Reason Morning Links: White House Rushed Into Solyndra Deal, A Republican Wins Anthony Weiner's Old Seat, Rick Perry Taken Aback by Death Cheers

|

  • Republican Bob Turner won New York's 9th Congressional District last night. 
  • Rick Perry was not comfortable with audience members who cheered for the death penalty of a young uninsured man at a recent GOP debate. 
  • Emails show White House pushed the Office of Management and Budget to approve the Solyndra loan. 
  • The case against video game tax credits. (Video game production is one of the most highly subsidized industries in the country.)
  • A liberal public interest group has filed an ethics complaint against Oversight Committee Chair Rep. Darrell Issa.
  • Market strategist David Zervos: "The bottom line is that it looks like a Lehman like event is about to be unleashed on Europe WITHOUT an effective TARP like structure fully in place."

From Reason.tv: Top threats to civil liberties after 9/11. 

NEXT: Paul Ryan Is Still Not Running for President. Watch His YouTube Video Anyway.

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. I’m reporting everyone here, except the losers who voted for Obama.

    Lets turn each other in for attacking Barak Obama

    1. John, SF, what do you want my complaints about you to say?

      1. something about RACSISMM!MXFMM@#

        1. Dear Obama Campaign, Reason Magazine, despite a writing staff that includes many of your supporters, seems to have attracted an anti-Obama element who frequently make assrape jokes. I demand they be immediately reeducated.

          1. reeducated? no prob to cattle-prod the miscreants into FEMA camps for waterboarding & sodomy till they fess up & re-orient.

            1. Make it cattle prods and sodomy, and you’d have a line out the door.

      2. That my real name is Lord Doomcock and I live at the end of Gumdrop Lane.

        1. Very good, Lord Doomcock. Anything for the Lady Doomcock?

          1. She kept her own name, so please address her as Lady Thundergina.

            1. Ah…I doff my hat to the distaff.

        2. So how do I genuflect to thou Lord Doomcock?

          1. Like this:
            Say, repeatedly, in a loud, clear voice, “DOOM COCK” while drawing your handgun in the mirror.

      3. I am from an entire family of bad political actors and consciousness.

      4. Hey guys, maybe you are interested in the best club for seeking the rich cougars, sexy young men. …what’s the most important is that you can find a sugarmomma who can pay all your needs ==:: :/.COGUARA.//COM ::==Where you can find tens of thousands of matches and friends right here, especially those in your city.

    2. There’s also an #attackwatch hash tag on twitter, which makes it even easier and more entertaining to mock.

    3. If someone was enterprising enough, it would be fun to write a script to generate a random complaint along with a randomly generated name/newspaper/website. It would certainly add enough noise to make the AttackWatch meaningless.

      1. Trust me, that’s already well underway.

    4. I’ve been cutting & pasting Obama speeches from whitehouse.gov and sending them in, saying “FOX News is smearing Obama by reporting he made these obviously fabricated, ridiculous statements.”

  2. Rick Perry was not comfortable with audience members who cheered for the death penalty at a recent GOP debate.

    What kind of Texan is he?

    1. Namby pamby, obviously

      I despise the bloodthirsty element of the Tea Party. We might as well give them some pitchforks and torches and send them off to the castle.

      Wait…. maybe that’s not such a bad idea after all.

      1. sher gut idea ! fat teapartiers…mummmmmm

      2. It wouldn’t be so bad if I could be 100% certain that every single person who receives the death penalty actually murdered someone [not in self defense and not an abusive spouse or parent] but there have been too many cases where innocents have been killed.

        1. Even if they killed someone in cold blood, is the death penalty something to celebrate? That mentality is disturbing to me.

          1. For the Gacys and Geins of the world? I vote yes.

          2. No, I agree that it is not something to celebrate.

            1. I agree. Even if necessary to do, never something to celebrate.

              1. Reason Commentators: Throwing stones in glass houses.

                1. Professional Critic: Holding up the industry standard by being completely unintelligible.

                  1. Eventually he’ll be at least mildly funny, and won’t you have egg on your face that day, Citizen “Nothing.”

                    1. We’ll cross that river when we get to it, SF.

                    2. Unless you’ve already counted your unhatched chickens.

            2. I’m free to celebrate anything I want.

            3. If they didn’t put down Charles Manson, they don’t need to put down anyone.

              1. If you murder someone in Canada you might get a three-year suspended sentence.

                http://www.theblaze.com/storie…..toryFlyout

                1. I’m guessing without clicking that it’s a chick.

  3. Euro’s Crisis of Confidence: System May ‘Go Off the Rails’
    http://www.cnbc.com/id/44505654

    “Merkel said in a radio interview that Europe was doing everything in its power to avoid a Greek default and urged politicians in her own coalition to weigh their words carefully to avoid creating turmoil on financial markets. “

    1. Don’t worry euro-beasts! Timmah is coming to rescue you.
      http://www.cnbc.com/id/44490489/

      “He will also ring the bells to the Germans on how they should handle the crisis,”
      They are so fucked.

    2. There is no ‘may’ about it.

    3. Greek Default sounds like something that should be in the Urban Dictionary. And I’m sure a respectable gal like Merkel is wise to want to avoid any act found in the Urban Dictionary.

  4. Mickey Kaus: What really terrifies Democrats about NY-09
    http://dailycaller.com/2011/09…..bout-ny-9/

    “After decades of pledging not to touch the two sacred programs, it’s beginning to look as if Democrats can’t just suddenly agree to pull trillions out of Social Security and Medicare and expect voters to maintain their reflexive loyalties.”

    1. not really. the brooklyn paper reports it was really about ed koch fearmongering over israel. plus the activist hipsters didnt vote. lastly, NY9 is gonna disappear theu gerrymandering.

      1. yep, the Dems losing a stronghold that they held for 90 years is nothing important.

        there’s a term called “whistling past the graveyard”. Check it out.

        1. given the israel angle amongst brooklyn [JOOS], not as imp as NY29 & 26 to predict the general.

          1. I don’t even understand your point here – try a little proper sentence construction.

            1. JOOOOSS!!!!111!!!

            2. My lord, may I humbly recommend Chrome+reasonable?

              Your path from the orgy house to the Great Fortress of the Apocalypse will be free of troll shit in which to step, making your journey all that more pleasant.

              1. Yeah, let me second that recommendation.

                Reasonable = thumbs up.

              2. too much time (and various add-ons) invested in Firefox. But I’ll give it a try.

                1. Yeah, I feel your pain, but once on Chrome, I never looked back on Firefox. Almost all of the extensions I used in FF are in Chrome, plus, in the case of reasonable, very useful extensions that I didn’t have.

                  1. Does Chrome have something analogous to NoScript?

                    1. Several: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/search?hl=en-US&q=noscript

                      I used to use NoScript, but gave it up as it too much of a PITA. Got tired of clicking “allow” on every site and window.

                    2. NoScript is a bit annoying early on, but once you’ve got a lot of permissions set, it’s no big deal.

                  2. Chrome doesn’t let you limit your Temp. I-net file folder size, nor does it allow you to change directories for user specific cache files. Check your temporary internet folder out. I used Chrome for 3 weeks and had almost 3GB of worthless files saved on my C drive. Since my C drive is a small SSD for startup programs and windows, and the few apps I deem worthy, it’s a big issue for me. I don’t want to give up the drive space nor do I want to constantly write and delete shit on my SSD when I don’t have to.

                    I tried J-linking to a folder on my regular HDD, the drive I use for all my storage, and it still didn’t work right. Google failed with some basic shit that IE and FF have had for ages.

                    1. Chrome doesn’t let you limit your Temp. I-net file folder size, nor does it allow you to change directories for user specific cache files.

                      True that, but you can run in incognito mode to avoid a cache, or just blow it away once per week.

                    2. Ska–Try the Chrome Toolbox. It has a setting for a keyboard shortcut to clear the cache.

                    3. Appreciate the links, I’ll take a look.

              3. Somebody help me out here — test driving Reasonable and it’s auto-ignoring some commenters. I can turn this off with the unignore button, but where is the dashboard?

