Reason Morning Links: A New Mini-Surge in Afghanistan, Speaker Boehner, Drug Dogs and False Alerts


NEXT: The Return of the Minivan

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. Let’s take the housing fight to wealthy owners with empty spare rooms
    …While most houses are privately owned, the total housing stock is a common resource. Either we ensure that it is used wisely and fairly, or we allow its distribution to become the starkest expression of inequality. The UK appears to have chosen the second option. We have allowed the market, and the market alone, to decide who gets what ? which means that families in desperate need of bigger homes are crammed together in squalid conditions, while those who have more space than they know what to do with face neither economic nor social pressure to downsize….

    1. This is such a great idea, I’m wondering why an idiot like Monbiot hasn’t taken in just as many rent-free boarders as his personal accommodations can handle. He’d probably whine that he get two rooms of his own so he can sit around and compose his leftist drivel in his underwear, thus leaving some poor urchin out in the cold due to his egalitarianism. Fucking twit.

    2. The comments are priceless as well. Britain is a lost cause.

      The ‘free’ market here (as in several other important areas) operates to reinforce inequality, and to defend the occupation of family houses by single individuals (as will doubtless happen in other comments) is to defend the continuing disenfranchisement of the young by the old, which is becoming rather a theme of this government (couldn’t be anything to do with the vastly higher rate of voting by the old, could it?).

      1. A good friend of mine (English professor) has a guest bedroom in his house. Every time he starts ranting about the rich making more money than they “need”, I offer to have a poor family move into his extra bedroom.

        1. He should have an entire poor African village living there. By world standards, he’s certainly rich.

    3. We have allowed the market, and the market alone, to decide who gets what

      Ignoring, oh, the entire planning system set up by the Town and Country Planning Act of 1947, plus future revisions. It and the greenbelts, etc. have created scarcity, so now Monbiot and other socialists have to fix what they caused.

    4. We should bring this to ‘Murca. Why, Freidman’s house alone could put a significant dent in NY’s problem.

      1. I be the White House has plenty of extra space that isn’t being used correctly.

    5. Your housing footprint is the number of bedrooms divided by the number of people in the household. Like ecological footprints, it reminds us that the resource is finite, and that, if some people take more than they need, others are left with less than they need.

      Brilliant. Surely someone here can formulate an algorithm for “your sexual footprint”.

      1. it reminds us that the resource is finite

        Because in Monbiot’s perfect world, NO new houses or apartments will or can ever be built.

        This is what happens when people with dysfunctional imaginations attempt to process information. And fail.

      2. The number of instances you have penetrated an orifice minus the number of instances an orifice of yours has been penetrated. A positive number indicates that you hate Gaia. Luckily, a commission headed by George Monbiot will reduce your number to 0.


          1. Steve Smith, would you really have a problem with the government requiring a poor family move in to a spare room of your cave? Sounds like more of a convenience for you.


      3. Why is it always completely unthought of to build UP?? Not like the old man who goes on a misleadingly sad adventure, but like apartments and high-rises where many people can live, and then share a communal backyard (often referred to as a park). Japan seems to understand that with limited surface area, building up is a really good idea. Maybe England should consider that possiblity.

        1. Because England isn’t a tiny fuckin’ island and no one enjoys living in a high rise except for retarded-ass hipsters who can’t fool anyone but themselves.

          Go try to play soccer on an empty patch of grass in the nearest big-city public park without stepping in dog shit.

          1. People in Minneapolis pick up after their dogs. The people in Atlanta, however…

          2. Honshu island is bigger than Great Britain (which is bigger than England). And what do those two paragraphs have to do with each other?

      4. OKCupid has algorithms for that.

    6. The UK is fucked up. The government sells cheap apartments to any citizen with kids. I know someone here in the US who’s married to a Brit. They live here, but they have a 3 BR apartment in London. They rent out two of the rooms, (more than making up for the payments) and have a free place to stay when they visit.

    7. Another gem quote:

      My guess, though I can find no research or figures either to support or disprove it…

      Yeah, UK is in serious trouble. They don’t seem to care about either economic or personal liberty over there.

  2. Boenher’s first act of disappointment – he failed to use the oversize gavel to pound severely on Pelosi’s head while she was within arms’ reach.

