cite for that, robc? That sounds like some interesting research.
When I was at Kent, they called it a "Hairy Buffalo", IIRC.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/rod.....well.thtml
Epic PR fail.
These capitalists are a bunch of pussies!
Seems like yesterday when Proctor and Gamble was cowed into changing it's traditional logo because some Holy Rollers (all 10 of them) claimed it represented witchcraft.
Now 4Loco is capitulating to the food police.
that old wives tail about P&G has been around since the 70s. Wow those people are nothing if not persistent.
who, wives?
Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood says the fed guv could install devices to scramble cell phone signals to prevent distracted driving.
The best quote is where he says people have Blackberries and cell phones and "they just think they can use them anywhere they go."
Uh, yes. Yes, in fact, we do.
LaHood is a fucking menace. Even more than Napolitano, Seblius or Holder, he is probably the worst Obama cabinet member.
Bullshit. Pure, unadulterated.
There is no way a hands-free phone conversation produces more distraction than a conversation with another person in the car. Probably less, since people have a habit of looking at the person they're speaking with when that person is present.
I believe it. Which also suggests the .08 limit is too low.
Don't worry, they'll outlaw speaking to passengers soon enough.
The next version of the Chevy Volt will be a one-seater.
Well, they're actually doing that because it doesn't have the ability to carry a heavier load.
The communications studies that I recall, long before this whole issue, seem to back this up. Estimated 70% of communication is non verbal. When talking on the phone, you tend to try to picture the other person to fill the gaps. I know I do it when talking on any phone. You can pick up on those non verbal cues from a passenger even when not looking directly at them.
Not to mention the fact that a scrambler will prevent anyone in the vehicle from using a cell phone, not just the driver. What an asshat.
I'm sure preventing anyone in the vicinity of crashed vehicle from using their cell phone to call an ambulance won't cause any inconvience at all.
Relax, girls. It'll never happen and you know it.
Relax girls. They just want to check your ID at the airport. It is not like they are going to make you go through a naked body scan or something. That will never happen and you know it.
Exactly. Never happen. It's as crazy as banning Happy Meals.
If there is one thing that the last 20 years or so has taught is it "think the unthinkable".
20 years ago, 1984 was a book about government oppression, today it's a handbook on procedures.
Orwell was an idiot. He was off by, like, 25 years.
""I'm sure preventing anyone in the vicinity of crashed vehicle from using their cell phone to call an ambulance won't cause any inconvience at all.""
You could pull over and call.
But what if you're following a bank robber or something like that. Well, he was traveling South on I-95 before I had to pull over and call.
Or all those Amber alerts you see on the highway signs. Wouldn't those become useless?
My money is they will figure out a way to allow only 911 calls. They don't really need a something that blocks the signal. Something that will drop any call other than authorized calls would work.
the carriers that give free minutes for dropped calls are gonne be really pissed. and trying to dial repeatedly while growing a festering rage at the phone will be much safer.
If the call doesn't go through it's not really a dropped call. In this case the system wouldn't allow the call to go through. From the users perspective the phone would act like there's no connection.
http://abovethelaw.com/2010/11.....their-son/
My nominee for dickhead of the 21st Century. I hope someone in prison shanks him.
Shanking would be too good for that piece of shit.
Punji sticking is much more justified.
Wow. I hope whatever judge sees that bullshit throws it out immediately, makes him pay the parents' legal fees, and fines him for wasting the court's time.
"Old wives tail"?
I like 'em young, m'self.
Then dont thread it.
That's what I said!
Podesta calls on Obama to circumvent Congress
Basically, asking Obama to become a dictator.
http://dailycaller.com/2010/11.....-congress/
"Former President Bill Clinton's chief of staff John Podesta, now the head of the Center for American Progress, called on President Obama to push forward with his agenda using federal agencies and executive branch power Tuesday[...] Podesta said the American people want the president to move forward with his agenda.
"I think most of the conversation since the election has been about how President Obama adjusts to the new situation on Capitol Hill," Podesta said. "While that's an important conversation, it simply >ignores the president's ability to use all levels of his power and authority to move the country forward."
In other words, damned the torpedoes [the Constitution, division of power, limits to federal authority], full speed ahead.
I like where Podesta's going here.
It's okay when OUR side does it!
Surely Obama isn't stupid enough to take advice from a Clintonite. Right?
The fact that the American people just handed control of the House to the opposition party apparently indicates they want the president's agenda to move forward.
The current Democratic party line for explaining their losses is that the American people are upset they didn't do more--single-payer healthcare, nationalize the banks, etc. They think if they'd doubled down on the legislation that they would have won.
