Reason Morning Links: More Bloodshed in Libya, Mayor Rahm, Earthquake in New Zealand

|

Advertisement

NEXT: Pennsylvania Railroad

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. It’s surprising that Reid would want to ban his own career choice

    1. Just the first step in rent-seeking. He’ll obviously grandfather in current office holders.

    2. Reason, esp. Radley Balko, is like the Utopian liberals of the right. They live in a fantasy world where they’ve never met a real drug addict, or a real pimp, or a real crack-whore. Assignment for Radley Balko! Go to AA meeting, hang out at a low income housing project, start snorting cocaine 2 or 3 times a week until 4 months later you are snorting $300 a day, watch any one of the hundreds of documentaries or TV shows about drug addicts, then start writing again after you get out of jail and are working on paying your restitution. I understand, the criminal justice system can seem like a scam, and you can find many good people that have long jail sentences, and I am with you on the treatment instead of jail, and I’m with you on the stupid SWAT raids, but to think you could legalize cocaine, meth, or heroine sends a message that you are an immature fool that has not lived life long enough to see the truly evil these drugs can do. It’s not just the Bible people that preach against drugs, it’s the drug addicts themselves. People that have never been in a church in their lives will tell you how bad the life is, and that if you could buy cocaine legally they would be down at that store right now, or in a hotel room with a room full of hookers.
      Why the sudden rant on the drug war in a Libya story? Because I think Reason is a SCAM! It’s an excuse not to be a Wisconsin teacher or a Rush Limbaugh fan. It’s fake because during the summer of 2008 these guys were pulling for a guy that all but said he was a big government socialist. They were praising the Bush shoe throwers and mocking Sarah Palin. Now they want to give speeches at Tea Party gatherings. How do someone change so fast, so radically unless you are a complete fake?

      1. if you could buy cocaine legally they would be down at that store right now, or in a hotel room with a room full of hookers

        Yeah, dissuade us with a vision of the horrors of a hotel room full of hookers and blow…

        1. I keep reading my writing, and marvel at what I’ve written!

          1. Easy to do when you’ve set the bar that low.

      2. Hey prude, you don’t like cocaine don’t take it. As for those addicts, you ever seen or personally been involved with an alcoholic before, it is just as bad, do I support banning alcohol, NO !

        Here is the secret to addiction, the issue with addicts is not the substance they are taking, its them hiding from their own personal problems. Unless you propose banning basically anything, that includes even internet, sex and eating, you will not solve addiction.

        1. That’s so fucking stupid man! “Just because you don’t let your kids ride on top of the pickup truck don’t tell me I can ‘t let my little Bobby sit up there!” You’re a fucking imbecile.

          1. ??? Not sure what that is supposed to mean. But I can surmise enough to see that you believe people are like children and the government are their parents who need to take care of them.

            Here is a shocking fact, drugs were legal in Victorian Britain, shockingly it did not lead to barbarism.

            Honestly, just take your puritanical carrot and stick it up your arse.

            1. Every decent person: we need some laws.
              You: we dont need any laws, we’re smart.
              Every decent person: but history has shown.
              You: i’m 22 and smart and can figre stuff out on ma own and dont need no laws.

              1. Yes we need laws, one of them that protects my right to take cocaine from being infringed from people like you.

                1. Honesty! I respect this.

              2. Every decent person

                This wouldn’t be exclusive to people who agree with you, would it? I am convinced. Pat D King, has been chosen by all the “decent people” to be their spokesperson.

                Since it needs to be spelled out for you, You can oppose individual laws without opposing Law. And you called someone else an imbecile? Too. Fucking. Funny.

              3. Re: Pat D King,

                Every decent person: we need some laws.

                Decent people need laws? But if they’re decent, then what would be the point of having them? They’re DECENT already!

                You: we dont need any laws, we’re smart.

                And REALLY decent. We follow the Golden Rule, no ‘laws’ necessary.

                Every decent person: but history has shown.[sic]

                Every decent people cannot complete a sentence?

              4. Every decent person: we need some laws.

                Methinks the rub lies within the concept of “some” laws.

                I think even dyed-in-the-wool libertarians would agree we need “some” laws. Like laws against theft, rape and murder, etc.

          2. So adults are like your children?

            Shut the fuck up troll

      3. if you could buy cocaine legally they would be down at that store right now, or in a hotel room with a room full of hookers.

        Sears-Roebuck used to sell cocaine in the catalog, back when it was legal. And hookers never bring their own blow, no matter how nicely you ask. If send them out to get some, you might as well consider that $100 gone.

        1. They use to draw and quarter people also. About the time they were selling coke at Sears they were just starting to talk about exterminating the Jewish population of Europe. Want to go back?

          1. Holy crap, did he just imply that the USA’s fair drug policy led to the Nazi’s killing jews?

            We used to be in favor of prohibition of many more drugs (i.e. booze) this is right around the time the US entered a 10 year depression. Want to go back?

            See how easy that was you cunt.

            1. “Cunt” is way too kind in this instance.

              1. “Troll” is much more accurate.

              2. Asscunt works for me.

          2. The Harrison Narcotics Tax Act was passed in 1914. The Nazi Party wasn’t founded until 1919.

            At least aim for historical accuracy, you equivocating dipshit.

          3. Are you truly that simple-minded?

            Or are you simply pathologically disingenuous?

        2. God I miss the old Sears.

      4. Re: Pat D King,

        Reason, esp. Radley Balko, is like the Utopian liberals of the right. They live in a fantasy world where they’ve never met a real drug addict, or a real pimp, or a real crack-whore.

        I have met a few whinos, yet I do not propose reinstating Prohibition. Would you?

        How would prostitution disappear if forbidden? Do you espouse stoning whores? That would probably be better in the end that leaving them in the hands of pimps, as pimps are the result of (what else?): Criminalization.

        1. No, I don’t propose reinstating prohibition. But we know that drink is not as bad as coke, H, or meth, not nearly as bad. Yet you fools use the logic that booze is legal therefore we must legalize all drugs and end this war-on-drugs. That’s fucking stupid and not very “reasoned”. You are the same people that preach God is not great, yet you somehow reason that men can overcome nature/drugs/addiction by reason alone because we are great? How can we be great if God is not great?

          1. Because God is make believe

          2. You are the same people that preach God is not great

            Shut the fuck up until you learn who you are fucking talking to.

          3. Re: Pat D King,

            No, I don’t propose reinstating prohibition. But we know that drink is not as bad as coke, H, or meth, not nearly as bad.

            That’s debatable – more people die of alcohol related issues than from coke or meth issues.

            Yet you fools use the logic that booze is legal therefore we must legalize all drugs and end this war-on-drugs.

            That’s not the reason, Pat. Booze was made illegal at one time and then legal. What was the argument to make it legal back then? That drugs were legal? That’s not the argument libertarians posit, Pat. You’re mistaken in that regard.

            The libertarian argument stems from the ethics of liberty, Pat. A person is free to ingest whatever he or she likes, as long as his or her actions do not harm others in their bodies or their property. You might say that people are hurt (their families, sweethearts, whatever) because people care about drug addicts, but feelings are the responsibility of the feeling person, not of someone else, otherwise I would be the slave of my wife’s feelings and she would be of mine. Hurting someone’s feelings may make me an asshole, but does not make me EVIL or IMMORAL. Instead, initiating aggression against someone’s body or property IS evil and IS immoral, which is EXACTLY what the war against drugs is: Naked aggression against people’s bodies and property.

