Reason Morning Links: Trump's Plans, Desert Mercs, GOP Donors for Gay Marriage


  • The Army Corps of Engineers floods Cajun country.
  • In America today, a decision to renew Celebrity Apprentice qualifies as election news.
  • Newt Gingrich endorses a health insurance mandate, calls Paul Ryan's proposed cuts "right-wing social engineering."
  • Socially liberal Republicans fund a campaign to legalize gay marriage in New York.
  • If the Arab Spring comes to the U.A.E., the founder of Blackwater will have a mercenary army ready to fight it.
  • Border incidents in Israel and India in the same weekend. Whee.

The latest from "Calculate Your Share of Government Spending."

NEXT: A Labor Strike Against Economic Reality

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. The other officer still works for the NYPD but was stripped of his gun and badge years ago because he allegedly assaulted a prostitute and got arrested during a sting operation.

      Ah, unions.

    2. I never click any of your links. Does that make me a bad person? Also, you abuse the privilege. Less is more, etc. The end.

      1. If you want nothing to do w/ my Golden Links, its your loss.

        1. If I were Jesse, my feelings would be hurt. Maybe he should surrender his responsibilities and let the inmates provide the Morning Links. They’re doing it anyway. Just a thought.

            1. J[o]h[nn]y Long[torso], your links are like masturbation, I like to do them every day.

              Some people think links are just icky 😉

          1. Hello Shit Facktory!

      2. Oh, there are lots of reasons why you’re a bad person, none of which have anything to do with whether or not you click on the links posted by Mr. Arbitrary Square Brackets.

        1. let’s hear all about it Fr. Ted

    3. The woman complained to police supervisors about the officer but no criminal charges were filed and an internal probe went nowhere, sources said.

  1. Strauss-Kahn was accused of rape years ago; A friend of the daughter’s. I guess that makes him a French Joe Kennedy Sr

    1. Coming out of the hotel bathroom naked is an old Ted Kennedy play.

      1. attempting to rape your daughter’s bridesmaid is a SOP

    2. The article calls him a chimpanzee in heat.

      1. A “rutting chimpanzee”. It is pretty typical of rape attempt cases for women to be discouraged to complain. I expect more cases to be in the press.

        I feel sorry for the daughter, and her depression is classic of a victim. The mother who discouraged the complaint was a bitch

        1. Especially when the perpetrator is that powerful. No one wants to take on the head of a major political party. I said this yesterday. This guy didn’t one day wake up and decide to live his dream of forcing himself on a house maid. If he did this, he had been doing horrible stuff for years. And sure enough it appears he has.

  2. Good grief. Why the fuck doesn’t Newt just go ahead and out himself as the statist neo-greenie phuck that he really is.

    Oops. That’s what he’s busy doing. Carry on!

    1. Yeah. I can’t believe that jackass. “If they don’t like it, they should come up with another solution”. No Newt. Before you go demanding anything from anyone, you need to come up with a solution that conforms with the Constitution.

      1. He respects us, just like he respects all the women he married.

    2. That’s what elections are for.


    Sunday was apparently not the first time the Strauss Kahn forced himself on a woman.

    1. Banon consulted a lawyer, but did not press charges.

      That doesn’t mean that she was not raped. Right, fellas?

      1. Yes, this guy is the most unlucky human ever. Women just keep falsely accusing him of Rape. I mean that happens twice to the same man all the time right?

        1. Guilty, then? No due-process crap required? That would save a lot of time…

          1. There is a difference between a rational observer coming to the rational conclusion that the evidence indicates he is guilty and the level of proof and due process necessary to send someone to jail. In other words, you don’t have to wait for a jury to draw your own conclusions about events dumb ass. Now go away and let the big kids talk for a while.

            1. You should be a judge*, wise one.

              *In Kazakhstan.

              1. PS

                “you don’t have to wait for a jury”

                That one is going into my Hall of Shame. Thanks.

                1. “That one is going into my Hall of Shame. Thanks.”

                  Only if you are a moron. First, there is a difference between factual guilt and legal guilt. Liberals certainly didn’t wait for a jury to conclude that Nixon was guilty of various crimes or that Clearance Thomas harassed Anita Hill nor should they have. Rational people are allowed to make rational conclusions based on the facts. They don’t have to wait for a jury to tell them the truth, although what a jury finds, if anything, is relevant to their conclusions.

                  I guess since you are a liberal and are by definition incapable of making rational conclusions based on evidence, you would depend on a jury. But the rest of who have IQs above 100 don’t have to.

                  1. Johnny, do you like movies about Nazis?

                2. Also, it’s “proven”.

                3. “OJ is innocent!”

                4. Add this one too:


          2. Let me be clear – it saves a shit ton of time.

          3. The due process concern trolls are out in force these past few days.

            1. The due process concern trolls

              Wow. Due process is out of fashion now in libertarian politics?

              1. Ya cause it says right in the constitution that I’m not allowed to have an opinion about something unless we get a jury verdict confiruming that opinion first.