  3. It’s too dangerous for passengers to overpower hijackers. The TSA should issue a regulation making it illegal.

    1. “The man spoke Turkish and demanded the plane return to Oslo” [where it took off from]

      WTF? Why didn’t this asshole just not get on the plane? Then he would have been in Oslo.

      1. He forgot to go through duty-free

    2. Norway has crazy immigration laws. It is not uncommon for immigrants to literally eat their own passports upon entry. If they can’t tell where to return you to then they must pull you into the social net. If they know where you are from they can deport you. Saudi of the north is a funny country.

    3. You jest, but I would not be the least bit surprised if they actually did pass such a regulation.

  4. U.S. actually sending more troops to Afghanistan before planned drawdown in July.

    Thus making the ultimate drawdown that much more impressive.

    1. I thought size didn’t matter?

    2. Surprise, surprise, surprise!

  5. Drug dogs are right almost half the time. Can we put one in charge of the Federal Reserve?

    1. I’m thinking if it’s sold correctly, we can get the ASPCA and PETA to get behind a scheme to use abandoned shelter animals to eventually phase out most humans receiving government paychecks within the confines of the beltway. Be a great tourist draw, opening the galleries of the Capitol building to watch them frolic and play in the House and Senate chambers. Certainly more entertaining, and less harmful, than what goes on there currently.

    2. No, but on the bright side, coin tossing now can be used to generate probable cause for a search.

      1. I think that person looks suspicious. I believe I have probable cause to search.

        Rolls 1D4 Results: 3

        Hot damn!! Alright shitbag, hands where I can see ’em!!

        1. This is grossly unfair and unconstitutional. Only a natural 20 should be considered reasonable for the purposes of searches.

      2. To be fair, that’s misrepresenting the stats — the usefulness of a test for an unlikely occurrence isn’t just based on its rate of false positives but its rate of false negatives.

    3. It is not the dogs that are wrong. It is their dipshit handlers. It takes a lot of skill to handle a working dog properly. And they can only work for at most an hour at a time. Most street cops don’t have the skill and over work their dogs.

      1. I got a hit only 34% of the time. Just sayin’.

        1. You got on base 47% of the time. That beats the dogs.

          1. But I didn’t score 44% of the time.

            1. I did, however, eat 15 hot dogs between pitches one day.

              1. Big deal! I handled 15 hot dogs between pitches pitchers everyday

              2. And the local SWAT once shot 15 dogs in one day.

                They’re working on exceeding that record.

            2. I think that depends on what type of scoring you’re referring to if you know what I’m sayin’.

        2. I got a hit only 34% of the time. Just sayin’.

          No one was sent to prison when you stuck out, Bambino.

          Just sayin’.

          1. Ya but they have plenty of hot dogs to swallow in prison

          2. No one was sent to prison when you stuck out, Bambino.

            Nor when the dogs struck out. Try to pay attention.

      2. While I have no doubts the handlers are, in fact, dipshits and cause a big part of the problem, is there some reason you dont assume the dogs can be wrong too?

        1. The dog is an animal. Handling him is an art like any other work with animals. If you go down to San Antonio where they train military police dogs and handlers for a living, those dogs will hit every time and rarely if ever be wrong. But they are being handled by experts under ideal conditions. That is a long way from being handled by a cop on the street.

          The implication of the statistic is that drug sniffing dogs really can’t sniff drugs. That is not true. They can. But to do so, they can’t be over worked and they have to be properly handled. The 44% success rate rests squarely on the shoulders of the cops using the dogs.

          1. Doesn’t matter. The problem is that they use a method to get around the 4th Amendment that is more likely to give false positives than true ones in the real world.

          2. So, I can add “better drug dog handling” to the list of things I never thought the Army would do better than the police?

            That list:
            1. Stricter ROE for use of force
            2. Better weapon discipline
            3. Better training of working dogs and handlers.

      3. It is not the dogs that are wrong. It is their dipshit handlers.

        Correctomundo, John. I can’t help it if thar fucker is too stupid to plant the drugs where I’m pointing.

      4. John is correct – the problem is that the dogs want to please their handlers, and dogs are also very tuned in to human body language. So the dogs will ‘hit’ because that is what the handlers want, not because they actually scent anything.

        1. Sounds to me like these drug dogs have a future in politics!

        2. Exactly. they treat their working dogs like pets. That is understandable. Who doesn’t like dogs? But you can’t do that with a working dog. He has to be treated like a tool. That way he works and doesn’t act just to please you. I could never be a decent dog handler. I like dogs too much. I would turn one of those dogs into a spoiled wuss in about a day.