            That’s fucking stupid and not very “reasoned”.

            Your misconception of the argument is what’s not very well reasoned. Don’t blame me, blame yourself for coming up with such childish strawmans.

            You are the same people that preach God is not great, yet you somehow reason that men can overcome nature/drugs/addiction by reason alone because we are great?

            Anybody can overcome as everybody has a WILL. It is WILL that allows us to act. Whether it was infused by a God or not, it does not matter.

            How can we be great if God is not great?

            I don’t answer loaded questions.

            1. I like that you took the time to think. I disagree with some of what you say but commend you on your ability to think on your own.

              1. Re: Pat D King,

                I like that you took the time to think. I disagree with some of what you say but commend you on your ability to think on your own.

                Let’s dispense with the ass kissing and just address my reply to you.

                YOU said that us libertarians use an argument we don’t use.
                I explained to you where the argumet against prohibition (of any kind) comes from. You have NOT addressed that.

                I can only conclude you either don’t care to address those points or are sufficiently dishonest to man up to say “I was wrong.”

                1. OM,

                  I didnt mean to accuse you not thinking below – sorry about that. Good response, probably better than mine, but not assholish enough. 🙂

              2. Fuck off. That isnt thinking, that was basic premises that everyone coming to this board should understand before their first post, you fucking ninny.

            2. Remember that Prohibition had a (thankfully temporary) Constitutional amendment giving it legal legitimacy. ‘Tards like Pat should, therefore, insist on a similar Amendment for the WoD… or go back to the Freeper circle-jerk and stay away from rational people.

          4. But we know that drink is not as bad as coke, H, or meth, not nearly as bad.

            Do we know that?

          5. Paddy o Troll wrote: “we know that drink is not as bad as coke, H, or meth, not nearly as bad.”

            Citation please…

            “Drinking ….. played a role in 78 percent of assaults and 88 percent of criminal damage.”
            http://www.slate.com/id/2172230/
            More:
            “Twenty-five to forty percent of all patients in U.S. general hospital beds (not in maternity or intensive care) are being treated for complications of alcohol-related problems.
            Annual health care expenditures for alcohol-related problems amount to $22.5 billion. The total cost of alcohol problems is $175.9 billion a year (compared to $114.2 billion for other drug problems)”
            http://www.marininstitute.org/….._costs.htm

            1. Drinking played a part in my having anal sex with your mom, but I would not advise anal sex with a man.

              1. I’ll make a lame attempth to rethpond to your point when I get the dick out of my mouth.

              2. I love you-they haven’t caught on yet. I dub you master

                1. What the fuck is wrong with you?

                  1. Pip, I have no doubt you have the lowest IQ on this site; let me make this simple for you: FUCK OFF

          6. But we know that drink is not as bad as coke, H, or meth, not nearly as bad.

            Cite, please.

            Do you know how many people die every year as a direct or even indirect result of alcohol? How many lives are ruined or made miserable by alcohol?

            It’s legal, yet regulated in an attempt to control to some degree the potential “bad” effects it has on society.

            There is no legitimate reason why marijuana or coke could not similarly be legal, yet regulated.

            I can sit on my sofa and get totally hammered on booze every day if I want, and there’s not a single thing illegal about doing so.

            Why should I not also legally be able to sit on my sofa and get stoned on pot or high on coke if I wanted to?

            As long as I don’t go out and drive my car, potentially threatenting other people’s safety, why do you care if I want to sit around and get snockered on the chemicals of my choosing?

            Might my life be miserable and wasted if I do that? Sure. Absolutely. Which is why I don’t do any of those things. But it’s not because it’s illegal that I don’t do it.

            Nor would I start doing it if it became legal.

          7. stupid troll is fucking stupid

      5. Why don’t YOU read a medical journal or two instead of relying on biased documentaries for you education.

        And the reason the addicts preach against their vices is…..because they’ve had reasonless conjecture rammed down their throats through government-mandated religion vis-a-vis your beloved AA meetings.

      6. It’s fake because during the summer of 2008 these guys were pulling for a guy that all but said he was a big government socialist.

        Bob Barr is a socialist?

        They were praising the Bush shoe throwers and mocking Sarah Palin.

        Probably.

        Now they want to give speeches at Tea Party gatherings.

        Reason supports the financial conservatism/get goverment out of my life angle of the tea party – but as far as I can tell – not much beyond that.

        How do someone change so fast, so radically unless you are a complete fake?

        Reason’s principles haven’t changed. Freedom is their measuring stick cross partisian lines.

        On the drug war: It’s not my impression that Balko supports drug use, rather he rocognizes that the war on drugs is a failure and a waste of resources, freedom and life. It hasn’t reduced drug usage rates, doesn’t help addicts get treatment and subjects us to a militarized police force.

        The fact that you’ve thought about these issues and came to the conclusions you did, makes me think you’re dumber than the average troll.

        1. I think the war on drugs has saved more souls that operation rescue. Balko has probably never used hard drugs in his life, and that might be the problem.

          1. I’m pretty sure you are hard drugs right now. Can I have some?

          2. So is lives saved by the drug war kinda like jobs saved by the stimulus? i.e. non fucking existent.

            This guy is fun, easier to laugh at then Chony because he is more serious.

          3. I think the war on drugs has saved more souls that operation rescue.

            Do you mean souls in the religious sense, or in terms of lives saved? If you’re talking about lives saved, than that’s an obsurd assertion. Violence caused by prohibition is massive.

          4. I think the war on drugs has saved more souls that operation rescue. Balko has probably never used hard drugs in his life, and that might be the problem.

            O.K., that cuts it: TROLL.

          5. “I think the war on drugs has saved more souls that operation rescue.”

            thell that to 30,000+ Mexican corpses.

      7. Drink!!?

        Old Pat doesn’t care how early he starts the drinking game. Maybe his drinking problem is what inspires him to write crap like this.

      8. Pat, you know what?

        I honestly don’t care.

        Even if coke and meth are every bit as dangerous as you say, I honestly don’t give a shit.

        People will use them and get hooked and have bad life experiences. Oh well.

        It happens with booze and with oxycotin legally every day. I don’t give a shit about that, so why should I care about this?

        The real question is this:

        If drugs were legal, some number of additional people would use them and would not be able to handle it. Let’s call that number of people X.

        Right now we already have a set of people who are essentially unemployable because drug arrests have made them part of the criminal justice / probation system. Let’s call that number of people Y.

        Is X greater than Y? I don’t think it is.

        Even if it is, is X greater than Y by a number sufficient to justify our investment in the drug war, and the damage the drug war has done to our civil liberties? Absolutely not.

        When you bring me your sob stories about drugs and try to sell me on the damage they would do if they were legalized, you have a steep mountain to climb. You know why? Because the current state of our inner cities represents the cost of the drug war. You have to convince me that, had no drug war been waged beginning in the 70’s, our cities would look worse than they do now. And you can’t do that. The results of the drug war to date are much, much worse than any fantasy about the dangers of drugs that was promulgated back in the 70’s. The cure ended up being many, many times worse than the disease.