                1. I’m not allowed to have an opinion

                  Have you expressed an opinion on this subject? I don’t see it anywhere. Anyway, you’re allowed to have opinions, but don’t state them as irrefutable facts of reality if you don’t want to look like a jackass.

              2. I don’t think due process was ever in fashion with respect to whether you can type a comment on a blog.

            2. That is because the accused is a socialist Frenchman. The tribal signals all tell the trolls to rush to his defense.

            3. Until liberals other than Glenn Greenwald speak out against the abomination that is attempting assasiation on al-awlaki, they can just shut the fuck up.

        2. If the restaurant supports his alibi, John, are you going to make a statement admitting that you’re wrong on this one?

          1. OF course. He may be innocent. But from what I see, I doubt it. But if it turns out that he is, I will be the first to admit that I made the wrong conclusion.

            Why would you think I wouldn’t?

            1. Because Sarkozy is your boyfriend?

              Because you are a human being using the internet?

              Meh, you probably would admit it. I still gotta ask though.

            1. Four minutes is a little soon to be posting about crickets…

              1. It is just what shit facktories do. They cannot help it.

    2. Only three weeks ago, Strauss-Kahn evoked such a possibility in an interview with French newspaper Lib?ration when he said he thought he was under surveillance and named the three principal difficulties he foresaw if he was to stand for the presidential elections.

      “Money, women and the fact I am Jewish.” He added: “Yes, I like women … so what?” He said he could see himself becoming the victim of a honey trap: “a woman raped in a car park and who’s been promised 500,000 or a million euros to invent such a story …”

      1. “”Money, women and the fact I am Jewish.” He added: “Yes, I like women … so what?””

        Notice he does not admit to liking Jews…

  4. So, Newt has no respect for the constitution, and buys the idea that the commerce clause is carte blanche for anything and everything the government wants to do?

    Can’t say I’m surprised.


  5. His name is not included on contracts and most other corporate documents, and company insiders have at times tried to hide his identity by referring to him by the code name “Kingfish.”

    “Holy Mackerel Andy!”

  6. Apparently God told Huckabee not to run for President. Don’t tell me God doesn’t love America.

    1. Don’t tell me God doesn’t love America.

      actually, it’s because he does that he told the huckster not to run.

      1. That was the point. He does love America as evidenced by his telling Huckabee not to run. Therefore you should refrain from telling me that God doesn’t love America because of this evidence to the contrary.

        1. We will know if god loves America when the conservative nominee is announced.

          If it’s Trump, we will know Hollywood is really controlled by the Jew.😉

        2. got it. on second read it’s clear that I did not read your post as written 😉

      2. We’re going to miss him.…..4&feature;

    2. Pretty sure it was Huckabee’s accountant who had more influence. The amount of money that douche has made since his presidential run is disgraceful.

  7. Socially liberal Republicans fund a campaign to legalize gay marriage in New York.

    People were being arrested for marrying gay in New York?

      1. Ulster County Court Judge J. Michael Bruhn ruled in favor of the state, reinstating the charges against West, arguing that this criminal case did not concern whether the state constitution mandates same-sex marriage, but rather whether West violated his oath of office in performing allegedly illegal marriages.

        Technically, the same-sex couples were still married and not charged for being married, but the mayor was charged for attempting to have them state recognized. Obviously I don’t agree with those charges, and I continue to seek cases where the actual charges/fines are levied against same-sex couples for being wed.

  8. a campaign to legalize gay marriage in New York

    I thought we all had agreed to call it “same-sex marriage.” Does this mean that two straight men (or women) may not marry? That doesn’t seem reasonable. Drink. Anyway.

    1. Dude. Marriage is about love. Look at Newcular Titties.


    More copyright madness.

    1. it would enjoin everyone at Georgia State, including students, who would seem to largely lose their fair use rights by virtue of enrolling at GSU. It would apply to e-reserves, faculty web pages and any learning management systems in use or adopted in the future. It would make GSU responsible for every conceivable act of copying that took place on their campus. In short, administrators at Georgia State would have to look over the shoulders of each faculty member whenever they uploaded course material to an LMS or any other web page. Arguably, they would have to monitor student copying at copiers provided in their libraries, since GSU would be enjoined from “encouraging or facilitating” any copying, beyond a limit of about 4 pages, that was done without permission

      It seems unreasonable to even consider this scenario but it reminds of the feds going after Google to make them pay for off-market drug pharmacists who used google, and not pursuing the business themselves for unsafe practices.

      The students and the small business pharmacists don’t have the cash that the University, and google (estimated @ 500 million) can scramble.

      1. When you’re a behemoth fighting a fast-moving bunch of marauders, you don’t play into their hands by chasing them all over the countryside and wearing yourself out as they slowly bleed you.

        No, you find out where they’re getting their food, which is almost certainly a nice stationary target, and obliterate it.

        1. I think I saw that movie.

    2. In anticipation of the trial starting on Monday in the copyright infringement case brought against Georgia State University by Cambridge, Oxford and Sage publishers, and partially financed by the Copyright Clearance Center…

      I hope the do Fortunate Son.