                  1. That would probably be the public list at work. I had to turn that off as I found that some legit commenters were being filtered.

            3. Not with that expensive public school education.

          2. The stOOpid is strong in this part of the thread.

      2. A Democrat can’t win in New York City. There is no way to spin that as anything but bad. And the dems got destroyed in a swing district in Nevada, a state Obama probably has to win in 2012, last night.

      3. Israel was a factor, but so was the bad economy, rising taxes, and anti-Wall Street rhetoric. The Dems don’t win over many New Yorkers by denouncing Wall Street as the root of all evil.

      4. NY9 is gonna disappear through gerrymandering AND population loss as people escape from New York.

        1. …as people escape from New York…

          This is a great idea for a movie!

        2. Actually, I think the upstate districts are more likely to get gerrymandered out of existence.

  5. Obama’s EPA not a ‘rogue’ agency at all
    http://www.bostonherald.com/ne…..id=1365720

    “The administration’s approach is constantly on display: Use government policy to raise oil and gas prices, subsidize alternative energy sources, then mandate the use of the latter. The EPA, far from being a rogue agency, remains an important tool for implementing this policy.”

  6. How dare those billionaires ask that, in return for higher taxes on them, the middle class pays more and entitlements are reformed.

    Jesus, get with the program, rich people. You use regulation to make the middle class poorer, not taxes.

    1. Proving once again that The Economist is not in the fiscally conservative camp.

  7. Democrats lose a district they haven’t lost in almost ninety freaking years, and Amodei annihilates Marshall in NV-2 (though that was expected by everyone).

    I’m guessing we’re at the point where pretty much everyone can imagine just how badly Obama would lose if he had to run right now. It would be a humiliating defeat of almost Mondale-esque proportions.

    1. And it’s only going to get worse, as the government is just about ready to admit that we’re going into another recession (really have been in one all along, but they aren’t going to say that anytime soon).

    2. NY9 was about ed koch fearmongering over israel. the district will disappear in gerrymandering. more was learned in NY29

      1. I see someone got their talking points early today.

      2. “Fearmongering”? How so?

          1. yep [JOOS] – ed koch [JOOISH] repeated the lie about israel’s proposal using the 67 borders WITH ADJUSTMENTS which was israel’s previous proposal and pre-dates obama.

            1. The radio clip from Koch that I heard only made vague references to Obama’s anti-Israel policies. Do you have a clip where Koch made the accusation you ascribe to him?

              Obama is the first USA president in at least 50 years to say that Jews should be forbidden from buying homes in certain regions. I think Koch’s opposition to Obama is reasonable given Obama’s segregationist policies.

              1. “Obama is the first USA president in at least 50 years to say that Jews should be forbidden from buying homes in certain regions”

                HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! That’s funny. You know, since Palestinians can buy homes wherever they want in Israel.

                Palestine is one of the very few places that Obama is far superior to any of his predecessors. Also note that many Jews find the Israeli government’s policies towards Palestine abhorrent.

                1. Palestine is one of the very few places that Obama is far superior to any of his predecessors.

                  Um, he’s not exactly liked by Palestinians, either, not even by the largely left-wing expats.

                  1. I didn’t say he was good on the Palestine issue. I said he was “far better.” Relatively that just means he admits Israel does some bad crap and violates the rights of Palestinians. Palestine does likewise to the rights of Israelis, but they are largely disempowered and repressed by the advanced Israeli military. It would be best if they divorced.

                2. Propietrist,

                  Obama never said that Israelis should be forbidden from buying homes in certain regions. He said that Jews should be forbidden from buying homes in certain regions. You’re conflating nationality with religion. And yes, non-Jewish Israelis can buy homes where ever they want. The Israeli Supreme court has upheld this opinion several times.

                  http://www.israelnationalnews……spx/147857

                  In contrast, the PA gives the death penalty to any PA citizen who sells land to Jews.

                  http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEas…..?id=188604

                  1. Where’s the Obama quote? All I’ve heard him say is that Israel should stop using their military to build exclusive, protected Jewish-Israeli communities deep in Palestinian territories, often seizing Palestinian private property via eminent domain as essentially a provocative measure to assert their control over Palestine. That’s a fair statement. Sorry, I think Israel deserves much of their blowback, especially considering that they claim to take the high ground and be “better” than Palestinian terrorists, when they essentially do the same things with better, America-provided weapons. Arab Palestinians and Jews probably would have lived in harmony had the entire system been implemented in a way that protected the rights and property of Palestinians in the first place.

            2. Maybe we should return to our 1776 borders.

              Oh, wait, hold on… that is also a stOOpid idea.

      3. Spinning like a centrifuge.

        1. wheeeeeeeeee!

    3. Yeah, hate to be the bearer of bad news, but Obama’s still leading all Republican candidates in most polls. Bush was trailing most of the Democrats at this time in 2003 and ended up winning. Let’s wait til we get closer before making predictions.

      1. ..the Graveyard. ^^^^^

      2. …mmmmmmm…*slurp*..Obama cock..mm…*glurble slurp*…

        1. What are you talking about? I hate Obama. How does stating bad news for Republicans mean I support Obama?

          1. Thn stop sucking his Kock

  8. So, is everyone aclimated to having checkpoints and machine gun toting cops on the street?

    1. not yet, but give me a little time.

      1. How about feeling safe on a plane being tailed by fighter planes?

  9. Howard Stern, Ace Reporter?

    And this is why fashion capitol has moved from Paris to New York- no hate speech laws.

    1. JOOOSS!!!11!!

  10. Only slavers think keeping your own money = subsidy.

    1. Nope. If I pay 20% in taxes, and we let you pay 10% because you make video games, the net effect is that you have more money in your pocket. I will then be tempted to join the video game racket.

      There, tax subsidies for video game players, written for a 3rd grader.

      If all taxation is slavery then stay off my roads and out of my hospitals. Social contract and all.

      1. You think you own a piece of the road? Really? Which piece?

      2. I think Crank’s objection is that he only considers direct transfers “subsidies”.

        Perhaps he would prefer the term “tax break” to “subsidy”.

        Your explanation was not particularly helpful because people who object to the term (personally, I go back and forth; I can’t decide if I don’t like it or not) already know how tax subsidies work. They just want the term “subsidy” reserved for something else.

        Because once you allow the term “subsidy” to apply both to direct transfers and to reductions in the tax burden, you open the door to people claiming that, say, the Bush tax cuts were a “subsidy” to high earners.

      3. “Nope. If I pay 20% in taxes, and we let you pay 10% because you make video games, the net effect is that you have more money in your pocket. I will then be tempted to join the video game racket.”

        You well might. But that doesn’t prove it is a subsidy. Which it isn’t.

        You might argue that the roads are a subsidy if they tax one person for them and not another. But what of people who are unemployed? Or just earning zero profit hence pay no corporate taxes, you should be attacking them too. And they can rightly counter they never asked for that money to be spent on their behalf so it’s a weak attack.

        And what does your social contract have to do with hospitals? You Canadian or something?

  11. US gov’t prepares to release BP oil spill report By HARRY R. WEBER and DINA CAPPIELLO Sep 14, 7:41 AM EDT

    Two months ago, BP petrophysicist Galina Skripnikova told attorneys involved in the oil spill litigation that there appeared to be a zone of gas more than 300 feet above where BP told its contractors and regulators with the then-Minerals Management Service the shallowest zone was located.

    The depth of the oil and gas is a critical parameter in drilling because it determines how much cement a company needs to pump to seal a well. Federal regulations require the top of the cement to be 500 feet above the shallowest zone holding hydrocarbons, meaning BP’s cement job was potentially well below where it should have been.

    Cement contractor Halliburton recently filed a lawsuit against BP asserting that Skripnikova’s statements prove the oil giant knew about the shallower gas before the explosion and should have sought a new cement and well design. BP has denied the allegations.