        1. Why have any laws at all you fucking imbecile? Inner cities? It’s the white mans fault of course, or Rush Limbaugh!

          1. the scared-of-blacks flight to the burbs removed owner-occupied properties from the inner cities (& made us dependent on imported oil). the gobp export of manufacturing jobs removed the jobs. and the drug war criminalized many minority youth (they abuse non-perscription drugs unlike whites abusing perscription drugs).

            1. Re: OhioOrrin,

              the scared-of-blacks flight to the burbs removed owner-occupied properties from the inner cities (& made us dependent on imported oil).

              You just managed to be even more the ignorant fool than Pat, OO. Congratulations!

              What “scared” people away from downtown was the increased taxation and the government’s plan to make everybody a “homeowner.”

              1. Stop OM! Nothing would be more funny than an extended idiot fight between Pat and Orrin!

              2. the burbs started way before that mostly as a consequence of freeways

                1. Re: OhioOrrin,

                  the burbs started way before that mostly as a consequence of freeways

                  Thus undermining your OWN “scared of blacks” argument not 3 posts ago.

                  Did you take your medication today?

                  1. no it facilitated driving away fm blacks. do try to keep up

            2. Tard fight! Tard fight!

              1. Mad Max: Beyond ‘Tard-dome

          2. So Pat’s plan is to just implement any laws he likes to enforce his moralizing? It’s asshole like this that make me ashamed to vote republican.

          3. We have laws to protect and enforce my rights.

            If you go off somewhere by yourself and smoke some crack [or some more crack, I guess] that does absolutely nothing to affect me personally, nor does it infringe on any property right of mine.

            Therefore, I don’t give a shit. Knock yourself out. Hell, go drink some hydrochloric acid for all I care.

            And yes, the situation in the inner cities is a result of the drug war – or at least is greatly worsened by the drug war. 35% of minority males are excluded from most of the employment market as a result of their enrollment in the criminal justice system. If you are seriously going to sit there and propose to me that more than 35% of the population would be similarly negatively impacted if drugs were legal, you’re nuts.

            And also, we would have to measure the marginal impact legalization would have. By your own statement, a large number of people are already using drugs. So those people essentially don’t count in our analysis. Their situation doesn’t change if we legalize drugs. We have to only consider unique new users and compare that number to the total number of people impacted by the criminal justice aspects of the drug war. There’s just no way you can scrounge up enough new drug “victims” in a legalization scenario to get anywhere near that number.

          4. Have you read any lockean theory? Maybe Common Sense?

            Yeah, try that first, then come back. You will understand why opposing the war on drugs doesnt make one an anarchist (not that we dont have a handful of them floating around here).

            1. Anarchists don’t float! ask me how I know.

          5. Shit, Pat, you simultaneously take the right-wing view of drug policy… then swerve into the “fuck Whitey” ditch. Are you bipolar, or just stoopid?

      9. BTW, douchebag:

        The Tea Party is fucking ours.

        It’s Sarah Palin who is an interloping whore.

        1. *swoon*

      10. Answer me this….is cocaine illegal, right now, at this moment?

        1. Define “illegal.”

          There are pharmaceutical formulations of cocaine and opiods that legally may be prescribed, dispensed and consumed.

          Is it illegal in the U.S. for recreational use? Last time I checked, yes.

      11. I like what you have written here and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

    3. ur restitution. I understand, the criminal justice system can seem like a scam, and you can find many g

  2. Harry Reid calls for ban on prostitution in Nevada.

    There goes Sen. Vitter’s “fact finding” trips to Nevada.

    1. John|2.23.11 @ 8:41AM|#

      Sometimes people do get the government they deserve.

    2. Re: MNG,

      Harry Reid calls for ban on prostitution in Nevada.

      They must reveal too much on their “clients”…

    3. Only Amy Air Force can save us now.

  3. My guess: Reid will not be re-elected.

    1. You think voting corruption will be wiped out in six years? I’ll take that bet.

      1. I *think* AB may have meant “re-erected”.

      2. Once the public unions are broken, Harry’s gonna have a harder time of it.

        1. since that aint gonna happen, he’ll be fine.

    2. Oh cone-trare. Social conservative/ Fiscal Lunatic. Win-win for the country and him. Statism at its finest. What could be better for the country than finally getting rid of prostitution once and for all. Like drugs.

    3. It’s stupid, but he’s a D.C. legislator, so carries all the weight of an angry celebrity.

  4. Caught this little bit in the WSJ this morning. My God Chris Matthews is stupid.

    Last September, Chris Matthews, the host of MSNBC’s “Hardball,” asked Politico’s Charles Mahtesian, “You think business can sit on those billions and trillions of dollars for two more years after they screw Obama this time? Are they going to keep sitting on their money . . . to get Mr. Excitement Mitt Romney elected president? Will they do that to the country?” Mr. Mahtesian concurred.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/…..on_LEADTop

    1. Wait, that’s makes absolutely no sense…wait, wait, wait…yep, no sense.

      1. Mathews in his own way is the most embarrassing of the MSNBC hosts. Crazy Larry and Ed Mad Man Schultz are just carnival barkers putting on an act. But Mathews in all his earnestness seems to really be this stupid.

        1. How dare you say that I’m not the craziest working at MSNBC?! You must be one of those pro-life nuts!

          1. No no Ed, just not the dumbest. Until MSNBC hires Phil Specter to do a show from prison, you will always be the craziest. Don’t worry.

            1. Guess I’ll have to torch this fucking place, just to prove my insane bonafides.

        2. Hey, I heard Olbermann is gone. Are you looking for somebody to fill his spot?

        3. What’s sad is that I clearly remember a time a while back when Matthews was a normal person and broadcaster. I thought that Obama’s election would make him normal once again, but he seems even more deranged now that he was when Bush was in office.

          1. Did you see Michelle Bachman on his show election night? She made a crack about the “tingle down his leg” and Matthews came unglued. “That is not what I said!!” “Idiot”. Those where his words. It was great.

            1. That was clearly not what I said. I said I “tinkled down my leg.” It’s a medical condition, dammit!

            2. But John, he was right, those were not his words! He didn’t say “tingle down my leg”, that’s a lie!!!

              No, he said “a tingle UP my leg”. Totally different thing! Gosh!

              1. Bachman owned Matthews on election night like I owned the kids on this site!

                1. Re: Pt D King,

                  Bachman owned Matthews on election night like I owned the kids on this site!

                  Hey! Don’t tell those ugly and awful lies about her! She DID own Chris Matthews!

                  I mean, people just pile it on her, including you!

    2. He’s made the argument before. I think the shiver in his leg is clouding his understanding of economics and business.

      Or he’s a political hack and has the cognitive power of a rhesus monkey.

    3. Are they going to keep sitting on their money…

      Hey, at least he admitted that the money belongs to the private sector and not Obama.

      1. It may be their money, but it is still their patriotic duty to spend it to help Obama.

        1. Uncle Sam needs YOU to spend your money!

          1. “It may be their money, but it is still their patriotic duty to spend it”

            And yet when Bush said that right after 9/11, the press BLASTED him for it.

            Repeatedly.

        2. Obama said as much in his SOTU Address.

    4. It takes a special kind of stupid to think that companies aren’t hiring just to be assholes.

    5. “You think business can sit on those billions and trillions of dollars for two more years after they screw Obama this time? Are they going to keep sitting on their money . . . to get Mr. Excitement Mitt Romney elected president? Will they do that to the country?”