  10. “The force is intended to conduct special operations missions inside and outside the country, defend oil pipelines and skyscrapers from terrorist attacks and put down internal revolts, the documents show. Such troops could be deployed if the Emirates faced unrest in their crowded labor camps or were challenged by pro-democracy protests like those sweeping the Arab world this year. ”

    OCP owns the cops!

    1. Too bad they never made any prequels.

  11. “I’ve said consistently we ought to have some requirement you either have health insurance or you post a bond or in some way you indicate you’re going to be held accountable,” he said.

    I was afraid we might have to deal with a Gingrich presidency, but fortunately that doesn’t look like it’s going to be a problem.

    1. God told Huck not to run. Huck obeyed. Why doesn’t God have a chat with Newt? What is he hiding?

      1. You think I actually want to talk with that asshole? Huckabee is bad enough fuck why don’t you people do something on your own initiative?

    2. Even from a political standpoint, what a moron. Who exactly does Newt think this statement is going to convince to vote for him?

      1. The common folk, the salt of the earth. You know: morons.

    3. I’ve said consistently that Newt should change his name from Newton to Newcular Titties. Let me tell you one thing, America, a man named Newcular Titties would have no place in his heart for statist nonsense.

    4. It seems Herman Cain whooped his ass at the Georgia delegates meeting. Newt might as well go back to writing historical fiction.

    5. Does he even have a political philosophy? I haven’t been able to discern a coherent one yet.

    1. I guess Newt got tired of biological wives and instead just built one in his garage. That is a Stepford Wife pic.

      1. What’s wrong with these GOP wifes, it looks like they’re high on prescription drugs all the time…

        1. It’s the shock collar she’s wearing.

        2. She should be used in a warning commercial about the dangers of botox overdose.

          1. She does look rather embalmed doesn’t she?

      2. It’s the new and improved Cindy McCain? model, complete with Swiss Army knife and GPS tracking.

        1. And a compass in the stock and a thing that tells time?

          1. They replaced the compass in this model with a Posi-Grip NuGina that lubes itself with Cialis mixed with DMSO.

            1. I thought this one came with the upgrade that makes it shit cash.

              1. It’s ass crack is the ATM swipe.

                1. and she smells like a brand-new Amurican made BMW!

                  but ya gotta get that True Coat, and that’s extra.

                  1. When the smell wears off, you can get a can of the scent from any authorized FuckBot dealership.

                    1. Tough crowd.

      3. Isn’t Newt’s wife just in her mid 40s? Why does she look like Cindy McCain 2.0? And why are all these women chomping at the bit to have sex with a gross guy like Newt? Its not like he was a President or even Senator.

        1. chomping at the bit

          Champing. Champing at the bit.

          1. Chafing?

    2. Smoke The Donkey

      Given that appellation and the context of its usage, this episode can end only badly.


    Adding injury to injury, I’m assuming the Philadelphia Parking Authority ticketed his car several times while he was being harassed by the police.

  13. SF’d it…..order.html

    1. For one thing, Evers said, Fiorino could have been shot. Cops who raced to the scene could have gotten into a car accident or injured pedestrians.

      His passive voice failed him at the end there.

    2. Amazingly, the comments there are criticizing the citizen for “setting up” the police.

      I imagine they don’t criticize the police when they set up hookers.

      1. Yeah, I love that part. When cops “set up” citizens, its through things like drugs and prostitutes. Things that are tempting.

        So, for this to be a “set up” this citizen would have been playing to a cop’s greatest temptation, the one to put your boot to any citizen’s throat for any reason.

      2. I saw a couple of comments criticizing the citizen and a couple playing the “they’re all wrong” card, but was surprised to see quite a number of comments, seemed like a majority of them, unabashedly calling BS on the cop. I hate getting glimmers of hope like that, it’ll make me feel all the worse when the reckless endangerment prosecution actually sticks.

        1. I hope stuff like this will pry cons away from cop bootlicking. Could happen.

    3. Wow, that might be the least explicitly pro-cop piece I’ve seen in a major city newspaper.

      And even if he ‘set them up’, the cops fell for it hook, line, and sinker. The cops set people up all the time, it’s called a ‘sting’, but I guess as long as they’re the ones doing it, it’s ok.

    4. Excellent morning link.

      Carrying a recorder so that you capture a cop’s complete ignorance of the law is not “setting them up”.

    5. You still screwed up the link. You should link to the single-page version.


  14. Some Limey is on Bloomberg huffing and puffing about the end of the world PLAYING CHICKEN WITH THE DEBT CEILING!!!11.

    “You can’t just stop spending. That’s crazy.”

    1. Clarification:
      You can’t just stop spending other people’s money.

      NOW it’s crazy.

    2. Soros’s right-hand man Druckenmiller (so much better as DrunkOnMiller) calls bullshit on the debt ceiling EOTW propaganda.…..90964.html

  15. Newt Gingrich endorses a health insurance mandate, calls Paul Ryan’s proposed cuts “right-wing social engineering.”

    Newt Gingrich opposes right-wing social engineering?