    BP was already $60 million over budget and stopping operations at that point and coming up with a new cement design would have meant millions of extra dollars in costs.

    http://ap.stripes.com/dynamic/…..4-06-59-00

  12. How about the new bird-safe building codes?

    1. Our plan is coalescing….

      1. Our plan is cloaca…

      2. “In an ideal world, this is how we deal
        with (environmental ) issues – we codify
        them in advance, rather than deal with
        them on a case-by-case basis,” said John
        Rahaim, the city’ s planning director.

        1. Using precogs, I assume. The problem is creating paradoxes by doing so.

  13. Republican Bob Turner won New York’s 9th Congressional District last night.

    The Jews did it.

    1. ed koch fearmongering over israel & the hipsters didnt vote.

      1. What do you mean by “fearmongering”?

        1. JOOOOSS!!!111!!!

        2. I must be precog. I thought I just read this thread.

      2. Spin, spin, spin my centrifuge!

    2. I’m buying the “revolt against gay marriage” line more than vague disapproval over Israel stuff.

      1. do u know how many…very many [JOOS] live in brooklyn?

        1. It’s difficult to say for sure. We stopped counting Jews several years ago. Now we just have rough estimates from random sampling.

          1. Maybe we need a way to know. Like a yellow star.

            1. I like it better without the counting. There’s a Jewish taboo against counting Jews. The taboo is intended to prevent leaders from seeing the population as a resource that the leaders own.

        2. Like 40%.

          And the guy who won is Catholic.

  14. Being a Harvard-educated Constitutional Scholar obviously qualifies you to be a venture capitalist, as long as you aren’t using your own money.

  15. Justin’s [Bieber] a lumberjack and he’s ok
    he sleeps all night and he works all day

    he cuts down trees he skips and jumps
    he like to press wild flowers
    he puts on women’s clothing
    and hangs around in bars

    1. The Biebs is no stranger to nontraditional styles, though he’s not going to cross into Lady Gaga “meat dress” territory.

      Sorry, Justine, but a “meat dress” is exactly what that guy at the bathhouse gave you last weekend.

      1. And he has a tattoo. He so hip.

      2. He looks like a 50 year old high school librarian.

    2. A+. Excellent Work!

    3. He’s not even a hipster db; it’s worse than that. He’s a wannabe hipster db.

    4. “he puts on women’s clothing”

      I don’t see a problem.

    1. In the end she is not that good. I like her music because I don’t mind techno and I am glad to see someone who plays anything but hip hop get famous. But she is hardly that brilliant.

      1. She doesn’t sell music. She sells Entertainment Weekly’s.

        If Kim Kardashian and Paris Hilton can become talentless stars, why not the Gaga?

        1. But her music is listenable. I think she is a freak and incredibly annoying in person. But when you listen to her music, it isn’t bad. So she is better than Paris Hilton. She can do something.

          1. Try as I do to hate her, I’m unable. She is not untalented. Her duo with Elton at the Grammys was great and not because he carried her. She plays a nice piano.

          2. I seriously thought her first couple hits were Madonna.

          3. Are you serious, John? Listenable? Her music is utter, utter crap. Rihanna’s better, and she’s just utter crap. There are worse, like Ke$ha, who is like utter^infinity crap, but give me Madonna – or even Britney Spears – over Gaga anyday. She’s not even in the same echelon, just another wannabe poseur. Not to mention Bowie or Debbie Harry, her “idols”. She namedrops good musicians and then proceeds to make banal, annoying and relatively typical modern pop drivel. Call me when she does something other than gargling baby syllables cloyingly over techno beats while wearing meat dresses to distract us from her complete lack of talent.

        2. Pop entertainment is so incredibly boring these days.

      2. I reluctantly admit to liking Gaga’s music. And I find her fame-whoring amusing in small doses. I think the reason is she doesn’t seem to take it too seriously (unlike Kim Kardashian or Paris Hilton, since they were mentioned down thread).

        1. Dude, it’s all plainly contrived. “Hey look at me! I want attention! I too can make passable pop music but I’m more eccentric!” She’s not a diva, she’s just pathetic.

          1. Also, in comparison, Nicki Minaj is about as weird but better looking and more talented.

    2. I just can not understand that woman’s appeal in any way, whatsoever.

      1. Yeah, her music really doesn’t appeal to me at all. As far as ‘similar’ artists are concerned, La Roux and Goldfrapp are far superior IMO.

        1. While not really a fan, every time I encounter La Roux I end up watching them because of my sick fascination with Jackson’s profound lisp.

          1. I’ve never heard Elly Jackson speak, but now I will make an effort. I do find “Bulletproof” and “Armour Love” to be fine pop songs.

        2. Art-POG,
          I agree…particularly Goldfrapp.
          The thing about Gaga that I find interesting is that she (like Madonna before her) seems to be coping so many of Nina Hagan’s moves…but Gaga is 30 years late.

      2. Without her we wouldn’t have had teh awsome Weird Al sendup.

    3. Did you actually read the article?

      Their main complaint appears to be that she’s not a hipster doofus and instead has painstakingly crafted a persona that is perfect for this moment in pop.

      That’s kind of like complaining that Katy Perry’s tits are too big.

      1. What exactly does Katy Perry do? Is she an actress? Singer? Does she have any purpose in life besides showing the world her unbelievable tits and body? Not that that is a bad purpose. But I honestly couldn’t tell you what she does.

        1. Singer. Sort of. Autotune screeching retarded “lyrics” is considering singing nowadays, right?

          1. Okay, so she is a music figure of some sort. I see her on commercials and see pictures of her on the internet. But no one ever explains what she does.

              1. I listen to her new songs long enough to learn the lyrics, because her and Kei$ha are competing to see who can come up with the sluttiest song.

                And unlike Kei$ha apparently Katy takes baths. So she’s one up on that score.

                1. Kei$ha looks like Courtney Love’s dirtier, slutty younger sister. Not even on an off night. Say what you want about Perry. But she is damned attractive.

                  1. Just Google imaged Kei$ha. What a scank.

                2. I often secretly hope Kei$ha is performance art attempting to prove that there is no music too shitty, no lyrics too retarded, and no musical persona so repulsive, that it can’t be made popular through repeated exposure.

                  1. I just don’t understand why she won’t shower.

                  2. Justin Bieber has that covered, SF

              2. The sesame street version was amusing enough.

            1. John, you may be getting Katy Perry confused with Zooey Deschanel

          2. I’ve caught bits and pieces of Katy Perry performing and was surprised to find her to be both a talented singer and performer.

            That doesn’t mean I like her work, but she is indeed talented.

            1. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

          3. I absolutely loathe Autotune. It’s one of the many stakes that is killing the vampire called “the music industry.”

            1. So you’re a big fan of vampires?

              1. just the right vampires.

                or making two vaguely connected points at the same times leads to confusion.

            2. I’ve been bitching about video killing a lot of good music.

              Ever since MTV started, it seems like ugly people have lost all musical skillz. At least it seems that way because you never ever see anyone who isn’t at least moderately attractive.

              Also, Journey went from a monster act to nothing after they appeared on MTV.

        2. She’s a singer.

          She’s had a huge number of top 40 hits, actually.

          One day we’ll turn around and she’ll be like Mariah Carey. You’ll say, “That bitch had HOW MANY hit records? No way.”

          1. And none of them with any staying power. Do you know anyone who actually listens to old Mariah Carey? I don’t. It is interesting how music can just disappear from the consciousness and other music stays forever.

            1. Right.

              I think at one point Mariah was threatening to break a couple of Paul McCartney’s records.

              I was like, “Really,, people? Mariah Carey is better than Paul McCartney? Really?

              1. That is what I wonder about the entire hip hop and R&B genera. We are going on 30 years now of hip hop. Does anyone listen to the hip hop that was popular 20 years ago the way people listen to classic rock now? If NWA or Public Enemy ever reformed, would they be playing stadiums the way the Rolling Stones do? Maybe they would, I don’t know. But it is an interesting question. Just who listens to this music past the first five minutes after it is released?

                1. erg… I’m a collector of 60s-70s R&B/Soul music. It was so damn good back then. Now?