      They’re probably going to keep swimming in it inside their giant vaults.

      http://soberhorsethief.files.w…..mcduck.jpg

  5. Rahm Emanuel wins Chicago mayoral election.

    Surprise, surprise, surprise!

    1. Sometimes people do get the government they deserve.

      1. Criminal leaves office, criminal takes his place.

    2. But he’s the perfect kind of scum to be mayor. He’s obviously willing to be a total dick which is a plus in local executive positions. I think he ran on being an asshole, I support this. Also, I don’t live in Chicago, so there’s that.

      1. He’s obviously willing to be a total dick which is a plus in local executive positions. I think he ran on being an asshole, I support this.

        Asshole is good for underling positions.

      2. He’s a dick! He’s a reckless, arrogant, stupid dick. And members of Congress are pussies. And Obama is an asshole. Pussies don’t like dicks, because pussies get fucked by dicks. But dicks also fuck assholes: assholes that just want to shit on everything. Pussies may think they can deal with assholes their way. But the only thing that can fuck an asshole is a dick, with some balls. The problem with dicks is: they fuck too much or fuck when it isn’t appropriate – and it takes a pussy to show them that. But sometimes, pussies can be so full of shit that they become assholes themselves… because pussies are an inch and half away from ass holes. I don’t know much about this crazy, crazy world, but I do know this: If you don’t let us fuck this asshole, we’re going to have our dicks and pussies all covered in shit!

        1. That speech, ever relevant, leaves me with a question. Can Rahm fuck his own asshole?

          1. I assure you, he can.

    3. Welcome my son. Welcome to the Machine.

  6. course a ban wont stop it. prostitution in the EU is well-regulated & the income reported & taxed. the girls have to carry med exam cards dated w/in 30 days & present them when asked. hookers are strictly confined to red light districts which have heavy police patrols to protect the girls mainly. and all customers must wear condoms. saved mucho time when on a 3 day pass outta the field.

    1. Did they charge you extra to have retard-sex?

      1. They gave him a bj as charity. He was like Charlie from Flowers for Algernon

        1. that that is is that that isn’t isn’t 🙂

    2. married sex is boring

      1. Unmarried abstinence is… joy?

        1. wouldnt know. i date 2 womens

          1. “Womens”? What, are you still in 2nd grade or something?

          2. OhioOrrin|2.23.11 @ 10:47AM|#
            wouldnt know. i date 2 womens

            Left and Right?

          3. Dating is boring. And old-fashioned. You’re just as boring a fuck as any old married asshole.

          4. OhioOrrin’s life partners are all manufactured by the Kleenex Corporation.

  7. Goicoechea, a rancher, joked: “You know, they say sheepherding is the second-oldest profession. Is he going to try to do away with us too?”

    Uh, please be careful with *that* kind of talk!

  8. Illinois is rapidly turning into or already is the California of the Midwest.

  9. This question I guess highlights the nature of race as a Protean social construct, but isn’t Emanuel white? If so it is interesting that he becomes yet another white mayor of a town with a huge black population. Maybe Emanuel got little of the black vote and just won the other groups by a lot, but I doubt it. Often here we hear that blacks only vote for blacks, but this result seems contrary to that.

    1. I’m betting he got close to 90% of the deceased vote, pet vote, double vote, and dead fish vote.

      1. Are Chicago’s dead voters the fast or slow moving kind? That kind of info would be important for GOTV efforts…

        1. Are Chicago’s dead voters the fast or slow moving kind?

          Science, MNG, you don’t get anything right, do you? Let me say it slowly so you can understand. Fast moving zombies are a myth!

          1. but I saw this documentary, 28 Days Later and they seemed pretty fast to me. And there was that story about the zombies in the mall, not the slow ones in Pittsburgh, but someplace else, and more recently. I seen some fast zombies somewhere.

          2. I agree completely. The very idea of fast zombies is absurd.

            1. The fast ones are called Zoombies

      2. only 90%? WTF…

    2. What does it matter? The Daleys have ruled Chicago with an iron fist for decades. Rahm just seems like the perfect person to continue that legacy.

      It’s the Stockholm Syndrome at work on a municipal scale.

      1. So we are accepting the story that he was elected because more actual, live voters voted for for him? Not that I find it totally unbelieveable, but I also wouldn’t be surprised if Chicago Mayoral elections aren’t a just some kind of Soviet formality.

    3. Democrats are the new black.

    4. Often here we hear that blacks only vote for blacks

      I have never heard that.

    5. You don’t suppose a former boss might have written him a really good reference letter?

    6. Silly MNG. When will you learn that race-based politics is for the rubes and the unwashed masses? So long as you are willing to cut deals or get dirt on the right people, you can get elected.

    7. Delroy Lindo runs that town anyway.

    8. An insane and/or cracked-out guy on the El yesterday loudly announced several times that he’d voted for Emanuel. I could have predicted his victory on that datum alone.

    9. Well, apparently they have to draw the line somewhere, and that line is Braun.

  10. Probably few of the protesters in the streets connect their economic travail to Washington. But central bankers do. They complain, most recently at last week’s G-20 meeting in Paris, that the U.S. is exporting inflation.

    China and India blame the U.S. Federal Reserve for their difficulties in maintaining stable prices. The International Monetary Fund and the United Nations, always responsive to the complaints of developing nations, are suggesting alternatives to the dollar as the pre-eminent international currency. The IMF managing director, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, has proposed replacement of the dollar with IMF special drawing rights, or SDRs, a unit of account fashioned from a basket of currencies that is made available to the foreign currency reserves of central banks.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/…..lenews_wsj

    1. Inflation exports combined with the largest military on Earth is how we do war these days. We can’t attack China, but we can turn screws. Also, fuck the UN, we do what we want.

    2. China’s its own worst enemy. Seriously. We got nothing on them f..king themselves.

    3. While there is truth to such claims, it’s so much easier to blame all of your endemic problems on an outside party you don’t control, isn’t it?

      China–and India, to a lesser extent–have serious, unresolved issues to deal with and growing middle classes that likely won’t tolerate the usual bullshit. So blaming the U.S. helps them stay in control without revolts and other noise from hoi polloi.

  11. RACISTS!

    1. Rather than a wussy concession speech, you should have led a protest with the many tens of followers you have in the streets.

  12. There’s a “cold, dead hands” joke somewhere in that Harry Reid story.

    1. Except the cold, dead hands belong to the hooker…

  13. Instead of hearing the usual bans on prostitution, drugs, freedom etc. etc. would it not be nice if they decided to ban politicians.

    1. Peace and prosperity would abound if they were banned. Those things must be heavily regulated, or they would get out of control. So your proposal is rejected.

  14. >>Emanuel called the victory “humbling”

    If ever two words should not be seen in the same sentence…

    1. Wouldn’t a loss have been more humbling?

      1. Certainly more bumbling.

    2. By humbling he meant his opponents were humbled.

    3. I didn’t know there was any force in the known universe that could cause Rahm Emanuel to experience the feeling of humility.

    4. It’s humbling because he had nothing to do with the victory.

    5. Emanuel and victory?

      1. Pick any two of the three.

  15. One fifth of Bahrain’s population shows up for protest.

    Only a fifth? Meh.