    Did I hit my head yesterday and wake up in an alternate universe?

    1. No he just opposes right wing social engineering that wasn’t his idea.

      1. Yes. This should be read as “I’m against good ideas I didn’t come up with.”

  16. My co-workers are talking in hushed tones–punctuated by nervous giggles of disbelief–about how one of them thinks he might live next to a Ron Paul supporter! [GASP]

    It’s like working with a gaggle of Maxi-tards.

    1. Ron Paul supporter = militiaman = Oklahoma City bombing.

      1. paul supporter=neo confederate=racist=bad for DA CHILDRENS

      2. I’ve already got the NRA sticker on my pickup truck. I figure if I add a Ron Paul sticker and a Gadsden flag, I shouldn’t be able to get to work without getting either pulled over by a cop or flipped off by someone with an Obama sticker at least once.

        1. gadsen flag=neo-confederate flag=NSF da childerns!

        2. I have a Culpeper Minuteman tag on the front of my car. When I got it, it was just some historical flag that didn’t bother people much. Now it’s a symbol of, well, I’m not sure what. It’s quite distressing to watch the symbols of our founding becoming icons–in the minds of some–of radicalism.

          1. I have mixed feelings about this.

        3. I believe that would be construed as “setting up the cops”.

      3. Nah, there is no chain of thought. They are just repeating back to each other what they all heard on NPR this morning. Like they do every morning.

        1. Newt. . .Dumbass. . .Desert planet.

        2. Sympathy. The other day eating lunch in our lounge I had a finance professor explaining to me that people who are afraid of inflation don’t understand economics.

          1. “Finance” professor, that’s cute. That’s like a Masters in Stockbrokering.

          2. I read that as “aren’t” the first time through. Of course, there’s inflation and then there’s inflation. When I was getting my finance degree, the general consensus was that low inflation–around 2%–was optimal. What we have now and in front of us is another thing altogether.

            1. When I was getting my finance degree, the general consensus was that low inflation–around 2%–was optimal.

              To be fair, he may have been referring to this kind of scenario rather than hyperinflation. It was a fairly brief exchange before moving on to the NBA playoffs.

              As an economics naif, I still don’t see what’s wrong with 0% inflation.

          3. There’s no one dumber than the dumbass that holds an advanced degree, Tulpa. I’m waiting for the day they start carrying their diplomas around to show people while arguing.

            1. “You don’t have the credentials to argue with me!”

              (apologies for CA reference)

              1. So?! So don’t ever say “fuck you” to me. ‘Cause you haven’t earned the right!

            2. Paging MNG. Paging MNG.


            3. Being smart and holding an advanced degree means you’re smart enough and well-versed at arguing to fool yourself into believing some truly ridiculous things.

            4. I’m reminded of Laputa.

    2. I am not a Ron Paul supporter. But I think I need to a Paul sign in my yard just to scare my aging hippie neighbors.

      1. That sign shouldn’t scare aging hippies. Everybody knows what a druggie Paul is.

        1. Aging hippies are the biggest drug warriors. They don’t want their kids having any of the fun they did.

          1. You must know different aging hippies than I do. Most of those that I have known are more of the “smoke all the pot you want once you turn 16” school of parenting.

          2. “Pot is different now than it was when we were growing up. It’s much more potent so you smoke more. Also we didn’t know all the damage that it causes to your brain back then.”

            1. It would explain their voting tendencies…

    3. Your co-workers don’t realize that you’re an antisocial, antigovernment lunatic, SugarFree? You need to wear more t-shirts with gun pictures on them, or something.

      1. They know, I think they just have layered another bubble of denial around themselves.

        1. No. They simply ignore it because they can’t reconcile their knowledge of you with their pre-conceived “knowledge” of what anti-statists are.

    4. NPR did a story on Ron Paul this morning. I only caught the second half of it, but from what I heard, it was really quite favorable.

      1. I heard that too and thought it was a pretty reasonable story.

      2. Of course they like Paul. He’s a divisive element within the GOP.

    5. You need to move to the King Library where people are generally compelled to STFU while they thumb through letters by famous authors (UK as a surprisingly good collection of letters from famous authors).

  17. Right now, on Bloomberg, they are doing everything put blow those Navy submarine “AHH-OOOOOOOOH-GAAAAAH” horns; “Brace yourselves, Men, we’ll crash into the debt ceiling in three… two….”

    1. sound collision

    2. Great interview Saturday in the WSJ about the debt ceiling with George Soros’ former fund manager Stanley Drukenmiller. The money quote

      “He contemplates the possibilities for bond investors if a drawn-out negotiation in Washington creates a short-term problem in servicing the debt but ultimately reduces spending:

      “Here are your two options: piece of paper number one?let’s just call it a 10-year Treasury. So I own this piece of paper. I get an income stream obviously over 10 years . . . and one of my interest payments is going to be delayed, I don’t know, six days, eight days, 15 days, but I know I’m going to get it. There’s not a doubt in my mind that it’s not going to pay, but it’s going to be delayed. But in exchange for that, let’s suppose I know I’m going to get massive cuts in entitlements and the government is going to get their house in order so my payments seven, eight, nine, 10 years out are much more assured,” he says.