                  1. It was incredible. Hip hop destroyed black music in this country. I can’t imagine a greater sin that can be laid upon a type of music. When the history of 20th Century Music is written, American ethnic music (jazz, blues, country, soul, gospel and so forth) will be the longest and most important chapter. America’s greatest cultural gift to the world and those fuckers killed it.

                2. I still listen to hip hop from 1989 – 2004. Yes, there are people that appreciate it John.

                  1. I am sure there are some Ska, but how many? And more importantly, how many young people who were not of age when it was made?

                3. I still listen to early hip-hop.

                  It’s the middle era stuff – Snoop and that time period – that I don’t listen to any more. But I never got that into it in the first place.

                  1. Run DMC was a clever band. The Beastie Boys were and are too. But I agree, at some point in the mid 1990s, it all started to sound the same.

                4. After reading Balko, I regularly listen to Straight Outta Compton and Fuck tha Police.

                  Of course the same could be said of most music. Does anyone still listen to Flock of Seagulls or Judas Priest?

                  1. Priest is actually popular with a second generation of fans. And yeah, most music fades away. But the really good music doesn’t. And that is the question.

                  2. *ahem* I actually own FoS first three albums. And yes, they still get play. Beyond “I Run So Faraway”, they actually had some good songs.

                    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHjtij5vZfA

                    Gotta love that hair! lol

                5. Public Enemy still performs in front of large crowds of adoring fans John. They never really broke up in the way that N.W.A. did. They just did a headlining tour in Europe at some big outdoor festivals and venues.
                  I’ve been a huge fan of P.E. since around 1990 and I’m more of a metalhead than anything else.

                6. Yes. Classic rap (not hip hop) from the late 80s and early 90s was great, because they sample lots of old jazz and had great beats. Nowadays the vast majority is beyond mindless, and it’s fusing with pop, which makes it even more mindless.

                  1. Oh and lots of funk as well.

              2. These days she is. McCarthy’s voice is shot. I think he blew an 0-ring.

              3. If you want to hear something very sad, the cast from “Glee” is now the most charted act in American pop history. Can I get a bullet in the head over here? Anyone?

          2. Mariah Carey had a crazy vocal range, and was a good singer before the days of autotune, so there’s that.

            1. Unfortunately her style (well, I think she and Celine Dion are both responsible for it) is one of the main influences on the melisma-infected female singers of today.

              1. The difference is that Mariah Carey, Celine Dion and Whitney Houston were all actually talented singers who didn’t need autotune to stay on key. That doesn’t mean they were good, because they weren’t.

      2. Yes, I read it. I think the brutal takedown part is that she’s not claiming to be a crafted persona, but is rather something so original that the haters can’t deal with it.

        She is a brilliant pastichist claiming to be a creative genius. She’s not creating, she’s recycling.

        1. Everyone in music has a crafted image. That is part of the art. I don’t know why people hold that against artists. You think Robert Johnson minded that people thought he sold his soul to the devil? Hell no. Scandal sells records.

          1. I don’t object to the crafted persona, that’s really the only spark of genius she’s evidenced. She made herself famous by sheer force of will and an amazing accurate read on how to pander to her intended audience.

            But as a musical artist, the school bus is on fire and plunging off a cliff.

            1. Eggzactly.

        2. I think the brutal takedown part is that she’s not claiming to be a crafted persona, but is rather something so original that the haters can’t deal with it.

          Here’s what gets me about her–nothing about her act or persona is original. It’s all derivative of earlier and more influential artists, mostly Madonna–even the idea of cultivating your fanbase around gays as the primary demographic was already established by Madonna and Cher, most notably. Her attempt at the VMAs to re-enact the Madonna kiss with Britney Spears was just the latest episode in that sad little tale. Even her meat dress wasn’t all that innovative–it’s not like she’s the first person to wear something stupid to an awards show. It only seems “fresh” because the entertainment industry has a short memory.

          And while some of her first songs were pretty catchy, her latest stuff is absolutely unlistenable, a mish-mash of techno-shit that was popular at raves in the mid-90s. Instead of expanding her musical repertoire, she’s regressed to recycling stuff that was popular back when flannel was considered a high fashion statement.

          She’s getting a lot of attention now because the media’s portrayed her as this decade’s version of Marilyn Manson–something to “shock” the rubes and squares of Middle America. It actually has very little to do with how talented a performer she is. The truth of the matter is that she’s more like Spinal Tap–a fairly talented musician (to her credit, she’s got a decent voice and plays the piano very well) that felt the need to resort to grotesque gimmicks as opposed to musicianship to gain fans. In about 5-7 years, her act is going to be pretty damn stale.

        1. Oh that is just so disingenuous I can’t believe it.

          Perry’s reps are saying, “This poster makes our star’s tits look too big – please, please nobody look at it”?

          That’s like Obama’s people coming out one day and saying, “Tonight’s speech will make the President look too smart. Please, please don’t watch it. Really, just turn off the TV.”

          1. I clicked it.

  16. Nothing like a little schadenfreude in the morning. Listen to the whining, fear and desperation in this Politico article about last night’s special election results.

    http://www.politico.com/news/s…..63466.html

  17. Elizabeth

    Charlie Sheen roast: The 8 meanest jokes

    You’re just like Bruce Willis ? you were big in the 80s and now your old slot is being filled by Ashton Kutcher.”

    1. That is awesome.

      1. Most excellent.

    2. That is pretty damn funny. The rest kind of point out why he should probably be in jail…

  18. So Elizabeth Warren is running for Senate, officially, and the progressive fapping is downright pornographic.

    1. I bet she loses. Brown is a really smart campaigner. And what does Warren offer? Sorry but I can’t see “ugly busybody schoolmarm” as a winning image even in Massachusetts.

      1. But John, she’s on the side of The People!?

        1. The people are so lucky to have her come down from Cambridge and save them by serving in the Senate. What a selfless woman.

      2. I can’t see “ugly busybody schoolmarm” as a winning image even in Massachusetts.

        I can.

        1. I think she was created in some unltra-leftist aristocratic intelligentsia laboratory. Like Brown or Harvard.

        2. Indeed. Have you met my good friend Babs?

  19. Teaching Iraqis jumping jacks

    There are a lot of nearly identical videos. Is there some reason Iraqis hae trouble with this, or are the Iraqi troops we train made up strictly of mongoloids?

    1. The top suggested video it showed me was Zuzana. Any woman who makes exercise videos that are more pornographic than the porn she used to do is worth marrying.

      1. God I wish youtube wasn’t blocked here.

      2. Mother of God….

      3. Zod bless you, good sir.

        1. Wow. Times like this, I wish I wasn’t a shrill progressive queer.

    2. Jumping jacks are brutal the first time you do them. Wait, never mind, I’m a klutz.

      1. You were in Iraq, right, Art?

      2. I think the Iraqis are probably just lazy. Jumping jacks sound easy until you do about a hundred of them and are sucking your lungs out. Then, not so much.

        1. Yeah, I’m actually on my second tour there.

          1. Be safe. My friend just got back from there. She couldn’t get over how stupid the Iraqis were and how common the IDF was.

            1. This comment, representative of our overweening arrogance, is part of the reason we have failed in Iraq.

              Has it never occurred to you that they might be acting stupid for a reason? Like, so you’ll do their job for them or even just to annoy you?

          2. Oh, shit. Stay in the rear with the gear, man.

          3. Fuck. I was hoping you were still lounging around in Europe running out the clock.

            1. I did run out the Active Duty contract clock. Last year was the most time I’d spent stateside since 2006.

    3. Reminds me of honkies dancing next to soul bros.

  20. “Republican Bob Turner won New York’s 9th Congressional District last night.”

    Drudge’s Headline? Revenge of the Jews; Dem Seat Turns in NYC

    1. Drudge is America’s greatest editor.

    2. I like the Fark version.

      “GOP Packs Weiner’s Seat”

      1. Okay, the effects of that push-up video have worn off, thanks to the “packs Weiner’s seat” line.

  21. Diesel could signal economy’s course

    John Felmy, chief economist at the American Petroleum Institute, discussed the contradiction last week at a U.S. Chamber of Commerce panel.