    1. WTF, so more showed up to a protest than we can get people to vote?

      1. Good point, they are winning their future.

  16. There’s a guy on Bloomberg right now “wondering” what sort of relationship Mayor Emanuel will have with the public employee unions.

    I suspect the Labor-Consultant-in-Chief may suffer a disappoint.

    1. He did not get many union endorsements. So maybe Rahm was the least worse outcome.

  17. Emanuel said his first official action as mayor would be to move to Chicago.

    1. Zing! (rimshot)

    2. Two funnies in one thread for MNG.

      Topping his previous record by two.

      1. You have a way of redeeming yourself, MNG. Hearty laughs resulted from those posts.

  18. Brown, Braun- whatever.

    1. If she were white, you would care about how to spell her name, you RAAAAAACIST!!!111!!1!@

    2. P, I believe you may find this amusing.

    3. Braun Godwins Rahm:

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..22881.html

  19. Tommy Friedman suggests that the solution to our travails in the Middle East is, wait for it……

    a gasoline tax! So we can underwrite high-speed rail and Chevy Volts!

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02…..ss&emc=rss

    1. You forgot the “to be more like China” line.

      1. Actually, it’s probably the first time he hasn’t mentioned China in an op-ed piece for years. But see if you make sense of this paragraph:

        No one is rooting harder for the democracy movements in the Arab world to succeed than I am. But even if things go well, this will be a long and rocky road. The smart thing for us to do right now is to impose a $1-a-gallon gasoline tax, to be phased in at 5 cents a month beginning in 2012, with all the money going to pay down the deficit. Legislating a higher energy price today that takes effect in the future, notes the Princeton economist Alan Blinder, would trigger a shift in buying and investment well before the tax kicks in. With one little gasoline tax, we can make ourselves more economically and strategically secure, help sell more Chevy Volts and free ourselves to openly push for democratic values in the Middle East without worrying anymore that it will harm our oil interests. Yes, it will mean higher gas prices, but prices are going up anyway, folks. Let’s capture some it for ourselves.

        1. Alan Blinder is the same guy who said minimum wage doesn’t lead to job losses. Fucking price floors, how do they work?

        2. Remember buying Chevy Volt is investing in America, in freedom, in liberty and justice for all. If you want the USA to become a third-world shithole where public servants can’t even get a decent living wage, FINE. But for us patriots, we know the real score, BUY A CHEVY VOLT!

          1. Shit, we don’t give a shit about them. We just care whether they can afford bomb making materials. Its probably best for us they go back to being dirt poor.

            1. BUY A CHEVY VOLT.

          2. The Chevy Volt is such a pile of fucking hype I can’t believe it. It’s a hybrid, period. They act like it’s going to single-handedly cause the collapse of the petroleum industry and end our reliance on oil.

            Yeah, it’s got a purely electric mode. But it also has an internal combustion, fossil-fueled engine. It can got a whopping 40 miles on its batteries – meaning it wouldn’t get many, if not most, people to work and back once, without kicking in the gas engine.

            Add to that the fact that its styling is as vanilla bland as any car in recent memory. Bleh.

            We are not impressed, he says imperiously.

            1. On the other hand, it is pure electric drive, so hopefully the gas engine works near its optimum efficiency, giving you at least 7 more miles per gas tank.

              1. What kind of gasoline does it take though? If it requires the 91 or 93 octane, it’s not really worth it.

              2. What’s the charge/discharge efficiency of the batteries? The variable speed drives?

            2. I also would like to know the environmental effects of its manufacturing process. I can’t be bothered to look into it, but what kind of batteries does it use, and how many? Are the batteries recycled when they reach the end of their lives (which likely would be about 4 years, I’m guessing)? And if so, how? And how much will that cost?

              Meh.

          3. Remember buying Chevy Volt is investing in America, in freedom, in liberty and justice for all.

            Invest.
            Dollars.
            In.
            Our.
            Technology.

            Fits in well with WTF, right?

        3. Lets say the scheme actually worked and we stopped using oil. That would cause the price of oil to crash which would intern cost middle eastern countries billions and make them much poorer than they already are. And that would help them how?

          1. Damnit, see above.

            1. It may be best for us for them to be poor. But it sure isn’t better for them, which is what Friedman seems to be claiming.

              1. Oh I C, you tried to delve into Mr. Friedman’s thought process. I would not sully myself with such a thing.

                1. Where would you rather sully yourself? Friedman’s mind or Gaza?

          2. It might force their leaders to reform, oh that’s already happening. Then I don’t know, maybe it would give us moral superiority because we care so much better for Gaia?

        4. (From the NYT Tommy Friedman op-ed:)

          Yes, it will mean higher gas prices, but prices are going up anyway, folks. Let’s capture some it for ourselves.

          This is the single most stupid thing I have ever read. “Let’s get some for ourselves”? Who do you think pays that premium, you idiot? Martians?

          1. He’s talking to other people who take public transportation or work from home. Only those dumb Red staters drive anywhere.

        5. Can we also start weaning ourselves from dependence on foreign credit so we can openly push for democratic values in China without worrying that it will harm our vote-buying interests?

          Ha ha ha, yes, I’ll show myself out.

    2. With one little gasoline electricity tax, we can make ourselves more economically and strategically secure

    3. Why do these people always bring up the idea when gas prices are at record highs?

      “Oh, you think your ass hurts driving out of the gas station now? Just wait until we add another 25% to the cost of a fill-up!”

    4. How about we do nothing and if the price of oil rises, we let that naturally incent the development of alternatives?

      1. Or how about we lift the controls on drilling for oil in the US? If the production is enough to force the price down, great. If not, we get rich selling what we do produce.

        1. we could allow a bonanza in the gulf and artic and it wouldn’t make an appreciable dent in our short term production. Decline rates would flatten for a while, but that’s about it.

          1. 1. We haven’t drilled it yet so we don’t know how much is there

            2. We have more oil than they want to admit, especially as technology increases.

            http://www.grandforksherald.co…..id/192956/

            Don’t buy the gaia worshiping peak oil bullshit.

            1. the oil cos will continue to cap-off viable wells to control supply.

              1. Re: OhioOrrin,

                the oil cos will continue to cap-off viable wells to control supply.

                Yea, sure – all at the same time! That will work!

                “Let’s cap the friggin’ oil wells. Agreed>”
                “Yeah, sure baby, whatever you say!”

                (And then turns around, starts pumping like nuts and undercuts the competition that just agreed to cap their own nuts.)

                You’re so dumbed down by your our own cliched view of the world, OO. Meaning: You don’t think.

                1. worked offshore 2 yrs. capping viable wells is an established business practice.

                  1. Re: OhioOrrin,

                    worked offshore 2 yrs. capping viable wells is an established business practice.

                    Yes, when it comes UNPROFITABLE, nitwit. Not as part of some conspiracy to “limit supply.”

                    Learn some economics… and some finances while you’re at it, before attempting to make an ass of yourself like that, again.

            2. I don’t buy the Gaia worshippers. I listen to geologists and the field in the artic/Cali/gulf would have to be twice the size of Sauds oil fields to make enough of a dent for the future. A trillion barrels of oil is only useful if it can be gotten out in a shortish time frame and without costing us a trillion barrels of oil in energy.