      Then there’s “piece of paper number two,” he says, under a scenario in which the debt limit is quickly raised to avoid any possible disruption in payments. “I don’t have to wait six, eight, or 10 days for one of my many payments over 10 years. I get it on time. But we’re going to continue to pile up trillions of dollars of debt and I may have a Greek situation on my hands in six or seven years. Now as an owner, which piece of paper do I want to own? To me it’s a no-brainer. It’s piece of paper number one.”

      Failure to raise the debt ceiling is not defaulting. It is at worst being late on a payment. It is not like the markets wouldn’t know that the issue wouldn’t be eventually resolved and they would get their money.…..90964.html

      1. Crap I posted the same thing above, just too late. Great article.

      2. John, a very late payment IS a default.

        1. Depends on the patience of the bondholder. Now if they default because they can’t wait, one could say its equivalent. It does depend on their actions though.

  18. Go ahead and snicker, you libertarian baboons; don’t you know what it does to PROPPITY VALYOOS when your neighbor puts “I’m Kookoo for Cocoa Puffs!”- err, Ron Paul for President signs all over his yard?

    Why do libertarians hate Property values?

    1. I hate property values because I pay property taxes and my house is a place to live, not an investment.
      If Paul signs drive down property values, I need to get me some.

      1. My feelings exactly. Same guys pushing “affordable housing” are the ones fighting deflation in the housing market.

  19. Part of a newly launched ongoing series, and a companion to my other wildly popular, “Why the fuck is Gail Collins paid to be an Op-Ed writer”… I bring you, “I read Krugman so you don’t have to.”

    Blah blah blah Republicans are radicalized blah blah blah holding the nation hostage over the debt ceiling blah blah blah Obama must stand up to them blah blah blah spending cuts are bad.

    1. In effect, they will have ripped up the Constitution and given control over America’s government to a party that only controls one house of Congress, but claims to be willing to bring down the economy unless it gets what it wants.

      That must be the secret Krugman-eyes-only Constitution that says the party that controls the White House and the slimmest margin of the Senate can do what ever the fuck it wants.

      As I’ve written before, the federal government is basically an insurance company with an army

      He seems to thinks this is a positive development.

      Dumbest Nobel Proze winner ever (but not a Nobel Prize winner really because he won the blah blah don’t give a fuck, you shitheel pedant.)

      1. Of course it is perfectly okay for Obama to veto a bill raising the debt ceiling and causing a default if he doesn’t get the spending he wants. The mendacity of these people is unbelievable.

      2. I assume you’re excluding the Peace Prize winnners.

        1. Say, why don’t they call in the War Prize? More accurate name, if you ask me.

          1. Call it the War Prize, that is.

          2. that doesnt work to well in the areas of science & literature

            1. I was just talking about the Peace Prize, not all of the Nobel awards.

            2. All science and literature are weapons of the patriarchy in its rapewar.

              1. +1, if Arabic numerals weren’t a tool of the patriarchy.

                1. Market forces, bitches!
                  It’s not our fault that the Ayrabs haven’t invented anything worth stealing since then! Uh, I mean borrowing. do you know hard it is raise the debt ceiling with a damned ABACUS?!?! DO YOU?!?!
                  *adjusts monocle*

        2. I’m on the fence about that. Krugman may be smarter than some of them, but he is certainly more mendacious than most of them. Even Arafat.

          1. Kofi Annan? UN Peacekeeping Forces (1988)? I don’t know if I think Krugman is that mendacious. I mean, against the UN he’s kind of Evil Lite.

            1. UN High Commission on Refugees. Twice.

              1. Its like the Nobel Child Sex Trafficking Prize.

                1. is it time?

    2. I would never read these trash NYT editorials if they weren’t constantly being linked to.

  20. My co-workers are talking in hushed tones–punctuated by nervous giggles of disbelief

    You left off the part about, “…and nervously glancing at ME.”

    1. They’ve learned. I’m not the bumbling, good-natured guy I play on H&R.

      1. Do any of you actually, you know, work?

          1. sorry, I’m too busy playing Angry Birds to do any actual work today.

        1. WORK?!

    1. NERD FIGHT!!!

    2. I’m inconsolable, as Good Eats is no more.

      1. he jumped the shark when he got all preachy about Man v Food.

        1. Maybe so, but I loved his show.

          1. I really enjoyed the episode about boiling water.

  21. In America today, a decision to renew Celebrity Apprentice qualifies as election news.

    Doesn’t Obama’s re-election campaing count as a renewal of the Celebrity [Presidential] Apprentice show?

  22. I’m not the bumbling, good-natured guy I play on H&R.

    Your links work?

