Reason Morning Links: Four of the Fullerton Six to Remain on Paid Leave, First Republican Sponsors DOMA Repeal, Harry Reid Plays Shutdown Hardball (or Something)

|

  • Pending the outcomes of an FBI civil rights investigation and an internal Fullerton PD probe, four of the six officers complicit in the death of Kelly Thomas will remain on paid administrative leave.
  • Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) becomes the first Republican to sponsor the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act.  
  • Did the GOP debate audience boo a gay soldier last night? No, one person did. Did Rick Santorum answer the question horribly? Yes, apparently, because he did not begin his answer with, "I thank you for your service."  
  • Bank of America is looking to dump $880 million in commercial real estate–at a discount
  • Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker John Boehner are set to face off yet again over a stopgap measure that would keep the government running. 
  • DOJ denies retoractive severence pay to gay and lesbian soldiers expelled from the military prior to repeal of DADT. 

New at Reason.tv: "What We Saw at the Troy Davis Protest in D.C." 

NEXT: "We suffered from limitations and slavery while others benefited from freedom."

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. The Real Elizabeth Warren
    http://img97.imageshack.us/img…..00×448.png

    via Instapundit

    1. Is it me, or does she kind of look like Hillary Clinton’s ugly sister?

      1. She looks like every teacher in high school that I wanted to punch in the face.

        1. Thank you for crystalizing my thoughts. Yes indeed, she looks exactly like that teacher that enjoyed lording it over a bunch of teenagers.

        2. I take small comfort in that, whenst I was a horndog teenager, she looks like every mother who’s teenage daughters I was violating downstairs, while she slept upstairs.

          1. She looked like your stepmom?

            **scurries, ratlike, to the door**

            1. Actually, you can stay for the ovation.

      2. She looks like she could be Waxman’s sister – the “pretty” one of the family.

      3. Why do liberal schoolmarms always have to be burn victim ugly? I know not everyone is model good looking But Jesus, there is average or good for her age and then there is ugly. Why are liberal women always the latter?

        1. I wouldn’t call her ugly, but homely? Plain? Dishwater dull? Yes.

          She could almost pass for a Subaru lesbian.

          1. Ok She is not Sonya Sotomayor ugly. But my God she is homely. You would think one or two of them would at least be pleasant or average looking.

          2. Hey now, easy on the Subaru.

            1. Subarus are good cars. Made in America no less. But what is up with their marketing. Everyone commercial they run features some hispter douchebag and his Forrester and makes me want to vomit. It is like they want to take Volvo’s niche as the car of the brain dead urban moron.

              1. I agree about the commercials. They have a bunch of kick-ass cars that you don’t see advertised much. I have a Legacy and it’s great during the Northeastern winters.

              2. I like the Subaru commercial where the dad says of his teenage girl, We knew this day would come.” My first thought? Her coming out.

                http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qf8OGLqE1s

                1. It’s very canny on the father’s part. Less guys will hit on her because they think she likes wymyn. The douchebags that hit on the pretty girl who everyone thinks is a lesbian were not guys she was probably going to date anyway.

              3. The original Outback commercials where it was kicking the shit out of Explorers and the like in the real world were awesome.

                The new commercials, however, are marketed toward crunchy left coasters and soccer moms who probably never leave pavement anyways.

                1. Well, the Reunion commercial is kinda cool. The guy and the blonde exchange knowing looks at the reunion, both remembering some camping trip together. Tag line: you never forget your first Subaru. Payoff: he’s still got that first Subaru that he and the blonde frolicked in, but his hot brunette wife has no idea.

              4. Easy now. I’ve got an old V70R. And just today saw an S60 with a “who is john galt?” plate frame.

            2. That’s Lesbaru, thank you.

        2. Only a very tiny few uber-liberal gals who happen to be smart look like Kristen Powers… Or Scarlett Johannson, if dumb.

        3. Is it the liberal that causes the ugly or the ugly that causes the liberal?

          Does being a liberal have something to do with low frequency of sexual contact with a penis?

          1. I think you might be onto something. These women grow up as the smart homely girls that never get any dates. So they grow up to take their revenge by demanding control of everyone’s lives.