              1. How about we start drilling in these places so we have some available for growth. I mean, these photovoltaic cells and windmills have to be made using energy. I’d think everyone would be on board for one reason or another.

        2. Why to you hate polar bears so much?

          1. Because they ate my grandma.

            1. Yeah, well I ate your mother last night, so do you hate me too?

              Hiyo!!

        3. Logical. We have to drill the sea floor to see what’s in it.

          1. *swoon*

        4. great idea! “we” sure will get rich.

    5. Did Friedman mention anything about using low quality fly ash for our high-speed rail projects? Because that’s all the rage in China right now.

      given poor quality control on the mainland, the use of low-quality fly ash, and other low-grade construction materials, was “almost inevitable” in high-speed railway construction.

      And that could have fatal consequences, Wang said. With a catalytic function almost opposite to that of good fly ash, the bad fly ash could significantly weaken railway line foundations and shorten a railway’s lifespan by about half.

      1. Color me confused, but is “fly ash” the remains of a cremated insect?

        1. I know you’re being goofy, but fly ash is the highly consistent fine ash that results from burning coal. It can be used as a filler in cheaper low-cement concrete mixtures to create a stronger, more consistent, and crack resistant product. In the USA, it’s also dirt cheap, as many utlities just want to get rid of the stuff the buyer typically just pays for transportation. Determining the quality can be tricky. Good fly ash is almost as good as cement, poor fly ash is like adding air bubbles to your concrete.

          1. …and the shitty stuff is in the foundation for thousands of kilometers of rail in Chicom. But ssshhhh don’t tell Friedman.

        2. No, you idiot. The Chinese call it fly ash, but it is actually fry ash, the ground up bits of french fries.

          Herro??? Google transrator need to do better with Engrish/Chinese transration.

          1. Damnit! I even speak Japanese so I should’ve easily realized that.

            3-9, dog!

  20. Mike Barnicle thinks union protesters in the Midwest are JUST LIKE the protesters getting run over by tanks in Libya.

    I think he needs to do a little on-the-scene investigating.

    1. I don’t really think that! I just borrowed the line because I thought it was funny.

    2. That’s harsh. I would never wish anyone to be surrounded by greedy, overpaid Wisconsin school teachers.

    3. Raping reporters? How sad.

  21. So, maybe I’m an idiot, but I’m wondering something. In all these protests in Wisconsin and Ohio, there are signs about keeping the hands of the Koch brothers off our government, or whatever.

    But who cares about the Koch brothers? Why is just saying their names out loud considered some kind of irrefutable argument? I mean, I know there was some kind of profile on them describing how they fund conservative causes–but who cares? Liberals have deep-pocketed donors, so why are the Kochs anything special? Why this left-wing fixation?

    1. It’s the flip side of the right’s Soros fixation.

      1. The Soros Fund’s third largest holding is Monsanto. It is also heavy in oil exploration, and GLD. That’s the Gold ETF. Why would someone who says that there is a gold bubble be so heavily invested in it? Oh wait, he’s invested in paper gold, not physical.

    2. It’s the left’s answer to the right’s fixation on Soros. Neither side can make it much past ad hominem attacks in order to justify their agenda.

      1. At least with Soros you can take the left argument about evil financial instruments and people and laugh at them for loving a guy who has managed to almost destroy two economies for the sake of his firm making money.

        The only Koch argument I’ve seen that isn’t some retarded ad hom is environmental, and that’s pretty flimsy.

        1. Yeah, considering a large part of Koch’s business is supplying environmental control equipment.

      2. The difference is that the Koch brothers aren’t convicted felons and don’t try to break currencies and destroy nations around the world.

        1. So basically, the Koch brothers are the worst, most impotent, and pitifully inconsequential of the bogeymen. Pfft, no wonder libertarians will never be influential, your evil mastermind is a pair of kittens wearing pink mittens.

          Soros does evil right, and that’s why the progressives will inherit the earth. (or what’s left of it, bwhahahahahah)

        2. Nothing wrong with breaking a currency now and then.

          Don’t want your currency broken? Don’t use a fiat currency.

    3. Don’t you know that it’s evil for American citizens to petition the government for redress of grievances if they don’t do so via a union or a PIRG?

  22. Reid added, “We should do everything we can to make sure the world holds Nevada in the same high regard you and I do.”

    So I assume that means that he will be resigning immediately?

  23. Nevada will never convince those California megachurches to relocate to Las Vegas as long as prostitution is still legal.

    1. Yeah, but what’s Jimmy Swaggart up to these days?

    2. You’d think the whorehouse next to the church model would be a good thing to bring in mega churches.

    3. The time for “medical prostitution” has come!

    4. whys? oh cause the hookers would siphon $$$ fm the collection plates

  24. The Evil Koch Brothers vs Wisconsin Teachers Union story has made it from Mother Jones to the NY Times.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02…..ef=general

    1. It’s funny that the only “bad” thing that people* could say about them was that they are evil corporate executives.

      *i.e. union leaders, heads of democrat PACs and democrat officials who take money from unions and PACs.

      1. The left has left the reservation. Corporations bad, regardless of what they do. Unions always good. Government always good, except when run by mean Republicans.

  25. Also, best word coined out of the WI/IN Democratic flight: “fleebaggers”

    Will have to try to find the link where I saw that.

    1. It’s good, but I like Flee Party better.

  26. I didn’t realize until last week that David H. Koch is one of the main sponsors of the PBS program Nova. I guess PBS, and specifically science programs, are now part of the vast right wing conspiracy.

    1. I think his clever illuminati scheme is this:

      1. Watching the program Nova makes laymen think they know about science.

      2. These laymen will then think critically about science for themselves.

      3. A certain percentage of these newly-critically-thinking laymen will then reject the evidence supporting global warming – because they are half-educated laymen, and not True High Priests of Holy Science with degrees.

      4. PROFIT!

      1. psssh, without the points of ellipsis, your progression is flawed!

    2. Well, we have diversified.
      *adjusts monocle*

    3. Yes, it’s curious. I assume they’re hoping to stimulate more advancements in science and technology in order to create a fanatical army of robot conservatives.

    4. David Koch has also given to Lincoln Center and the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

      Imagine the horror if arts and culture lovers knew they were enmeshed in such vile conservatism?

    5. If the Koch brothers didn’t exist, the Obama administration would simply create them via the social network.

  27. I guess reason really did save Cleveland.

    “‘You’ve been looking to re-invent the rust belt as the tech belt,’ Obama said at the end of the small business forum at Cleveland State University.”

  28. One fifth of Bahrain’s population shows up for protest.

    That’s like, what? 10 guys?

    1. Don’t forget the goat.

      1. They don’t allow their females out in public in that part of the world.

        1. Ah, so my number is inflated.

      2. I NEVER FORGET THE GOAT!

  29. So apparently there are riots and a general strike in Greece today.

    Given the fact that there’s a decidedly anarchist flavor to the revolutions happening to the south of Greece, what are the odds that Greece flares up again, but more radically this time?

    One reason these events go in waves is because the availability of ready examples of the collapse of authority makes one’s own authorities look less credible and more vulnerable. If some additional X% of Greeks come out into the streets this time, could Greece go down?

    1. Arent the Greeks protesting cuts in government spending? Am I the only one who finds it hysterical that their are anarchists protesting government austerity?