    1. IRL, everything works. And typos don’t constrain my rage.

      1. Except your traitorous pancreas.

        1. It works, just not the way I want it too. The poetic justice of a libertarian filled with anarchist organs.

  23. Did God tell that end-of-the-world guy, “I’m gonna kill you last”?

    1. Peggy. Noonan. When I saw she was a finalist, I thought it was a sop to all those folks out there who just love reading saccharine conventional wisdom takes on the world around us. I mean, she’s the Kathy of the editorial page. Ack!

  24. Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed al-Nahyan is the crown prince of Abu Dhabi and the Deputy Commander of the Armed Forces. He’s only the ruler of Abu Dhabi and thus the UAE if Khalifa is so senile that he can’t function, which I doubt. He IS the next in line probably, but that doesn’t make him the de facto ruler.

    I am suspicious of several other “facts” in that story as well. On the other hand, the general idea of it is totally unsurprising.

  25. lol, DOnald Trump cracks me up man. Totally.

    1. Weather isn’t climate when it contradicts the party line.

      1. weather v climate is the diff bet dollars & cents.

        1. Could somebody please get this nitwit a shift key and tell him to keep writing until he gets to the end of his words?

      2. Don’t tell MSNBC. Recently while flipping through news clips on Xbox Live, Briam Williams said something to the effect of, “with all of these weird weather events, many of us are wondering what we’ve done to cause them” to which Jim Cantore replied “as the Jetstream warms, the atmosphere has to churn that much harder which in turn creates more severe weather.”

        They did everything but say global warming/climate change in an attempt to describe why weather is so severe now (because we’ve NEVER had severe weather before). They know the “weather != climate” party line, and are consciously skirting it in an attempt to not look like they’re talking from both sides of their mouths, even though that’s EXACTLY what they’re doing.

  26. Ohio Boys Suspended For Farting On School Bus

    “It’s very laughable, that’s what it is,” said Anthony’s father, James Nichols. He said he spoke with the school’s vice principal, Daniel Senu-Oke, who “suggested my son should hold his gas on this hour-long bus ride.”

    1. It’s the new WOMD rules. Surprised they didn’t charge him as a terrorist.

      1. Indeed. Packing all that compressed methane, he might as well be wearing a suicide vest.

    2. Fart Proudly…..1583940790

    1. They should have had lipstick lesbians in it. That’s something everyone can enjoy.

  27. Is there something strange about the comments this morning? It looks like a number of people at the top replied to a ghost comment. Did someone say a dirty word?

    1. What could be a dirty word they’d delete? Between Warty, Episiarch and I, are there even any dirty words left?

      1. Then maybe it was a drawing of Mohammed or something derogatory about that ligitiously-sensitive attorney. Or maybe, just maybe, it truly is a ghost comment. END OF DAYS!

      2. are there even any dirty words left?


  28. The other day eating lunch in our lounge I had a finance professor explaining to me that people who are afraid of inflation don’t understand economics.

    Is he one of those morons who thinks he’ll be repaying his loans with “free money”?

    1. If he was saying “People who don’t have any cash and have a ton of debt shouldn’t be afraid of inflation”, then he’s right. I suspect that describes everyone in his circle.

    2. I’ll jump in for robc and just mention that inflation in a fiat economy in a monetary phenomenon which has nothing to do with the rate of growth of the economy.

    3. His point, to the extent he had one, was close to that; in particular he was arguing that wages rise with inflation so it’s irrelevant. A rising tide lifts all boats, etc.

      He also justified the common bedrock assumption of math finance that govt bonds are “risk free” by saying that if the govt defaults on its debt we’ve got big problems anyway — to which I responded that’s true, but the presence of “big problems” doesn’t mean that scenario suddenly becomes irrelevant.

      1. Wages are sticky. They also tend to fall more slowly than prices.

      2. His point, to the extent he had one, was close to that; in particular he was arguing that wages rise with inflation so it’s irrelevant.

        Oh, so he’s historically illiterate AND ignorant of the distortions that inflation introduces on the markets.

        I’m guessing he’s tenured.

        1. He’s a finance guy, not a macroeconomist. He works off the assumptions the economists give him, much like physicists have to trust that we mathematicians aren’t lying about Hilbert space theory. They are separate fields, so it is forgiveable to some extent.

          I probably shouldn’t relate the story of the hardcore pro-Bama philosophy prof who was asking me what the difference between debt and deficit was at a barbecue over the weekend.

          1. Why does it matter what the difference is? Neither are bad!

          2. Here now!

            We understand Hilbert spaces just fine without asking those silly mathematicians.

            Now if you ask me about tangent bundles I’ll refer you to the math department. But that’s ’cause I’m not theorist.

  29. The Palestinians need to march on the border [with nobody holding so much as a pebble] every day, essentially indefinitely.

    They also need to live-feed everything.

    The US media will stick with the “clashed with protestors” phrasing for a long, long time, but after a month or so even they would switch over to the “fired on unarmed protestors” phrasing they use for countries we don’t like.

    1. I might agree, Fluffy, if the Palis would first stop random rocketing of Israel.

      But, since they are at war with Israel, the Israelis are justified in treating attempts to breach the border as something other than peaceful.