          2. A lot of liberal politicians come out of academia. Which makes it a two-fold hit: Women are usually older when they leave academia, preferring the cushy “office job” of teaching and the extremely generous benefits package during their child-bearing/raising years and the unfortunate fact that women rise through the ranks of academia faster if they are unattractive or just plain. It’s seen as a sign of intellectual seriousness. So plain women in their late-40s to early-60s; not an attractive demographic.

        4. Why are all conservatives so fucking painfully stupid, fuckable or not?

          1. Well Tony, being stupid, you do know stupid. So I guess you do speak with some authority on that.

            1. He’s too stupid to speak from authority, John.

              Government bureaucrat employment application:

              “If you can fill this space (name), you’re hired!”

          2. well tony, true conservatives have only been on earth like 5k yrs to gain knowledge. give em a chance to ketchup

              1. By OO’s standards? Yes. By human standards? No.

          3. Dunno. Why don’t you go ask some conservatives?

        5. Why are liberal women always the latter?

          I don’t buy your narrative. Can’t get more liberal than Susan Sarandon, for instance.

          1. I was speaking about ones actually in politics. Hollywood starlets are not what I am talking about.

            1. Then please point me to the “hot” conservative politicians. I just don’t buy your narrative.

              1. I didn’t say conservative politicians were hot. I said liberal women in politics tend to be burn victim ugly. The list of such women is long and distinguished. They are never seem to be even average looking. They always, especially the real schoolmarm types like Warren tend to be bone dog homely.

                1. I didn’t say conservative politicians were hot.

                  Fair enough, but then your statement has an extra adjective in it. You don’t need “liberal” since you aren’t comparing them to non-liberals.

                  I said liberal women in politics tend to be burn victim ugly. The list of such women is long and distinguished. They are never seem to be even average looking.

                  On average, they are average looking. You are trying too hard.

              2. Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann and Christine O’Donnell are just a few conservative politicians who, for the most part, are easy on the eyes.

            2. Elizabeth Warren 62 years old. I think she looks fine. Why do you types obsess on this issue? You do realize how sexist it is don’t you? I somehow doubt you’re a model of human perfection.

              1. She doesn’t look fine. She doesn’t even look average. And that doesn’t mean she is unfit for office. Her stupidity does that. But it is very odd that so many homely women in public life are so liberal.

                1. Not really. Liberal politicians tend to come from academia. Conservative politicians tend to come from spokesmodel school. That’s why there might be a difference.

                  1. Liberal politicians tend to come from academia.

                    No they don’t. They’re mostly lawyers, just like most conservative politicians.

                2. It’s bizarre to watch a bunch of conservative creeps attack grandmothers over their looks.

                  1. There’s only one woman for John. And she may or may not be running for president.

              2. Elizabeth Warren 62 years old. I think she looks fine.

                There’s a good reason to think you’re not the best judge of female attractiveness.

            3. Hollywood, fashion, music, and other industries that capitalize on hotness are hostile to conservatives, so hot conservative women that would otherwise go into acting or modeling instead go into politics or Fox News. That’s my theory, anyway.

              1. That is actually not a bad theory cynical.

              2. The vast majority of attractive women are not in showbusiness or modeling.

              3. Lots of attractive women on Fox News. I’m that’s part of its high ratings.

  2. Dem Poll: Obama Dragging Down His Own Party
    http://hotlineoncall.nationalj…..-obama.php

    One of the Democratic party’s leading pollsters released a survey of 60 Republican-held battleground districts today painting an ominous picture for Congressional Democrats in 2012. The poll shows Democratic House candidates faring worse than they did in the 2010 midterms, being dragged down by an unpopular president who would lose to both Texas Gov. Rick Perry and Mitt Romney. Pollster Stan Greenberg released the poll with some sugary spin for Democrats, downplaying the results by arguing that the president’s jobs plan will improve the party’s fortunes.

    1. You know what the Dems could do to fuck up the GOP? Run Hillary instead of BO. The GOP is getting pretty damned cocky about their chances in the general election (Romney in particular made a snide remark about anyone on the stage being able to beat Obama) based solely on Obama’s weakness, rather than any of their candidates’ strengths.