      1. No, it’s perfectly ludicrous.

        But the Bolshevik program was nonsense too.

        I’m more interested in the Greek phenomena because of its potential for rapid escalation, and not because I think they have a coherent program or sensible aims.

        1. My concerns lie with their feta and olives.

  30. Emanuel amassed 55.2 percent with 99.5 percent of city precincts counted, above the 50 percent-plus benchmark he needed to win outright to avoid an April runoff. Gery Chico had 24 percent, with Miguel del Valle at 9.3 percent and Carol Moseley Braun at 9 percent. John F. Kennedy polled his worst ever performance in a Chicago election, garnering only 8.2%.

    1. It’s like I’m watching my 4 year old sink NBA 3 pointers or something.

      It makes me think this is a fake MNG put together by YouTube pranksters.

      1. Hey, what can I say, Chicago elections are low hanging fruit…

        1. Just so you know, most experts on Chicago put quotes around the word election when used in connection with the Stinky Onion.

    2. what about daley senior?

  31. Parents, please don’t talk to the police – you’ll live to regret it:

    http://gawker.com/#!5765753/student-kills-self-after-suspension-over-legal-drug

    “America’s public school systems and see how we’re preparing our youth of today for the challenges of tomorrow! In Fairfax County, Va., The Washington Post reports, a 15-year-old “model student” and linebacker, Nick Stuban, was suspended and banned from school property for seven weeks for buying a capsule of the legal “marijuana-like” synthetic compound JWH-108. He was then reassigned to a different high school; a month later, he killed himself.

    Here’s the original WaPo report:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..28_pf.html

  32. Parents, please don’t talk to the police.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..28_pf.html

  33. Virginia Senate passed state constitutional amendment making it harder to seize via eminent domain. Several more steps required before the actual change occurs.

    The good stuff:

    In all other cases, a taking or damaging of private property is not for public use if the primary use is for private gain, private benefit, private enterprise, increasing jobs, increasing tax revenue, or economic development,

    And then the kick in the nuts:

    except for the elimination of a public nuisance existing on the property.

    Isn’t this the “blight exception” that the Empire State Development Corp used to seize land for the Nets new stadium and for Columbia University?

    1. I’m thinking public nuisance is not quite the same as blight – or at least it shouldn’t be.

      As I recall from my Virginia Remedies class in lore school, to constitute a nuisance, the activity at issue had to be something that prevented you from having the quiet enjoyment of your property. I.e., I’m thinking the bar should be a little higher to demonstrate that something is a public nuisance, compared to it being considered “blighted.”

      Of course, I could just be making that up, out of my wishful thinking that it’s how things could be.

      I’ve done zero research to support my wild-assed hypothesis.

    2. As I read it, they could condemn and seize your property to raze a nuisance structure [like an abandoned house or tenement] but could then transfer that property to a new owner as if it was a tax lien seizure put up for auction.

      So a determined municipality could still fuck you.

      1. I live in fear that some developer in Fairfax County (VA) will have had enough of drooling over our Metro-abutted 20 acres with 50-year-old garden style condos and hook up with our benevolent county government to fuck us in the ass. I think they could get us decarled a nuisance if they really, really wanted to.

  34. Folks, when even a traditional democratic stronghold like Providence, Rhode Island decides that it’s time to break the teacher’s union, you know that it’s all over for the left.

    1. Providence is facing a daunting budget crisis. The city had a $57-million deficit last year and expects a higher figure for the year ending June 30. In addition, the city, under then-Mayor David N. Cicilline, nearly depleted its reserves to cover day-to-day expenses. Taveras is currently awaiting completion of a report by an independent panel, which he commissioned to get a better handle on the city’s financial situation.

      Hilarious.

    2. gosh then the libertarians would be the new left. just wait’ll bachrushpalinbeck vomit on youse

      1. Re: OhioOrrin,

        gosh then the libertarians would be the new left. just wait’ll bachrushpalinbeck vomit on youse

        Gosh OhioOrrin writing full sentences in English with proper grammar – that would be such a sight!

      2. Oh, what a threat. I’m so terrified I’m shaking all over.

        Seeing with my own eyes that the America has finally had enough of you scum and isn’t going to take any more is absolutely glorious. It gives me some hope that our country may have a future. The only wonder is that it took so darn long.

  35. Dem Rep to unions: Time to get ‘bloody’

    A Democratic Congressman from Massachusetts is raising the stakes in the nation’s fight over the future of public employee unions, saying emails aren’t enough to show support and that it is time to “get a little bloody.”

    “I’m proud to be here with people who understand that it’s more than just sending an email to get you going. Every once and awhile you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody when necessary,” Rep. Mike Capuano (D-Ma.) told a crowd in Boston on Tuesday rallying in solidarity for Wisconsin union members.

    http://nhjournal.com/2011/02/2…..me-to-get-‘bloody’/#

    1. “I’m proud to be here with people who understand that it’s more than just sending an email to get you going. Every once and awhile you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody when necessary,” Rep. Mike Capuano (D-Ma.) told a crowd in Boston on Tuesday rallying in solidarity for Wisconsin union members.

      I am willing to bet that if someone gets hurt, NO ONE in the media will blame this guy’s rhetoric, not even peripherically…

      1. Maybe he meant they need to provoke people into hurting them in order to manipulate people into sympathy for their cause (or simply create false flag attacks like the Republican chick that said an Obama supporter cut her up).

        Being very charitable, but whichever side initiates violence will probably lose, and I imagine both sides know that, but I’m not sure the opposition is savvy/ruthless enough to really see what it means.

        Regardless, the unions have an advantage — to pretend to be a union member, either you have to protect your identity and wear union garb, or you have to actually infiltrate, get the job, pay the dues, and so on. But any asshole can claim to be supporting the opposition, since it isn’t organized.

    2. I’m proud to be here with people who understand that it’s more than just sending an email to get you going. Every once and awhile you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody when necessary,

      Eliminationist. Rhetoric.

  36. Let Teachers Tantrum … Then Fire Them
    by Linda Schrock Taylor

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/taylor/taylor160.html

    […]We cannot carry the teachers to their rooms ? let alone force them to actually teach ? but we can ignore them. Like toddlers, they should soon notice that no one is paying any attention to their fits and spurts. But on second thought…they have shown that they are not as sensible like toddlers.

    Governors should fire every teacher who has broken his/her contract. Teachers do sign contracts, agreeing to expectations that they teach in the classrooms; not tantrum in the streets. Demonstrating “teachers” are stupid to not realize that their behavior is inexcusable and sets a horrible example for students, parents, and the nation as a whole. I would be willing to bet that these same teachers are the ones who constantly complain to their principals about rude, insensitive, and badly behaving students and parents of students. Monkey see; monkey do.

    The teachers who encouraged their students to leave school, as well, deserve to be fired plus lose their teaching certificates. They are not “teachers.” They are agenda-driven individuals and obviously, their agenda includes neither academics nor instruction. It is a shame that America no longer pillories people in town squares. Ripe tomatoes, anyone?

    I prefer tarring and feathering them, myself…

    1. Should I re-post the tar-and-feathering amendment?

      1. Go ahead, it’s pertinent.

        1. Proposed amendment: “A well-regulated political cla?s being nece?sary to the ?ecurity of a free State, the right of the People to tar and feather their ?orry A?ses shall not be infringed.”