This. It's hilarious that the terminall libertarded see that voters went ahead and voted democrats out, and voted in those who wouldn't get within 20 miles of a progressive policy.
Because Obama wasn't progressive enough.
Fucking asshats.
""In other words, damned the torpedoes [the Constitution, division of power, limits to federal authority], full speed ahead.""
It's all about little or no limits to executive power. Something the last admin promoted.
So, now Four Loko will be no different than Mad Dog 20/20?
Well, it has less alcohol.
I just find it funny that permission is needed to not distribute phone books.
Landline phone companies are highly regulated by state and federal panels.
This was a trade off since way back in the stone age they had no competition. They were promised a "fair rate of return".
If they want to change rates, offer new service plans, sell off telephone exchanges or stop delivering phone books that few people use but cost a small fortune to produce and deliver they have to kow tow to the state.
Many LL Telcos are still forced to lease their lines to Competitive Local Exchange Carriers (CLEC) at rates that do not allow enough return for basic maintenance.
For many customers the "last mile" of High Speed internet service is provided by lines owned by the Incumbent Local Exchange Carrier (ILEC) even if some other company is providing the service.
I find it hard to believe that MORE government regulation in the name of so called net neutrality will benefit service providers or consumers.
Poor, poor government-sanctioned monopolists.
When you dance with the devil...
If they stop giving me a phone book, my phone bill had damn well better go down.
"Don't worry, they'll outlaw speaking to passengers driving soon enough."
Good point. I mean, has the government ever certified that driving is safe? The FDA should step in immediately.
Right - it's a "public health issue." That's what they try to do with anything they don't like - make it a public health issue. Remember when CDC and the AMA tried to do that with guns a few years back? They painted "gun violence" as a public health issue that needed to be regulated as such.
The most dangerous weapon you can use is a car.
I remember seeing an article where a woman pulled into her garage and a man with a gun was waiting, she ran him down. The article said Car 1, Gun 0.
For a while the car was the en vogue weapon of the wife done wrong.
Plus cars travel across state lines so there's that whole Interstate Commerce thingy.
For dealing with the Gate Grope, what you do is eat a big ol' bean burrito and then save up a nice load of intestinal gas. When the TSA agent goes "down" to do the leg frisks, let fly a massive blast right in his face.
"Oh, jeez, sorry about that. Guess I shouldn't have washed down those burritos with that pale ale and crab cakes. And that bran muffin and coffee this morning is just starting to kick in."
There's a local Indian restaurant that makes this delicious lamb curry with chickpeas. I usually drink it with several bottles of a good IPA. My gas the next day can peel paint.
I usually make a conscious effort to avoid doing this the night before I fly out of consideration for the other passengers, but with the current TSA mess I'm seriously reconsidering. My only concern is that I might get charged with assaulting a TSA goon.
IIRC, Reason reported a case where a guy was in fact charged with assault on a police officer when he farted at the latter.
Of course, you always run the additional risk that you might just shit your pants while waiting.
Nothing but beenie-weenies straight from the can for a full 24 hours prior to flight.
Of course others on the plane will hate you for it, but such is the cost of freedom.
From the department of too much information:
Of course Napolitano thinks it's awesome. It's the only way anybody's gonna feel her up.
Yeah, I'm sure their flunkies gave them a thorough and aggressive frisking, like the serfizens get.
I hope you can see this because I'm posting as hard as I can.
I hope you can see this because I'm posting as hard as I can.
I hope you can see this because I'm posting as hard as I can.
I hope you can see this because I'm posting as hard as I can.
I hope you can see this because I'm posting as hard as I can.
I hope you can see this because I'm posting as hard as I can.
I hope you can see this because I'm posting as hard as I can.
I hope you can see this because I'm posting as hard as I can.
I hope you can see this because I'm posting as hard as I can.
I hope you can see this because I'm posting as hard as I can.
I hope you can see this because I'm posting as hard as I can.
I hope you can see this because I'm posting as hard as I can.
I hope you can see this because I'm posting as hard as I can.
I hope you can see this because I'm posting as hard as I can.
I hope you can see this because I'm posting as hard as I can.
I hope you can see this because I'm posting as hard as I can.
I hope you can see this because I'm posting as hard as I can.
I hope you can see this because I'm posting as hard as I can.
I hope you can see this because I'm posting as hard as I can.
apparently there is almost no upper bound on how hard you can post
I think "shoot the moon" takes on a whole new idea here.
Thanks