      1. On the Golan and Lebanon sides, that stands up.

        It doesn’t really stand up on the Gaza or West Bank sides.

        A “border” is the line between two states. Right there there is no Gaza border or West Bank border. That’s the entire point of the dispute.

        1. Actually, the Palis shoot rockets from Gaza and from the West Bank, so it stands up on all fronts.

          A “border” is the line between two states.

          True enough. Its not the Israeli’s fault that the Egyptians, the Syrians, and the Lebanese won’t man up and exert sovereignty on their side of the border.

          1. Yeah, OK: so what you’re saying is that if tomorrow the Egyptian army took over Gaza and the Jordanian army took over the entire West Bank, the Israelis would be cool with that?

            And I guess you’re also therefore agreeing that the security barriers Israel maintains that are outside the limits of its 1967 territory aren’t “borders”?

          2. Actually, the Palis shoot rockets from Gaza and from the West Bank, so it stands up on all fronts.


            No, it doesn’t.

            Until the Palestinians have a state, the Gaza rockets are being fired from within an area that is still under Israeli authority of one level of efficiency or another. The Israelis claim the right to blockade Gaza and to enter it to undertake military and police actions whenever they want, so it is therefore not in any meaningful sense across a “border”.

            If one group of Puerto Ricans was shooting rockets at the US, and another group of Puerto Ricans was attempting to swim ashore in Florida, machine-gunning the swimmers would not be justified as a “border” defense.

            1. So what’s on the other side of the 1967 border? Is it Israel’s? No, not really. Is it Egypt/Lebanon/Syria’s? Apparently not.

              So it’s stateless. I think you can have a border with a stateless region; on one side, you have Israel and on the other, you have not-Israel.

              But just because those areas are stateless, doesn’t mean Israel loses its right to self-defense and border security. It may even extend a certain presence into those areas that are, yes, outside its borders, without bringing them inside its borders.

              Given the de facto state of armed conflict between Israel and the Palis, I find it hard to fault Israel for treating approaching mobs of Palis trying to breach Israel’s borders as hostiles. I mean, they are hostiles, aren’t they? Was anyone in that mob trying to get into Israel for a better job, or to do a little shopping? Or were they more likely engaged in trying to make a little progress on pushing the Jews into the sea?

            2. What is Fluffy trying to say? The rockets are coming from inside the area of ‘claimed authority’, so Israel can’t enforce borders with a hostile entity?

      2. And when the Israelis stop building settlements for their citizens inside Palestinian territory, then we might finally be talking about two separate states for whom talking about a state of war would actually make sense.

        1. JEWS!

          1. I am very pro-Jew.

            In fact, I wish the United States had many, many more Jews than it currently has.

            We should give all Israelis US citizenship and have them move here.

            But seriously though, all joking aside: With regard to this specific issue, I have said for years that if the Palestinians want to succeed they have to abandon terrorism and instead adopt nonviolent resistance tactics like simply marching up to the checkpoints and security walls and pushing through en masse. I’m interested to see how it plays out, if they start to actually DO that.

            1. So you’re for sovereignty for Palis but not Israelis?

              1. “Shorter Fluffy and Tulpa” specifically referenced Jews and not Israelis.

                I am actually highly in favor of sovereignty for both Israelis and “Palis”, as you put it. Let’s decline the entire former mandate of Palestine one nation and grant everyone living within that area citizens of that state. Sovereignty for everyone! Hurray!

                1. Kind of like the Jews enjoy being part of the sovereignty of other ME nations?

                  Oh, wait. That’s right, they’ve been driven out.

                  Don’t get me wrong – its a horrible mess. Putting the Jews smack dab in the middle of one of the most barbaric, backwater areas on the planet after the Holocaust was not, perhaps, the best thing to do.

                  But its too late now.

                  I, also, think that giving the Palis full statehood, with all the responsibilities thereof, might be the way to go. Because once they are sovereign, they might actually have to face up to the consequences of being in a state of war with their neighbor. Who can wipe them off the map whenever he wants.

                  1. I’m talking about Israel, not the Jews.

                    And once Palestine is actually sovereign, there aren’t going to be any more Israeli settlements built on their land.

              2. JEWS!!!!!11!!

          2. How ironic that I’m the one accused of hating the Jews when I’m simply asking that we treat Israel like any other country.

            1. PURE COMEDY GOLD. Yes, Israel should be treated like every other country that gets lambasted for self-defense and occupying lands seized in defensive war, all none of them.

        2. Maybe when the palis stop being antisemitic fucks who would leave the settlers in peace and not kill them they can have a state.

          1. If the Israelis can kill anyone who crosses their “border” because they “threaten their sovereignty”, then the Palis can also kill anyone who crosses their border and threatens their sovereignty.

            Fair is fair, right?

            Remember, I don’t really give a shit WHAT Israel thinks its problems are. Every individual Palestinian is entitled to demand liberty as an individual human being.