          1. I see you got the long ‘s’ rules straightened out. I can now support this amendment with a clear conscience.

            1. Correction was applied.

          2. Sorry, this Amendment is more 100 minutes old. And it’s written with a bunch of funny f’s. It’s impossible to know what it means.

            1. It’s a fair cop.

          3. I want to copy this to my FB status.

            1. Feel free. I posted it at Urkobold, too.

    2. “Despite what some among us would like to believe, it is not because of our creative ideas. It is not because of the merit of our positions. It is not because we care about children. And it is not because we have a vision of a great public school for every child. NEA and its affiliates are effective advocates because we have power. And we have power because there are more than 3.2 million people who are willing to pay us hundreds of millions of dollars in dues each year.”

      – NEA General Counsel (now retired) Bob Chanin in 2009

  37. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnKLEOXenow

    The in dash video from where the cop shot the guy who was whittling. Even for someone who reads Balko’s weekly kicks in the nuts, it is pretty fucking shocking.

    1. Too bad the shooting is off-camera, so the video doesn’t confirm the brave officer’s story that the whittling terrorist turned into a ninja and was about to totally flipping out. What a travesty.

    2. Seriously, though, like I said yesterday: if you’re a cop, you’re either one of these types or you tolerate them. In either case, fuck you in the fucking neck.

      1. The worst part is they all stand around and watch they guy bleed to death. Not a single cop even attempted to render aid to the guy even though he was obviously no longer a threat. When the second cop comes on the scene, the first one is cowering behind the traffic light box even though the person he just shot four fucking times is obviously incapacitated. They just let him die.

        1. How did cops become such pussies? They can’t approach a guy that was shot 4 times without 8 of them holding hands and huddling behind each other? And then the first (and only) thing they do is grab the knife and flip the corpse over the handcuff it? And the cop in that rearending from last week was ‘scared’ that the guy he just ran into was going to steal his shotgun? Man up, wussies.

          1. They are pathetic sick bastards. They handcuffed the 90 something old lady in Atlanta they murdered and let her bleed to death.

      2. Here, this made me feel better. Who would think cyclist chicks could be that hot

        http://www.bikeradar.com/galle…..ws/article

        1. That is unusual. Cyclists normally look barely healthier than marathoners.

        2. Here’s why she’s so damn sexy. Every chick should do cleans.

          1. The cute geek glasses. And she has a fantastic ass.

      3. I’ve said it before about this story but the shocker to me is the woman crossing the street when the cop fires his gun. She jumps for a second but then just continues walking. Citizens are just that numb to police authority that a shooting of any kind does not raise questions.

      1. Birk’s attorney, Ted Buck, said malice must be shown for the officer to be charged and that he didn’t believe his client had malice.

        So it’s cool to kill people as long as you aren’t malicious about it? And not just an acceptable defense, but such a good defense you can’t even be charged.

        1. Dude, WTF? Even accidental, he should be charged with negligent homocide.

        2. So there is nothing malicious about shooting someone four times in the torso? I will remember that.

        3. Ted Bundy was totally prosecuted in error, since he had no emotions, malicious or otherwise. The Innocence Project needs to get on this ASAP and have him posthumously exhonerated and his family compensated!

  38. Re: Pat D King,

    No, I don’t propose reinstating prohibition. But we know that drink is not as bad as coke, H, or meth, not nearly as bad.

    That’s debatable – more people die of alcohol related issues than from coke or meth issues.

    Yet you fools use the logic that booze is legal therefore we must legalize all drugs and end this war-on-drugs.

    That’s not the reason, Pat. Booze was made illegal at one time and then legal. What was the argument to make it legal back then? That drugs were legal? That’s not the argument libertarians posit, Pat. You’re mistaken in that regard.

    The libertarian argument stems from the ethics of liberty, Pat. A person is free to ingest whatever he or she likes, as long as his or her actions do not harm others in their bodies or their property. You might say that people are hurt (their families, sweethearts, whatever) because people care about drug addicts, but feelings are the responsibility of the feeling person, not of someone else, otherwise I would be the slave of my wife’s feelings and she would be of mine. Hurting someone’s feelings may make me an asshole, but does not make me EVIL or IMMORAL. Instead, initiating aggression against someone’s body or property IS evil and IS immoral, which is EXACTLY what the war against drugs is: Naked aggression against people’s bodies and property.

    That’s fucking stupid and not very “reasoned”.

    Your misconception of the argument is what’s not very well reasoned. Don’t blame me, blame yourself for coming up with such childish strawmans.

    You are the same people that preach God is not great, yet you somehow reason that men can overcome nature/drugs/addiction by reason alone because we are great?

    Anybody can overcome as everybody has a WILL. It is WILL that allows us to act. Whether it was infused by a God or not, it does not matter.

    How can we be great if God is not great?

    I don’t answer loaded questions.

  39. Re: Pat D King,

    Every decent person: we need some laws.

    Decent people need laws? But if they’re decent, then what would be the point of having them? They’re DECENT already!

    You: we dont need any laws, we’re smart.

    And REALLY decent. We follow the Golden Rule, no ‘laws’ necessary to then fancy ourselves “decent people” – we live it!

    Every decent person: but history has shown.[sic]

    Every decent people cannot complete a sentence?

  40. Yee Haw!

    The scariest thing in the world for some people is the notion of individuals making their own decisions.

    1. The scariest thing in the world for some people is the notion of individuals making their own decisions.

      No, the scariest is subsidizing the decisions made by the individual, particularly if the decision leads to a consequence deemed undesirable by the individual.

    1. That’s rich, by which I mean a target rich environment.

  41. “David Koch” Prank Calls Wisconsin Governor

    The liberal media has had some trouble getting Wisconsin governor Scott Walker on the phone, but by posing as “David Koch,” blogger Ian Murphy managed to score a 20-minute conversation with the union-busting Republican. Aside from getting Walker to bash Chuck Schumer and agree that “Morning Joe” host Mika Brzezinski is “real piece of ass,” Murphy also gets the governor to give away his plans for getting Senate back in session. Walker tells “Koch” that he’ll agree to meet with the assembly Democrat leader if he comes to the capitol with all 14 absent Democrats. “If they’re actually in session for that day, and they take a recess, the 19 Senate Republicans could then go into action and they’d have quorum because it’s turned out that way,” Walker says. Murphy doesn’t get Walker to fall into any big traps, and as Ben Smith tweets, the big takeaway “is that Walker really believes what he says and really won’t compromise.”

    http://slatest.slate.com/id/2286165/

  42. What conservatives think:

    “They don’t think government should help its citizens. That is, they don’t think citizens should help each other.”

    “Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.”

    How fucking sad is it when you keep making mistakes that were pointed out to you in eighteen-motherfucking-fifty? It’s not even a “vaguely analogous” situation, it’s fucking word-for-word. How can you even fucking pretend to call what you advocate “progress” when your ideas are that obsolete?

    Granted, it takes some arrogance to speak authoritatively about what people think when you neither understand them, nor care to, nor possess the perspective to be able to do so if you wanted to.

  43. HI
    More Bloodshed in Libya, Mayor Rahm, Earthquake in New Zealand
    good post

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.