      5. Or you could say they are performing perfectly. After all, isn’t the goal to get probable cause to search the vehicle? If you can’t get your dog to alert, you can’t get probable cause.

        It is all about your metrics. If your metric is “get probable cause”, then false positives are not a problem at all…

      6. “”It is their dipshit handlers.””

        I would be curious how they gathered data. Just because a cop says the dog hit, doesn’t necessarily mean the dog did. Perhaps the data includes times when the cop lied about it.

        1. That is a good point. Also, you would think someone would notice all the search warrants they were getting that were not resulting in busts. I mean 67% of the hits were wrong. No one noticed this?

          1. Look man, if you sniff coke all day, your gonna make mistakes.

    4. Right half the time-that’s good!

    5. If they’re wrong, we should be able to shoot them.

      1. Wrong, right – let’s just understand that we CAN shoot ’em, pretty much for whatever reason we make up decide is reasonable.

    6. Government operates at 30% efficiency compared to private sector organizations pretty much across the board. 44% from my fellow canines is seriously awesome for government work.

      1. Like we could afford HC for dogs-they run into to many bullets

  6. Pension funds caused a 30 percent drop in state revenue in 2009.

    But just wait until those 55-year-old pensioners start spending that money and a multiplier effect kicks in. Stimulated economy, here we come.

  7. Study of drug dogs used in the Chicago suburbs finds that their alerts led to the presence of actual narcotics just 44 percent of the time.

    My dog brings back the ball about 25% of the time, so really, the narcohounds are doing relatively well.

    1. Start using a speedball, your dog’s average should increase.

  8. Trial set for white man fired for using the word “nigger”

    I am very interested in this trial, especially so shortly after the controversial Mark Twain revisions.

    1. If the context given in the article is correct, that it was during a staff meeting discussing a story about that specific term, then yeah, it’s PC run amok. The other example of him supposedly using it was to highlight the word’s usage by others without consequence as well. Not holding any delusions that the de facto institutional racism inherent in the perpetuation of this double standard on the usage of a single word, regardless of context, simply based upon the user’s skin color or ethnicity will be seriously considered. . .

      1. I took more solace in the fact that the judge is allowing the trial to go ahead. Although, Judge Barclay Surrick is white…

    2. Can’t we just execute these racist bastards and be rid of them?

      1. At least subject them to high-tech lynchings.

      2. If I was a racist, I would totally get behind your plan to get rid of everyone that used the n word.

        1. What you did there? I see it…

        2. @cynical Finally a clever remark-and racist!!!!

  9. The dogs have always been just another excuse for a search. No matter what the animal does (i.e. bark, lick, lay down, lick it’s nuts) it’s a “signal”.

    1. For Hispanic drivers, the success rate was just 27 percent.

      1) ?Racista!

      2) Aren’t there any drug-sniffing Chihuahuas?

      1. Lol but they should have broken it down by political affiliation.

      2. Yes, there are.

        1. Do you see me in jail? It wasn’t my purse. I wouldn’t be caught dead with a black and silver Chanel purse, mine was silver and black Chanel!

  10. Passengers overpower attempted hijacker on flight from Norway to Turkey.

    The system worked.

  11. Obama calls outgoing press secretary “Baghdad” Bob Gibbs $172,000 a year salary “relatively modest pay”. Man, talk about being out of touch with reality.

    1. For high level toadies like him, that is modest pay. He is totally in touch with reality. It is just not our reality.

    2. That was the worst earned $172k ever. If I was the White House I’d sue for breach of contract. Gibbs made Scott McClellan look good.

      1. Gibbs made Baghdad Bob lok like fucking Nostradamus.

        1. Plus Bob had better mike presence.

      2. Oh, c’mon, Gibbs was comedy GOLD! Worth every penny – I say that as a taxpayer.

    3. $172,000 is like minimum wage in DC. With that salary, he was probably subsisting on hot dogs and microwaveable ramen noodles. You can’t compare what Gibbs was making to someone living in Bumfark, Idaho.

      1. [My] search for Bumfark, near Idaho did not match any locations.

    4. Over on Mr. McArdle’s employer’s blog they have commenters defending that $172,000 salary tooth and nail because of how hard it is to be the mouthpiece for the POTUS.