      It would be tricky to make the switch without pissing off black voters, but it could be done.

      1. I don’t see how. For it to have any hope of running, you would have to have BO totally on board. And with his ego, I doubt that would happen. And even if you did it well and didn’t alienate the black vote, you would demoralize it and greatly reduce black turnout. That would be a complete disaster not just at the national level but all up and down the ticket.

        1. Plus, Michelle won’t want to give up Air Force One and all those vacations.

          1. BO will be an extraordinarily wealthy man for the rest of his life, regardless of what happens. He’d probably make more money during the next four years if he wasn’t president.

            1. It’s not just the money, it’s the status.

      2. Did he say anyone could beat Obama, or anyone would be a better President than Obama?

        1. He said the latter.

          1. I believe he said both at different times.

      3. There’s still time for Hillary to get into the GOP primary.

      4. The replacement of Torricelli with Lautenberg in NJ would be the model, except maybe throw in a tragic illness to keep the base in line. The dems are good at this. Spread some money around, and it would work.

      5. You know what the Dems could do to fuck up the GOP? Run Hillary instead of BO.

        Fantastic idea.

        Alienating black voters would finally kill the socialist party.

      6. “Mr. Johnson? There’s a Mr. Oswald on Line 2, says something about how he can guarantee a Democratic victory in 1964?”

        Not that I’m advocating this in any way, shape, or form. (For one thing, we’d never hear the end of shit like “His brilliance was cut down in its prime.”) But it does seem he’d make a much better martyr than he has as a President so far. And that is a way to seal up the Presidency for the Dems for another four years, without the pesky necessity of asking the country’s first black President to step down.

        How is he polling among Hispanics? I mean, it’s certain that 99%+ of the black vote is still going to vote for him, but will enough Dem-leaning Hispanics come out to give him the nod, even considering the abysmal economy?

        1. But it does seem he’d make a much better martyr than he has as a President so far. And that is a way to seal up the Presidency for the Dems for another four years, without the pesky necessity of asking the country’s first black President to step down.

          God forbid this should happen, for a multitude of reasons. Not just because it would be awful in and of itself, but also because the Milennials would be so traumatized by it, they’d spend their entire adulthoods trying to find “the next Barack Obama” the way the Boomers did after Kennedy was killed.

          Obama’s already worshipped on Kennedy-like levels, we certainly don’t need to come full circle with that shit. The Milennials already have enough personal mental and emotional dysfunctions and complexes without adding a generationally-defining one to the mix.

    2. God does have a sense of humor. To think of all the bullshit cult of personality that happened in 2008 and then how just four years later the focus of that cult is going to destroy them is right out of a Greek Tragedy.

      1. Run Hillary as Veep. (You can thank me later, DNC.)

        1. What drug cocktail are you planning to put Hillary on to make her agree with that?

          1. I can help you there. For my usual fee, of course.

            1. Three 18 year old interns?

          2. Hillary can always get sworn in as Veep and then Vince Foster the big O.

          3. Why wouldn’t she take it?
            If Obama/Clinton loses, it was Obama’s fault. No harm done. If they win, she’s set for the 2016 run.

            1. Oh — and first woman VP! A place in the history books!!!!

            2. She’s already set for a 2016 run. Being VP doesn’t help her at all.

              Technically she’s said she won’t run in 2016 though.

              1. In fact, being Obama’s VP would be a problem since she’d be more closely associated with what would be another four years of economic disaster.

              2. …and the Clintons never lie…

            3. She might take it, but why would Obama want her there? He’d have to hire food tasters.

          4. That’s she’s spent 4 years making unsavory contacts around the globe that could prove useful for political aspirations?

      2. I think the destruction began to manifest as early as 2010, don’t you?

        1. Oh yes. And what is funny is that after the worst election defeat since the civil war, they didn’t change course or learn anything. You would have thought 2010 would have put the fear of God into them. But they really do seem to have gone mad.