    Sales of gasoline have dropped in volume 2.1 percent so far this year. Then Felmy pointed out that diesel sales are up this year a walloping 10.9 percent.

    At first glance, it’s kind of a bright spot in an otherwise lackluster recovery. A huge increase suggests the 16-wheelers, freight rail and farm equipment have stayed busy.

    Trucking has outperformed the rest of the economy this year, with volumes up 5 percent, according to the chief economist of the American Trucking Associations, Bob Costello.

    American manufacturing ? another sector that has been doing better than the rest of the economy ? contributed to the increased traffic, since U.S.-made goods usually generate more business for trucking than imports.

    Ferrying a Chinese-made pair of jeans to Walmart might involve one to three “truck movements,” he said. With a durable good produced by a U.S. factory, there might be seven to eight truck movements.

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/s…..z1XvzRshLw

  22. Not political, but I hope my fellow Houstonians will mourn with me:

    66 million trees expected to die in the Houston area

    1. IT is horrible down there. My friends in Texas have never seen anything like it.

      1. Everyday we wonder where else a fire will start. We’re sitting on tinder down here. I can’t help but give suspicious looks to smokers here, some of which I just know are to blame for these fires.

        1. One of my best friends sent me a picture this morning of a fire right by their house. She lives in Katy. The whole place is a drained bayou. It is where the rice fields used to be. I can’t imagine there ever being a fire there. But there is.

          1. Yeah George Bush Park is burning.

        2. The one up by my house I think they said was started by somebody trying to burn a mulch pile.

          1. Yeah that is fucking intelligent.

      2. It officially is the worst drought in the 175 year history of the city.

    2. I read that article earlier. I think they might actually be a bit light. Half the world looks about ready to die around here.

    3. I like Texas better than Ohio in so many ways, but at least our climate is pleasant here. We call 2 weeks without rain in the summer a drought.

      1. Normally we get rain steadily throughout the year. Two weeks without rain in the summer is plenty extreme. We’ve gone almost three months with practically no rain now. And temps topping 100 every day. It is hell.

        1. There are a lot of days lately I think Phil Sheridan might have been right.

          1. And me stuck with a mortgage.

    4. We haven’t gotten any rain to speak of this year. At my house, I think we’ve gotten less than an inch. Some of the prickly pear cactus are dying.

      Amazingly enough, our old live oaks show no stress at all. Thank God. A grandfather live oak is about the last word in majestic trees, and I would be sick if we lost one.

      1. You can have the ones in my yard. I can’t stand the slutty things, spewing their seed everywhere.

        I especially want the one next to the driveway to die a painful death. The fucker has dented both cars’ roofs with giant acorns

        1. He is simply reacting to your hatred in the only way he knows how.

          1. I keep playing Trees to fuck with it, but the Oak side of the force is strong in this one.

    5. Colorado seems to be ok. We even had snow in the high country three weeks ago.

    6. Gosh, is Houston supposed to get rain over then next week and a half like Dallas is?

  23. the district will disappear in gerrymandering.

    Nice.

    “If those bastards won’t tow our lion, we’ll take away their representation.”

    1. It’s about the people and their right to speak out.

    2. I think it was well understood the district was gone before the election results came in.

    3. What a waste of such carefully crafted racial gerrymandering. It’s amazing they’ll shift power away from the only region of the state that’s growing just to send a message to those upstarts.

      1. Rhywun! Long time no see.

        1. Sadly, work interferes a lot lately.

          1. I hear ya. Be strong, brother.

    4. The good news is that they are redistricting because of population loss – so there will be fewer NY Reps regardless of how bizarre they draw the lines.

  24. Elizabeth Warren for Senate:

    “If you can’t beat ’em get confirmed by ’em, join ’em.”

  25. Somebody got a link to incif? I’m reinstalling Firefox on the work laptop.

  26. Rick Perry was not comfortable with audience members who cheered for the death penalty of a young uninsured man at a recent GOP debate.

    The auduence wasn’t cheering for the death of a person. The question posited by Wolf Blitzen was obviously loaded. Ron Paul was able to answer it with his usual aplomb.

    1. Paul has the patience of Job. I would have lost my temper long before now if I were Paul. I mean seriously, how many times can some douchebag journalist ask him “do you really believe all this stuff about small government?”

    1. Oh SE, calm down and pull your skirt up a little higher.

      1. It’s the glasses, isn’t it, John? You’re a sucker for the hot librarian look.

        1. Damn straight I am. It is all about the glasses and the hot body.

          1. And your Palin obsession is now explained.

            1. amongst menz, that’s palin’s main qualifica…make that, attribute

    2. Oh noes, how will we justify a massive military if we have to stop invading every fucking backwater on the planet?

      1. Really, I was having this conversation with a conservative this morning – they really are as stupid on the military as liberals are on Social Security and Medicare, but at least the liberals aren’t pretending (well, at least) to be fiscally responsible as their programs drag us towards bankruptcy.

  27. Israel’s new problem with the Arab Street

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..ml?hpid=z3

    As everybody knows I’m not afraid to criticize Israeli policy when I feel it is warranted, but I have to say that some of the recent subjects in the news compel a defense of Israel.

    1. It’s laughable for Turkey, a nation which has denied its Kurds any move towards autonomy and engaged in many questionable human rights abuses to fight its terrorist enemies to lecture Israel on any of those subjects.
    2. As I said long ago when it happened the Egyptian overrunning of Israel’s embassy was nothing but thuggish behavior, wrong in itself and wrong in its aims. Israel has for the most part honored its agreements with Egypt and the peace between the two nations has been good for everyone involved.

    All that said, it will be terrible if the US solely vetoes Palestinian statehood recognition by the UN. Can anyone defend such a foolish waste of our diplomatic capital?

    1. “All that said, JOOOSSS!!!111!!”

      1. no it was about turkey

    2. Do you really think that Turkey or anyone else in the Middle East would change its views towards Jews if the Palestinian state? What difference would it make. The examples you give prove that nothing is going to satisfy the Arabs. They have a million internal reasons to hate Jews and Israel that have nothing to do with Palestinian statehood.

      1. Turkey has had good relations with Isreal for quite a while John, so yes.

        Again, is there any reason you’d like to offer for why the US should use its diplomatic capital to unilaterally veto the recognition of Palestinian Statehood if adopted by the rest of the UN? Many people here style themselves as foriegn policy realists, what would we possibly gain by that?

        1. I tell what we gain, leverage over the Palestinians and Israel. If we ever vote for it, we will have screwed Israel and will have no way to restrain them. And we also will have no influence over the Palestinians since we will have given them what they want.

          Look, we tried to give them statehood at Oslo. And they fucked it up. They proved that any state they get, they will use as a platform to terrorize Israel. That is who they are. They are never going to give up and live in peace. They are going use every possible weapon they can to kill and terrorize as many Israelis as possible. And if they ever got the upper hand, they would exterminate or exile every Jew in Israel.

          That is just who they are. There is no making peace with them. I wish it was different. But I don’t see a way to fix it. And I don’t see how giving them statehood is going to do anything but give them more ability to attack and kill Israelis. It is nuts I know. But it is reality.

          1. “we will have screwed Israel and will have no way to restrain them”

            We would have the three billion a year reasons we always do…

            “we tried to give them statehood at Oslo. And they fucked it up. They proved that any state they get, they will use as a platform to terrorize Israel. That is who they are”

            Wow, and you accuse others of racism! “That is who they are…” Wow.

            Oslo was a pretty imperfect agreement, the Israeli leaders themselves were quite public that they got pretty much everything of importance they wanted. And both sides have violated it since then (i.e., Israeli settlements have tripled since its signing).

            And what of the West Bank John? It’s been relatively peaceful, all while being under the yoke of Israel’s military (Oslo left conditions on soveriegnty that no self-respecting nation would respect), and what have they got for that? Increased settlement activity and no statehood…

            1. Through the use of suicide bombing and indiscriminate attacks on civilians, the Palestinians have destroyed any sort of moral capital they have. They did what they did. They still fire missile out of Gaza directly at civilians. They elected Hamas to govern the place. There is no reason to believe they want peace.