      We are really and truly fucked.

    5. Man, I wish I was making relatively modest pay.

      1. Shit, for $172k I’d take the job and make Obama look like a fuckin’ genius every day. Principle be damned, that’s nice scratch.

  12. Passengers overpower attempted hijacker on flight from Norway to Turkey.

    They were promptly detained and will be prosecuted for usurping the fuctions of the State, which everybody knows it is there to protect everyone from hijackers…

    1. which everybody knows it is there to protect everyone from hijackers…

      Even the hijacker himself…

  13. Study of drug dogs used in the Chicago suburbs finds that their alerts led to the presence of actual narcotics just 44 percent of the time.

    Which is just a tad below simple guessing or coin flippin’.

  14. Women/Men Shoes sold at wholesale price In Our MBT Shoes Store.Find more discount mbt shoes,mbt walking shoes,mbt Kaya on sale here.MBT Shoes on sale,Enjoy all cheap MBT Shoes online here.

  15. NEO-Cons FTW! The more things change the more they stay the same. Rep. Peter King: On Security Policy, GOP Freshmen Have ‘Same Mindset’

    1. Wow! I am totally shocked at this.

      It is funny that you need to solve a math problem to comment at National Review…maybe that is why there are so few posts.


      1. I had fun with it (just for all of you H&R kids)and they actually posted my comment.

  16. The new Congress disappoints on day one, I see.

    A proposed rule requiring that the Constitutional enumerated power (not the general welfare or necessary and proper clauses) be stated for every bill was defeated.

    That was quick. By my count, the Tea Party Relovution in the House lasted less than a day.

    1. Every silver lining has a cloud.

    2. You know, they should be required to do that, anyway. That measure should be reintroduced.

    3. Do you have a link, or a place where we can see the vote? I’m just curious how it was divided up. For the record, the Tea Party weren’t the only ones who won in November. Good ol’ neocons and corporatists won as well.

    4. Do you have a link? Not disbelief, I’d just like to read more about that.

    5. Citing the Constitution is hard!

    6. Don’t worry, the real fight is over the debt limit.

      They WILL refuse to rate it. We’re going to default on our debt sooner or later may as well make it now.

      1. Yeah, right. There are only somewhere between 60 and 90 TEA Party members in Congress. At least 150 more are needed in order to have any impact at all.

        Nothing significant is going to change under the Orange Crybaby. It’s going to be all theater all the time.

    7. Ask, and ye shall receive.

      Note the toothlessness of the rule that failed:

      Garrett offered an amendment that would have restricted lawmakers from citing the “general welfare” or “necessary and proper” clause as a bill’s constitutional authority.

      If bills cited those clauses of the Constitution, they would be subject to additional debate on the House floor regarding whether the legislation is constitutional.

      1. But this is not the same as saying (which I thought you were originally implying) that the new rule itself was out the window. They still have to cite constitutional authority – but to include the entire text of the constitution, including the “general welfare” clause, etc. I assert that that is still far, far better than nothing. It will get the people thinking about what those clauses have been stretched to cover.

      2. “Why would one part of the Constitution not be acceptable?” said a Democratic House aide, “If the Republicans disagree with a part of the Constitution, they should change it. Maybe Rep. Garrett should channel his inner Scalia.”

        You can’t argue with this level of stupidity. Even if you point to the federalist nature of the Constitution and that it is a government-limiting document. Also, their hypocrisy is pretty evident, as they ignore 98% of the document and only call on “general welfare” or the commerce clause.

      3. Debate. . .over. . .the. . .constitutionality. . .of. . .bills?

        Does that ever happen anymore?

        1. I don’t think so. That’s SO 100 years ago.

      4. I assert that that is still far, far better than nothing.

        We’ll have to disagree on that one. What strikes me, though, is the complete failure of nerve by the Republicans. A sign, I fear, of things to come, especially combined with their very weak statements on budget cuts.

    8. Enumerated powers are so 18th Century.

      We do it better now. We pass any law we like, and then see if the judiciary notices that it’s unconstitutional. And since centuries of judicial precedent have determined that blatantly unconstitutional laws are in fact constitutional, there’s little to notice.

      (Don’t worry! We live in a democracy. We can still vote new constitution-violators into office to replace the old ones!)

      1. Don’t hate on judges. The right to bear arms also theoretically protects us from tyranny, but I don’t see gun owners applying that power to protect our rights from Congressholes. Everyone’s to blame here.