          1. I blame Bush. Everyone went a little nuts back then. Some were permanently scarred.

          2. They were still giddy in love with Obama, and he took them right off a cliff.

          3. It’s our moment … um.

          4. There was nothing they could do after 2010.

            The Congress is a perfect deadlock now:

            Nothing the Tea Party wants can get through the Senate. Nothing anyone else wants can get through the House.

            It’s a marvel of engineering, actually.

            If Obama had tried to pivot right Clinton-style his own people in the Senate would have stopped him cold.

            1. “If Obama had tried to pivot right Clinton-style his own people in the Senate would have stopped him cold.”

              And that is pretty mad isn’t it? If Obama had made a deal with the House Republicans that actually cut spending and reduced the deficit, he would cut the legs out from under the entire Republican Party. He would have also given them partial ownership of the economy. It would have been just like Bill Clinton in 1995. After he signed welfare reform and agreed to spending cuts, the Republicans had no reason to run beyond “where is the outrage” over Clinton’s various sleaze that most people didn’t care about. If the Democrats had actually compromised and given the Republicans some of what they wanted, the Republicans would have been left running on Solyandra and Gunwalker. Good luck with that.

              1. I dunno. Sure, Solyndra is typical Washington corruption, but Gunwalker is a little more serious than a blowjob, and it’s a scandal that’s already getting Americans killed. It’s the kind of thing that, if we didn’t already know it was true, would be dismissed as a paranoid fantasy.

            2. ALso their control of media bit them on this by constantly reassuring them that everything was trending well- the economy was recoverying, Obama was popular and beloved by the independents. Dogs and cats…

            3. If Obama had tried to pivot right Clinton-style his own people in the Senate would have stopped him cold.

              Harry and Chuck and Dick might have squealed like stuck pigs, but there are enough red state Dems in the Senate up for reelection in 2012 to give a reformed BO a majority in the Senate if he has the GOP on board.

              I don’t see the hard left Dems obstructing the first black president’s agenda on cloture votes either.

              1. I don’t remember the left squealin’ that much over Clinton. But my interest in politics back then was close to zero.

                1. The left’s discontent with Clinton is why Nader got so many votes in 2000.

                  1. ah… as I said, my interest in politics was near zero. Gawd, I miss those days.

  3. Did the GOP debate audience boo a gay soldier last night? No, one person did.

    That person? Rick Santorum.

    1. I think he gets off on booing, which makes it a sexual activity, which disqualifies him from military service.

      1. And from Catholicism, if the activity doesn’t produce another little Catholic.

        1. A little gratuitous, don’t you think?

          1. You’re talking to a former altar boy here.

            1. That’s better.

        2. Luckily I am very much a submissive, so his booing my lady parts really turns me on.

  4. Santorum thanking a gay for his service would be too rich.

    Bank of America is looking to dump $880 million in commercial real estate–at a discount!

    Is that like the “$79 value” cutting board the infomercial people give you for free when you purchase a set of knives?

    1. That is what they need to do. Sell the shit and get it back into productive use and off of their books. Nothing is worse than assets going unused sitting in foreclosure.

      1. Yes, of course. I just question whether it’s really worth $880M if they can’t sell it for $880M.

        1. I bet they are lucky to get half that.

          1. Maybe the feds will buy it at face value.

            1. Maybe the feds will buy it at twice face value.

              Stimulus, don’t ya know.

              1. invoice it as muffins and they will.

          2. There is a good chance that if BankAmerica is desperate enough to start dumping portfolio RE that it will set off a panic.

            All the banks have been trying to hold on to as much crap as possible to keep prices up. But none of them can afford to be the last to know that plan has been abandoned. The last guy to sell will make the bottom, and no one wants to make the bottom.

            The European banks are going to have the same issue with sovereign debt.

            1. That is probably about right. But really though isn’t it a question of when the panic hits not if?

              1. You can say that again.

            2. That is probably about right. But really though isn’t it a question of when the panic hits not if?

  5. …set to face off yet again over a stopgap measure that would keep the government running.

    Once again getting libertarian hopes up across the land.

  6. Military Struggles to Find Helium for Spy Blimp Surge By Dawn Lim and Noah Shachtman September 22, 2011|6:30 am

    The U.S. military is sending so many spy blimps to Afghanistan that industry is scrambling to supply helium and “cannot keep up with the increased demand” for the containers that hold the gas.