              Here is what we need to do. We need to take every American and European who thinks that the Palestinians are so peaceful and we need to move them into a no man’s land between the Gaza and Israel. About 20,000 would do it. That way every time there is a rocket or suicide bomber, it is likely to kill one of those 20,000. Then you can come tell us about the deal that needs to be made. Because unless and until it is your life at risk, stop lecturing the Israelis about how it is their job to die for peace. Their lives count too. And if any other country, including all of Europe and America, were subjected to half of what Israel has put up with the Palestinians, there wouldn’t a problem, because the weaker side would be dead. But, it is apparently the Jews’ duty to die so Western liberals can feel better about themselves.

              1. “Through the use of suicide bombing and indiscriminate attacks on civilians, the Palestinians have destroyed any sort of moral capital they haveAgain, that statement reeks of the worst tribalism.”

                Again, that statement reeks of the worst tribalism. Some Palestinians have done that, so we should deny all of them a state? WTF? Even our conservative Presidents have never held such a vulgar and laughable position.

                Then, even though I specifically mentioned the West Bank, in your response you ignore it completely and ramble on about Gaza. I submit that shows that you have no response…Your view is a mix of half-informed, selectively chosen examples and such…

                There were many people who wanted to deny Zionists any moral capital on which to found Israel because of the terroristic acts of a few Zionist organizations around the founding too…But the idea of a people for a state and a state for a people won out. But apparently not if the people are Palestinians…

                1. When there enough of them to mean that any state they get is going to be a terror state that makes wars on its neighbors, no they can’t have a state.

                2. MNG, a people have a positive responsibility to make a good faith effort of stopping violence in the areas they govern. By your logic, the victims of a KKK lynching in the old South can’t sue the town even if the police purposely arranged to be unavailable during the lynching because they sympathize with the KKK.

                  The PA did not even make a good faith effort to stop terrorism. Because of this, the Palestinians have lost their claim to self rule.

              2. “But, it is apparently the Jews’ duty to die so Western liberals can feel better about themselves.”

                This is a particularly nasty but common response from John and other conservatives like him. The insinuation is that liberals are singling out Israel wanting them to act in ways that put them at risk that they would not ask other nations to do.

                It’s ridiculous. Liberals, like myself, have long advocated, for example, that our own US forces not react disporportionately and contrary to the rules of war when fighting our enemies. I’m for autonomy for Tibet, I condemned Sri Lanka when they broke the laws of war in attacking their terrorists. We are only asking of Israel that they follow the same international principles of human rights and just war that we ask of all other nations, including our own. It’s Israeli supporters who, more often than not, make special exceptions for Israel. When we refuse to go along with them then we are accused of singling out Israel!

                1. You are totally singling out Israel. China isn’t near the piriah state the Israel is. Nor is Russia or any of the other countries that are engaged in real occupations ten times worse that what goes on on the West Bank.

                  If you don’t want to be accused of singling out Israel, stop singling out Israel.

                  1. Actually, liberals, including myself, for years fought MFN status for China based largely on their occupation of Tibet. We wrote our congresspersons, attended rallies, donated money to that cause.

                    I’m a member of HRW which is charged with “singling out” Israel for human rights violations. Not only do they frequently and roundly condemn Israel’s enemies but they also condemn Russia, Sri Lanka, and other violators.

                    As usual you simply don’t know what you are talking about and are building goofy ideas on your misinformation.

                    1. But let’s stick with this idea of singling out Israel.

                      Last I checked we don’t give Russia or China billions of dollars of support. We don’t use our security council veto unilaterally to defend their occupations.

                      So yes, Israel is singled out for special treatment, but in the opposite way of what you suggest.

                    2. Last I checked we don’t give Russia or China billions of dollars of support.

                      The 2009 USA aid figures (the most recent available) were:

                      332 Million to Russia
                      1,992 Million to Israel
                      1,734 Million to Egypt
                      1,249 Million to Pakistan
                      811 Million to the PA
                      686 Million to Jordan
                      250 Million to Lebanon

                      The problem is, you don’t check. What is your threshold for objecting to USA foreign aid?

                      http://www.census.gov/compendi…..n_aid.html

                2. It’s ridiculous. Liberals, like myself, have long advocated,

                  MNG, you never complain about USA aid to Arab nations until after I call you on your hypocrisy.

              3. + 50 to John @ 11:08 AM

            2. MNG, Judea and Samaria only became peaceful after Israel built the security barrier. Terrorist deaths in Israel totaled 174 in the 1980s. They jumped to 348 in the 1990s.

              http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAA…..0-1999.htm

        2. the PA – yes. hamas – never

        3. Turkey has had good relations with Isreal for quite a while John, so yes.

          And Turkey moved closer to Iran after seeing the USA pressure Israel for 20 years. The evidence is rather clear that the more we pressure Israel, the more the surrounding states move away from America. They don’t want to invest in a relationship with the USA if the USA proves itself an unreliable ally.

        4. If Palestine becomes a state, can it have fighter jets and missiles just like all of the other states?

      2. Isreal itself is built on the idea of “a land for a people and a people for a land.” Palestinians, like everyone else, deserve autonomy. Of course if they use that autonomy badly, threatening their neighbors and such they should be roundly condemned and dealt with, but still they deserve it.

        Heck, even Bush II called for a Palestinian state. For us to then unilaterally veto such recognition would look terrible in the eyes of the world, and in this day and age where international cooperation is so critical that matters.

        1. Sure, give them a state. When a state commits an act of violence across a border, it’s called War. Let them enjoy the full-blown consequences of a war with Israel.

          1. Well of course. If the legitimate government of a state provides just cause for a war, then yes, it’s just to move against them (though one should follow the laws of war when doing so if one wants ones cause to be just).

            But that they might do this is no reason to deny them what we would think just for anyone else (and ironically what the entire idea of Israel itself is built upon).

            1. If the legitimate government of a state provides just cause for a war, then yes, it’s just to move against them

              Except of course in the case of Gaza firing rockets at Israel – that doesn’t count for some BS reason I will need to come up with.

              1. Too true, MiNGe. MNG also has no qualms about the missiles from Lebanon at Israeli civilians.

    3. All that said, it will be terrible if the US solely vetoes Palestinian statehood recognition by the UN. Can anyone defend such a foolish waste of our diplomatic capital?

      Oh, please. Nobody really gives a fuck about Palestinian statehood. Its just a stick to beat teh JOOOS and the US with. If we veto it, our diplomatic capital will be pretty much undiminished.

      Personally, I think statehood could well be the worst thing that could happen to the Palis. It would be a green light for Israel to actually go to no-fooling war with them next time they attack Israel.

      You can’t be a state part-time, or only a little bit. You want to be sovereign, you get to take responsibility for everything that comes out of your country and blows up in somebody else’s.

      1. Nobody cares for it? Even our conservative presidents have publicly affirmed the right of the Palestinians to be autonomous. It’s a world-wide position for a reason; it’s logical given the values the world embraces. Keeping people in an occupied state for decades strikes most people as wrong, despite what a few of them might do that is also wrong…

        I mean, you think the entire world but the US is only for Palestinian statehood because they are anti-Semites? I submit that kind of thinking shows the pitiful position of your stance…

        1. You do realize the Palestinian problem would have gone away decades ago if any of the surrounding Arab countries had been willing to offer citizenship to the displaced?

          Well, that and the annoying tendency of Palestinians to blow shit up. Watching what happened in Jordan in ’70-’71 pretty much killed the idea of anybody giving the Palestinians a permanent home.

          1. It’s amazing to watch the same people who jumpt up red-faced and accuse people of being racist anti-Semites if they dissent one iota on Israel policy caverlierly toss around such tribal generalizations as “the annoying tendency of Palestinians to blow shit up.”

            Some Palestinians do awful things. That’s certainly no reason to keep all of them rustled up in occupied territories. If you think that peoples deserve their own land then why not them?