  17. Every silver lining has a cloud.

  18. Eric Cantor was on CNBC this morning, engaging in a lot of fatuous puffery about fat-trimming and reinventing government.

    I remain unconvinced.

    1. Charlie Brown and the fucking football.

      1. No shit. New Cuomo is pulling the same crap here in NY – I’m not buying it for a second. Not when he’s inviting the likes of SEIU to the table to help “solve” our money problems.

    2. I hate that shit. Fat trimming my ass. Just say the God damned truth. We can’t afford the government we have and we have to make changes, real changes. But if Cantor did that, people at the Washington Post might not like him anymore. People might call him an extremist. Oh nos!!

      1. “” But if Cantor did that, people at the Washington Post might not like him anymore.””

        I think you mean K street will stop giving him money.

    3. We just need enough votes not to raise the debt limit and force the feds to default.

    4. Just read an interesting article from an Economist from a bit ago (the won about scary china) that showed that leaders who went for budget cuts were no more likely to lose elections than those who did not. In fact they were slightly less likely. Those who pushed tax raises were of course much more likely to lose.

  19. That was the worst earned $172k ever. If I was the White House I’d sue for breach of contract. Gibbs made Scott McClellan look good.

    Wait- I don’t understand; on Morning Joe, Chuck Todd said Gibbs was an awesome press secretary.

    1. Tony Snow was my favorite one in the last 20 years, on the Democrat side probably Joe Lockhart. Most of the rest have been assholes.

  20. GREENFIELD, Calif. – Police in California say a man was killed after officers threw a flash grenade into a house during a raid while looking for another man who was suspected in a shooting.

    The Monterey County coroner tells the Salinas Californian that 31-year-old Rogelio Serrato was the victim of a fire started Wednesday by a diversionary flash grenade used by police.

    Monterey police raided the Greenfield house in their search for 23-year-old Alejandro Jose Gonzalez, whom they were seeking in connection with a New Year’s Day shooting.

    Police say Gonzalez was not in the house and is still at large.…..hiaE3miUsZ

  21. That measure should be reintroduced.

    Every fucking morning.

  22. Dear Rep King:

    Die in a fiery plane crash.


  23. From the WaPo state revenue article:

    “The basic point is we need to remember how far we fell in 2007, 2008 and 2009,” Johnson said. “We’re still 12 percent below where we were in revenue at the beginning of the recession, yet all the needs have gone up.”

    I’ve got your “needs.” Right here.

  24. Leftists don’t like to have the Constitution read in session – because they don’t know it or care to know it.…;emc=rss

    Is this group of Republicans really trying to suggest that they care more deeply about the Constitution than anyone else and will follow it more closely?

    In any case, it is a presumptuous and self-righteous act, suggesting that they alone understand the true meaning of a text that the founders wisely left open to generations of reinterpretation. Certainly the Republican leadership is not trying to suggest that African-Americans still be counted as three-fifths of a person.

    I don’t know about Republicans, but the editorialist surely cannot say HE understands the Constitution, as the 3/5ths clause was repealed by the 14th Amendment, which last time I peeked, is still in the Constitution.

    There is a similar air of vacuous fundamentalism in requiring that every bill cite the Constitutional power given to Congress to enact it. The new House leadership says this is necessary because the health care law and other measures that Republicans do not like have veered from the Constitution. But it is the judiciary that ultimately decides when a law is unconstitutional, not the transitory occupant of the speaker’s chair.

    Interesting statement, especially in light of the fact that congressmen and women swear to protect and uphold the constitution, and in light of the “pursuant of” clause in it. For the editorialist, Congress is just a law factory and the judiciary a kind of quality control department.

    Even inside sausage-making factories, machines and people follow a procedure and protocol to AVOID fixes, corrections and rejections afterwards.

    1. “the 3/5ths clause was repealed by the 14th Amendment, which last time I peeked, is still in the Constitution.”

      But… SLAVERY!!!1!1!!!

      1. The funny thing is that the 3/5 thing has nothing to do with the worth of the individuals it applied to, it was strictly for the purposes of determining representation in Congress and apportioning direct taxation.

        1. The best part of the editorial is the one that purports to inform the reader that Congress just makes laws, and it is up to the judiciary (meaning, after all the damage has already been done) to determine if the laws are unconstitutional or not. That is insanely childish and nitwitted – who’s in charge of their H.R. department? It is obvious that their editors are not reading the submissions for the editorial page.