    That’s according to documents from the Defense Logistics Agency, the Pentagon office responsible for keeping vital supplies flowing to the warzone.

    With their ability to stay in the air for days at a time ? and hold more spy gear than any drone ? aerostats and airships are quickly becoming surveillance tools of choice in the Afghan War. The military carried out three aerostat surges between last fall and this summer; several dozen are deployed in Afghanistan now. But really, that’s just a scene-setter. Early next year, the U.S. military is planning to send not one, but two “freakishly large” airships to the skies above Afghanistan.

    http://www.wired.com/dangerroo…..imp-surge/

    1. use the hot air fm the gop debatez !

    2. Fucking zepplins. I hate them so much.

      1. We know everyone is sick of Stairway, but WTF?!

        1. Yo! What about me??

          1. ^^Nice work in Them Crooked Vultures!

          2. I believe you were the John still capable of collaborating on a H&R comment.

    3. Either that or they’re trying to raise the cost of the Ron Paul Blimp for 2012.

    4. And of course part of the problem is Congress back in ’96 ordering by law that helium be sold for less than what market scarcity would actually charge. I read somewhere that if the free market were actually allowed to function a child’s balloon would cost about $100, IIRC.

  7. The FEMA debate is really a great example of how nuts we have become. I will even grant that there is a role for FEMA. When a hurricane or an earthquake or some other big disaster hits and the locals are totally overwhelmed, there is a place for the Feds to coordinate emergency assistance to that area. Thus it is called “Emergency Management Agency”. But there is no emergency now. FEMA should be out of business right now or off training and planning for the next one. But no they are not doing that. Instead, FEMA has become a one stop shop for pork, graft and welfare. WTF is the federal government doing rebuilding every town that gets wiped out by a tornado? Don’t those people have insurance? In 2006 and maybe now for all I know, they were still running FEMA operations on the Gulf Coast for the 2004 hurricane season. Two years later, they were still down there handing out money.

    And now we are having a debate about FEMA. And from listening the media you would think this is all perfectly normal and the evil Republicans want to make Americans die on their roofs in a flood.

    1. Let me guess, FEMA comes under the general welfare clause?

      1. Yes it does. It is not unconstitutional. It is just out of control.

        1. Why not give the government’s role in disaster management to the Reserves / NG / Corps of Engineers?

          Oh wait, that would mean we’d need them in country. Never mind.

          1. They play a big role. The problem is that the “Reserves” really don’t exist in units that you can send places. They really are individuals that augment the active duty. The Guard is self contained units. But they belong to the states. You would have to federalize them to fulfill FEMA’s role.

            The reality is that the states could do everything FEMA does via state compacts. The only reason they tolerate FEMA is because of the money they bring.

        2. Davey Crocket would like a word with you.

        3. Having not yet succeeded in hitting on an opportunity, I send you a part of it in a newspaper, which broaches a new Constitutional doctrine of vast consequence, and demanding the serious attention of the public. I consider it myself as subverting the fundamental and characteristic principle of the Government; as contrary to the true and fair, as well as the received construction, and as bidding defiance to the sense in which the Constitution is known to have been proposed, advocated, and adopted. If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions. It is to be remarked that the phrase out of which this doctrine is elaborated is copied from the old Articles of Confederation, where it was always understood as nothing more than a general caption to the specified powers.

      2. Actually, it would be very easy to parcel out a lot of what FEMA does to various cleanly delineated powers.

        Their flood shit comes under control of internal waters.

        Their public infrastructure repair stuff comes under defense and/or post roads.

        It’s just the direct aid to individuals that is constitutionally problematic.

    2. I said EPA, not FEMA!

      1. mr caine then said he’d re-build the EPA not eliminate it.

    3. Dude, building secret internment camps isn’t cheap.

    4. WTF is the federal government doing rebuilding every town that gets wiped out by a tornado? Don’t those people have insurance?