            This old chestnut about “why don’t they just go live in another Arab nation” is just as hilarious given that people said the same thing about the Jews who wanted their own land (why don’t they just live in various Western nations). They want, just like the Jews, to have their own nation on their ancestral homelands.

            1. “peoples deserve their own land”

              WTF does that mean? Do the Kurds deserve their own land? The Prussians?

              “Palestinian” is in invented race (they all are really but most not so recent). They are just Arabs who happen to be living there after 1948. They have their “own land” and if they can refrain from acting like assholes, they can call it a country.

              1. “WTF does that mean?”

                It’s an old Zionist slogan, you didn’t know that? Everything you say in your post against Palestinian statehood could, and was, said against Israeli statehood. They wanted their own state, not to live in the other nations they could live in. They wanted it on their ancestral lands. People said “but hey, not everyone can have their own state, look at the Kurds.”

                That you can make this argument to deny Palestinian statehood in defense of the very state founded on the exact same principles is, well, hilarious.

                BTW-I think the Kurds defintely deserve their own land. It was the only good reason to support our Iraqi action imo.

                1. Like Helen Thomas said, the Jews should go back to Europe where they were so welcome and treated as equals.

                  Yeah, like the Pale of Settlement. No pogroms at all there. Or in Poland. Or what was that little country…oh yeah, Germany.

                  1. That sound you hear is my point flying over your head Restoras.

                    If you think it was crazy to suggest that Jews give up their goal of a state for their people and go back to Europe, why do you support the idea that Palestinians should give up their idea of a state for their people and just go live in Jordan and Syria?

                    1. Oooo I’m so overwhelmed by your childish insults that I can hardly craft a response – but I’ll try anyway.

                      Maybe, just maybe, someone like myself would be more amenable to the concept of a Pali state if they acted more civilized toward thier neighbors, instead of raining down rockets, blowing up buses, and sniping children.

                      Oh, and go fuck yourself.

                    2. Ok, so let’s put it in this context. 400 years from now, the large Native American diaspora goes to the China and Russia-dominated UN with the idea that they should be able to take back all of America for themselves – as their native, destined lands – and China and Russia agree to help them force non-Native Americans to live fenced within the Arizona desert while the Native Americans take control of all the prime real estate and fertile land. They justify it by saying, “they did this to our ancestors hundreds of years ago, and we need a land of our own.”

                      They disarm the un-native denizens, and start using eminent domain to mow down their new houses to build guarded sanctuaries for their wealthy in the middle of Arizona, simply to assert their power. If we fight back, we are terrorists, and all citizens are at risk. If you criticize them, you are racist against Native Americans. If don’t like the treatment, we should just move away or be annexed by Canada or Europe. No, we can’t even make our own country because some radical groups had the audacity to fight back, and that means they must keep controlling us “for their security”.

                      You’re saying our ancestors should sit back and enjoy life peacefully in poverty fenced in out in the Arizona desert instead of fighting for the land they’ve lived on for centuries? You seem to believe that’s basically how the Palestinians should act. In your view, what distinguishes a terrorist from a revolutionary? Terrorism supposedly involves killing innocent civilians, yet the Israeli military gets off bombing urban centers indiscriminately? When “terrorists” target government buildings, is that terrorism or revolution?

                      (Note, I’m not picking on Native Americans by any means – in fact I think they were in the right to defend themselves against past aggressions by the US government, and the government’s treatment of them will always be a stain. That doesn’t make it right to turn around and do the same thing centuries later, which is essentially how Israel justifies what they did.)

                    3. You’re saying our ancestors descendents

                2. Jordan held Judea and Samaria for two decades without any Liberals pressuring it to turn that land into a Palestinian state. Why the change of heart?

                3. Everything I said could be said against any state. I think the Celts should get their land back from the Anglo-Saxons after they get it back from the Normans.

              2. +100 OS, thanks for that.

            2. The Jews got their own land and were kicked out of every Arab country. And no one talks about any right of return or any sort of restitution for that crime. Why? Because no one cares and Jews don’t count. And you wonder why they formed their own country. If Jews just hadn’t done that and continued to die for the world’s sins and pleasure, liberals would probably still like them.

              1. + 5 to John and Old Soldier

            3. Back the fuck up, cowboy. I don’t give a rat’s ass if you’re an anti-semite, and I’ve never called you one.

              I don’t believe in ‘tribalism as government’. The idea that every little pissant group with a funny haircut and a stupid accent deserves their own country is laughable on its face. By that logic we should cede New Jersey to Guidostan.

              Want to get treated like a real country? Act like one. The Palestinians don’t. That’s why Jordan washed their hands of the bunch of them… in 1988. From any sane perspective, the people who call themselves Palestinians would have been Jordanians, but they went and screwed that pooch, didn’t they?

            4. This old chestnut about “why don’t they just go live in another Arab nation” is just as hilarious given that people said the same thing about the Jews who wanted their own land (why don’t they just live in various Western nations).

              Half the ancestors of today’s Israeli Jews immigrated to Israel from Arab nations that expelled them.

              http://www.jimena.org/

        2. I mean, you think the entire world but the US is only for Palestinian statehood because they are anti-Semites?

          I think the anti-semitism of the UN is pretty much a given, MNG.

          I also think that the Palis are much more useful to their purported friends as a suffering minority under the heel of teh JOOOOS than as an actual state.

          I’m pretty sure, as well, that if any of their neighbors really cared about the statelessness of the Palis, they could have just taken back the land the Palis are now squatting on and made them citizens.

          1. “I think the anti-semitism of the UN is pretty much a given, MNG.”

            All of it? Incredible. You really think 98% of the world is motivated by animosity towards Jews?

            Wow, if that paranoid idea is the base for your stance here, then, well, wow, what more can be said?

            “if any of their neighbors really cared about the statelessness of the Palis, they could have just taken back the land the Palis are now squatting on and made them citizens.”

            This is one of my favorite suggestions from cons on this issue; the problem of the Palestinians wanting their own independent, autonomous state should be solved by other nations “taking” their land and making them be their citizens.

            Wow.

            1. All of it? Incredible. You really think 98% of the world is motivated by animosity towards Jews?

              I wouldn’t know. But I’m pretty sure that the tiny fraction that got kicked upstairs to the UN is almost overwhelmingly anti-semitic. Mostly because they miss no opportunity to act that way.

              You’re having a reading comprehension problem today, aren’t you? I said that the statelessness of the Palis could be easily solved, by the states that used to govern the land they now claim taking them back. You started going on about how they should have their own state.

              Which they certainly didn’t have before Israel was established. What therefor entitles them to their own state, now, is a mystery to me.

              While I certainly recognize that being led by murderous assholes is the traditional route to sovereignty, that generally requires that (a) your murderous assholes not be utterly incompetent and (b) that they not pick fights you cannot win.

              Regardless, apparently the Pali claim to a state of their very own is supposed to have some moral basis. Since their moral capital should be, by any sane reckoning, just about zero, I am baffled by this.

              But, you might notice that nowhere did I ever actually oppose statehood for the Palis. My position is that (a) they don’t have much of a claim on one, (b) no other country, based on revealed rather than stated preferences, really cares much if they get one or not, and (c) if they get one and don’t mend their murderous, sociopathic ways, they might be sorry.

              If you would care to discuss what I have actually said, rather than what you wish I had said, go right ahead.

              1. *crickets*

            2. All of it? Incredible. You really think 98% of the world is motivated by animosity towards Jews?

              No, but a majority of the UN representatives dislike Jews enough to vote automatically against Israel in non-binding resolutions that don’t cost them anything. There’s a big difference between the UN and the people of the World, as the protests outside the UN every year demonstrate.

              http://www.intercourseandconce…..tests1.htm

          2. I also think that the Palis are much more useful to their purported friends as a suffering minority under the heel of teh JOOOOS than as an actual state.

            Quite true.

    4. All that said, it will be terrible if the US solely vetoes Palestinian statehood recognition by the UN. Can anyone defend such a foolish waste of our diplomatic capital?