    2. If nothing else, it will be harder for Republicans to sponsor blatantly unconstitutional legislation and be able to get away with it. I hope.

  25. Sign the petition to NOT raise the debt limit!…..d50ea69417

    Debt default is our only hope for small government in our time!

    1. You don’t know what you’re talking about, but have fun. Maybe you’d care to make a wager with someone as to whether the debt ceiling will in fact be raised or not this year?

  26. it is a presumptuous and self-righteous act

    Not to be confused with branding successful business people as “fatcats” or proposing to “spread the wealth around”.

  27. Friends say Omaha school gunman was fun, outgoing

    I’ve asked all my friends to refrain from describing me as “quiet” or “fun” if and when I go on a shooting spree. I want them to say “that guy was always a crazy fucker, I’m not surprised”.

    1. “The guy never fucking shut up. We all knew there was something wrong with him.” “Every morning I’d watch out the window for Brett to leave before I’d venture to the car to go to work. I didn’t want to be anywhere near that creep.”

      1. You’re on the list!

        Of people I want commenting after the ‘incident’. Hope I didn’t scare you there.

    2. He posted on H&R everyday! I knew there was something not right with him.

  28. The bill tauntingly titled the “Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act” has nothing to do with increasing employment and will never reach the Senate floor, but shows that the leadership is willing to threaten the hard-fought access to health care for millions of the uninsured, just to make a political point.

    The New York Times editorial board is gonna need a loooooooot of Prozac over the next two years.

    1. “‘Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act’ has nothing to do with increasing employment”

      Actually, I think they’re concerned with decreasing the rate of job shrinkage. Fucking ‘Boomers. “We got ours, fuck you” is the slogan of a whole generation.

    2. Somebody the other day said they should attach repeal to the debt ceiling. sounded like a good plan to me.

      1. If the Repubs had any stones at all, that’s exactly what they would do.

        Let’s cut to the chase, here. Get right to the knife fight. We’re running out of time.

    3. Re: P Brooks,

      From the editorial,

      The bill tauntingly titled the “Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act” has nothing to do with increasing employment[…]

      The editorial board is composed of people who have a hard time with reading comprehension – the name of the bill does not mention anything that can be construed as meaning the repeal of Obamacare will “create jobs,” only that it will stop it from killing more jobs.

  29. More hyperventilation from the NYT editors:

    This, of course, has nothing to do with Mr. Boehner’s tearful populism and everything to do with the tens of millions in corporate dollars that helped propel the Republicans to power in the House. Businesses have complained about the Obama administration’s expanded, and necessary, oversight of finance, health care and food production, among other areas. Now they have helped elect a House leadership that is eager to do their bidding.

    Republicans and their kkkorporate puppet masters want to kill you!

    1. Which is, of course, much, much, much more horrible than lefty/socialist/central planning big government statists wanting to kill you (particularly so they can claim the lion’s share of any leftover assets to fund their idealism). But hey, all fucking restaurants will be Taco Bell, so it’s all good.

      1. I hope someone will teach me about the shells.

        1. hahaha beautiful reference

    2. As Animal Mother said, “Thank God for the sickle cell…”

      God, I hate people. All people, yes. But especially Elected Government Officials?

  30. Both CNN and the Today show were all over the autism study being debunked. And in a good way. The bastards actually reported it as news and made it clear the case against vaccines is nonexistent. I couldn’t believe it.

    1. They should do a study on how many kids got sick or died b/c their parents turned down the vaccines.

      1. I’ll bet it’s not that many.


    This must be read to be believed.

    1. What is it with BATF and burning people’s houses down? (Yes, I know it was allegedly the Hell’s Angels, but it was the FBI at Waco)

  32. Study of drug dogs used in the Chicago suburbs finds that their alerts led to the presence of actual narcotics just 44 percent of the time.

    My German Shorthair Pointer’s number of false points is a lot less than that. Now if I could only get her to be able to tell the difference between hens and roosters.

  33. “”The three bills that Republicans plan to introduce this week ? one to cut the congressional budget, one to repeal the health care bill and another to instruct House committees to present new health care legislation “”…..VuZHNpdHNv

    Bold mine.

    Here comes Boehnercare!

    1. I thought Viagra was already covered by Medicare?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.