            If the US had a terrible terrorism problem, and we decided to, say, seize Quebec Province to try to defend ourselves from it, if unarmed Quebecois marched on the new pseudo-internal-border and were shot down by our “border” guards I would side with the Quebecois, and would want the border guards and those who gave them their orders to drown in their own blood. Abso-fucking-lutely. And if you came around and said, “Wah! Security! Sovereignty!” I would spit in your face.

  30. BTW:

    Newt Gingrich is sticking up for the individual mandate because he is eating a grenade for Mitt.

    If Mitt is out there all by his lonesome in support of a mandate he will get crucified. If Newt sticks up for it, instead of it being Mitt’s albatross it’s “a policy option”.

    1. Mitt is not in favor of the individual mandate at the federal level.

      1. In other news, Mitt is also not in favor of hair gel.

        Too late, Mitt. That peanut butter is already in your chocolate.

        1. There’s a new concept called “federalism” you may not be aware of.

          1. Right. Still waiting on the DEA and DOJ to discover that concept in re: medical marijuana

            1. Uh, OK, but that’s not what we’re talking about. Drug enforcement reform isn’t on the menu this time around.

          2. I’m well aware of it.

            I’m just pointing out that Mitt claiming to oppose the individual mandate, essentially anywhere, is about as credible as Newt saying he opposes divorce.

            Too late, Mitt baby. I am not a Catholic. You don’t get to walk away from me and say three Hail Marys and walk away to sin no more and call us square.

            1. I could forgive Romney for Romneycare if he were honest and would stop trying to insult everyone’s intelligence. If he got up and said “hey I was governor of a liberal state and they wanted universal coverage so we gave this idea a shot. It was clearly a huge mistake and I regret ever signing onto it. But that is what states are for to try new things so we know what works and what doesn’t. I am older and wiser now”.

              If you said that, you could at least respect the honesty. But instead he defends the indefensible and pretends that because he did it on a state level he is somehow excused from responsibility and Obama isn’t. That just shows he is a mendacious ass who won’t ever admit fault and has no business in office.

              1. His flip-flopping past caused him to not win the GOP primary in 2008. His response is to take every decision he’s ever made now all the way to the end zone or bust. I’m enjoying it greatly.

              2. Even if he were to say that, I still wouldn’t trust him. By signing MassCare, he revealed his true inclinations – a big government, top-down technocrat. I see no reason to believe he’s changed his spots.

              3. I could have forgiven him if he had said that 4 years ago. Time has long expired though.

              4. John, I agree with your advice for what Romney should have done. As with most politicians I suspect his ego gets in the way of admitting he did something wrong, even when it’s to his advantage to do so.

                That said, it’s unfair to pretend that there’s no difference between supporting the individual mandate at the state level and at the federal level, which is what Fluffy and other anti-Romney partisans are doing.

                1. It’s also unfair to pretend that’s your distinction, when it’s clearly an ex post facto rationalization you pulled out of your ass, the way Mitt pulled it out of HIS ass.

                  When Ron Paul says he opposes abortion but thinks it should be a federal issue, I believe him.

                  When Mitt Romney says he favored the individual mandate for MA but opposes it federally, I know he’s a bullshit artist who is just looking for a way to oppose Obama without having to denounce his own policy. I know, you know it, everyone here knows it. It insults our intelligence to pretend it’s anything else.

                  1. Sorry, that post above makes it sound like I’m saying YOU personally pulled the distinction out of your ass. I’m using the imperial “you” there. It’s inelegantly phrased.

  31. Interesting Ron Paul and Gary Johnson, or Herman Cain for that matter, aren’t serious candidates, but Mitt and Newt are!???

  32. Interesting Ron Paul and Gary Johnson, or Herman Cain for that matter, aren’t serious candidates, but Mitt and Newt are!???

  33. Interesting Ron Paul and Gary Johnson, or Herman Cain for that matter, aren’t serious candidates, but Mitt and Newt are!???

  34. Has anyone else gotten an invite to Google Music yet? Shit’s awesome. That’s all I’m saying.

    1. tell me more. it looks very interesting.

      1. You upload a bunch of music to your account, and then you can listen to it from any other computer or device by going to Very cool.

        1. Sounds like a DRM sting operation.


          1. The thought has crossed my mind. I’ll be H&R’s canary.

          2. So basically it’s an online repository of a user’s private DRM keys?

        2. Hmm. Amazon cloud player does it for me. And those $5 albums are like crack.

          1. Goddamned right they are. Even better is the free downloads of sampler albums.

        3. You upload a bunch of music to your account, and then you can listen to it from any other computer or device

          Why not just leave it on the original device? Too easy?

          1. Shut the fuck up, anonopussy. Leave technical matters to people who aren’t fucking idiots.

            1. “You don’t have the credentials to argue with me!”

              1. Well, you certainly don’t, you little clitoral abscess.

        4. So you’re totally dependent on having a fast Net connection if you want to listen to music that you own. I’ll stick with mobile music players, thank you.

    2. I signed up but haven’t gotten my invite yet. How long did it take you?

      1. I never signed up. I haz connections.

        1. Don’t be a dick. Invite these people into your little club. Google needs fed, anyway.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.