      If you’re being pragmatic about it, then the USA should back Israel. When other nations see the USA abandon Israel, they figure that an alliance with the USA is not worth much. Who wants to team up with a fair weather friend? It’s not as if the USA can claim any moral high ground on the issue considering that we allow Turkish strikes on Kurds in northern Iraq which have caused the collateral deaths of civilian Kurds.

      1. When other nations see the USA abandon Israel, they figure that an alliance with the USA is not worth much.

        If they didn’t get that message already with Egypt, they’re never really going to get it.

      2. No kidding.

        After this past year, every tinpot kleptocratic sociopath on the planet knows that its better to be our enemy than our friend.

  28. saw this on Instapundit:

    In Study, Fatherhood Leads to Drop in Testosterone
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09…..p=2&sq=pam belluck&st=cse

    “Testosterone, that most male of hormones, takes a dive after a man becomes a parent. And the more he gets involved in caring for his children ? changing diapers, jiggling the boy or girl on his knee, reading ‘Goodnight Moon’ for the umpteenth time ? the lower his testosterone drops. So says the first large study measuring testosterone in men when they were single and childless and several years after they had children. Experts say the research has implications for understanding the biology of fatherhood, hormone roles in men and even health issues like prostate cancer.”

    1. that’s what happens when the avg dad’s nutzsak is nailed up over the mantle

    2. Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

    3. That’s why FPSes were invented.

    4. I can vouch for this study. Of course, the drop may have something to do with the dear missus trying to cut your balls off every other day.

    5. “jiggling the boy”

      Isn’t that illegal?

      1. Only in ol’ Alabama.

    6. ” measuring testosterone in men when they were single and childless and several years after they had children”

      Several years after? Of course it dropped. It does for everyone.

      1. They compared single, married and childless, and married with children (and I think also tried to distinguish between degress of caregiving for the ones with kids) to differentiate the drop with kids from the drop with age.

  29. So I see Obama has announced how he wants to pay for his jobs plan.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44…..e_economy/

    When he announced his plan I derided it. It’s stupid by his own metrics. Obama and his supporters have tried to counter the charge that his first stimulus plans did not better the economy with the argument that it was not big enough to do the job. Then what use is this stimulus plan? The infrastructure bank is a terrible idea, the infrastructure spending mostly goofy too. The only thing defensible in the plan is the tax credit for hiring vets. Sure, the GOP would look like hypocrites for opposing the payroll tax break, but the way that is set up it has little effect….

    But with his announced plan to pay for it Obama has for me shown how terrible he is. He knows his plans cannot get through Congress, his only motivation for putting them forward is to try to use them politically against the GOP. The GOP was set to work with Obama and the markets needed to see that DC could pass something together, but he dumped that for short term political gains. Shame on him. Like I said during the nomination, perhaps how they do things in a Chicago machine election, but this is the big leagues…

    1. I mean, what more can this guy do and still ask for support? It’s by his own claims he should be judged. He said he would promote peace, yet here we are still in Iraq, Afghanistan and now Libya. Said he would curtail some of the WOT and WOD abuses and did not. Said he would better the economy and it got worse under his watch.

      The man will have to run, with some irony, on having OBL taken care of under his watch and the (at this time seemingly) success in Libya, and I guess DADT repeal. Well, that and “I’m better than whoever the GOP nominates.” The GOP will undoubtedly do what they can to assist him on that, but he literally strikes me as a person that gives no person a positive reason to vote for him…

      1. Isn’t the good feeling you get by voting to assuage your white liberal guilt a positive reason?

        1. most recently, it was a rejection of palin despite mccain being a reasonable, but old candidate.

        2. I actually think many people voted to “make history” by electing a black man. And as I’ve said I don’t necessarily think that a foolish motive. But that motive is gone now.

          1. Wait, voting for a guy on the basis of his skin color and a desire to make history isn’t foolish? That’s like saying voting for Kennedy because he was attractive and would have been the first Catholic president wasn’t foolish.

            1. I actually don’t think it would have been foolish for voting for Kennedy because he was Catholic and Irish, especially if one were Catholic and Irish. Catholics made up a third of the nation for a long time but no President until 1960, statistically that’s very unlikely. A Catholic being elected to that office is symbolic, sure, but symbolism means something too, it indicates sea changes in attitudes and opportunities, and I can think of a lot worse reasons to vote for someone…

              1. No, voting for somebody on ethnic or racial lines is foolish. “Hey, look, he’s like me” is what got us such shining paragons of governmental competence like Marion Barry, Kwame Kilpatrick, and Barack Obama. I can’t think of a worse reason to vote for somebody. Hell, being bribed to vote is a better reason.

      2. I predict the Obama re-elect campaign will be a collection of vicious smears, repeatedly endlessly in TV ads funded by his billion dollar war chest, spiced by thinly-disguised accusations of racism, with the most transparent veneer of progressivoid policy promises.

        1. “a collection of vicious smears”

          Well, he has been the subject of same from the other side for quite a while…

          1. I mean, I wonder if his smear-campaign will rise to the level of accusing his opponent of being a treasonous secret muslim non-citizen loyal to Kenya…

            1. You mean reality based?

            2. You mean that McCain and Palin made those attacks? The RNC? Stop moving the goal posts. Don’t compare Obama’s attacks to the worst things that come out of the fever swamps of the internet.

            3. If memory serves the first “birther” allegations came out of the Clinton primary campaign.

              1. You are correct, sir.

          2. Tell you what, MNG. Let’s put some money on it, and submit my prediction to a vote of the commentariat after the election next year.

            Although I do note that your replies don’t actually dispute my prediction. Just the usual tired tu quoque.

            1. “Tell you what, MNG. Let’s put some money on it”

              He doesn’t take bets. Hell, I told him I would pay him $100 to prove his claim that I shilled for Palin here at Reason. His response was that he wasn’t going to bother with it because it wasn’t like I could pay him via PayPal.

              So, MNG, here’s the deal you stupid cunt: If you can prove that I was a shill fo Palin here at Hit & Run, I’ll mail a cashiers check made out to Cash to Reason c/o Matt and then you ask Matt to forward it to you.

              Stupid cunt.

        2. If you’re going to make a prediction, at least make it something unlikely.

  30. Meathead on meathead crime

    Put-in-bay is an island in Lake Erie devoted to drunkenness. The story is about how an MMA fighter and a BJJ guy solved a disagreement with one of them getting beat to death.

    This shit is why I don’t drink in public anymore.

    1. south bass island not put-in-bay. jeesch

      1. Shut up, you stupid fuck. And quit changing your name. Moron.

        1. ur mistake not mine. try reading the link first…or maybe just ur [STOOPIDZ]

          1. For all his punctuation oddities, at least Hercule could spell. I know Hercule Triathalon Savinien, and you, my troll, are no Hercule.

            1. Whatever happened to Anon-Bot. Is he biding his time in the deep reccesses of the tube’s processors? Waiting to spring upon the world with a deft agility and command fealty from all?

              1. John Conner sent a terminator back from the future to destroy Anon-Bot to prevent Skynet from coming online.

                1. Judgement Day is inevitable.

  31. You have to get at least 4% in a national poll.

    BTW, we’re excluding you from the next national poll.

    And we’re including some folks who’ve polling worse than you.

    http://www.dailyiowan.com/2011…..24841.html

    1. Which national poll did Huntsman hit 4 percent in? Santorum?

  32. Obviously, the video game industry is subsidized so the Dept of Defense can get future drone pilots and mechanical robot warrior controllers to train themselves from youth for the role. It was a well known fact in the ’80s that the high scores on every BattleZone machine were accessible to the Pentagon.

    1. I thought that movie was called The Last Starfighter

  33. A Dear John letter to California.

  34. Hey guys, maybe you are interested in the best club for seeking the rich cougars, sexy young men. …what’s the most important is that you can find a sugarmomma who can pay all your needs ==:: :/.COGUARA.//COM ::==Where you can find tens of thousands of matches and friends right here, especially those in your city.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.