      John, my area in northwestern NJ was hit pretty hard by Hurricane Irene, and then subsequently by 6 days of heavy duty rain. I don’t live in a flood zone so flood insurance is not required for home purchase – ergo, most do not have it. We only got 4 inches of water in our basement and no damage to our belongings or appliances (thankfully). My neighbor’s house is only 8 feet off ours, and he got over 4 FEET of water in his basement. His stuff was trashed. His insurance company rejected his claim, telling him that FEMA would provide assistance instead since this was an “emergency” and not a run-of-the-mill damage occurrence.

      I think that insurance companies know they won’t have to pay out on policies since FEMA will cover the costs if the insurance company rejects you. They win, FEMA comes in to save the day, and if you’re lucky, you get money inside of a year’s time to repair, rebuild, or replace what you lost.

      1. That is an interesting angle. I never thought about it. But you are right, FEMA is just a huge payoff to the insurance companies.

      2. “”FEMA comes in to save the day, “”

        Does FEMA give you money, or offer low intrest loans?

  8. Majority in U.S. Continues to Distrust the Media, Perceive Bias
    http://www.gallup.com/poll/149…..-Bias.aspx

    The majority of Americans (60%) also continue to perceive bias, with 47% saying the media are too liberal and 13% saying they are too conservative, on par with what Gallup found last year

  9. Texas Tolerance

    Quite the progressive state, no?

    1. If I was a teacher, I would not be tolerant of mouthy teenaged bigots in my class either. But then again I wouldn’t be bringing up irrelevant topics in a vain attempt to indoctrinate my students with my politics either… WTF.

  10. OwlGore claims 8 million viewers watched his 24hr infomercial.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..7-000.html

    Real figure is closer to 17,000.

    1. The Times Atlas offered to do a visual representation of the viewership.

    2. Who were those people? I think Ron Paul is a good guy, but if he gave a 24 hour infomercial on the Fed and the gold standard could even the people on this board watch it?

      1. It was actually a 1hr infomercial repeated 24 times.

        1. Ok. I thought it was Al Gore droning on like Jerry Lewis at the MDA telethon.

      2. Wait until a Reason editor critiques Ron Paul, then ask if the people on this board would watch it.

    3. From TFA:

      Despite Gore successfully getting speakers including Renee Zellweger to make appearances,…

      Ok, is there actually a Renee Zellweger that I haven’t heard of who is a prominent climate scientist? Because the only one I have heard of is an actress who’s biography reveals absolutely no sign that she could possibly add anything useful to a discussion on Climate Change?

      I mean, seriously, was the Daily Mail unable to find anyone on Al Gore’s speakers list to mention that was more notable or relevant than her her? I mean, were there no actual…ummm…scientists in the group?

  11. Bank of America is looking to dump $880 million in commercial real estate–at a discount!

    I, for one, can’t wait to see who buys, but ultimately can’t pay, for that real estate!

  12. Is The Light Bulb Ban A Bright Idea?
    http://www.popularmechanics.co…..1?click=pp

    What was initially perceived as a mildly controversial step forward for energy efficiency has since faced growing criticism, morphing into a potent symbol of nanny-state interventionism. Politicians are starting to notice, introducing legislative countermeasures at both the state and federal levels. While those antiban bills swirl around in committee, another technology that has been hailed as the next step in lighting for well over two decades is on track for an abrupt coming-of-age. Compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs), enthusiastically touted by industry advocates and environmentalists, are accused by critics of being aesthetically inferior, impractical?and even dangerous. As usual, when technology intersects with political debate, the ratio of rhetoric to science is woefully out of whack.

    1. I decided the world had gone mad when the international symbol for a good idea was outlawed.

      I will be legally changing my name to Wonko the Sane.

    2. I’ve been stocking up 75w bulbs – have to start on the decorative ones as well.

      1. I have a small stock going on. I really have no need for 100W bulbs, but the 40W-75W are very useful.

        I do use a mix of CFLs and normal bulbs. CFLs are for basic ‘light’ while normal bulbs are better for reading and dimmers.

        1. “Normal” bulbs? No bias there, huh?

          Far more lumens of electrically-produced light in the world come from fluorescent bulbs than come from incandescents.

          1. What kind of bulbs do the red-light cameras use for flash?

            1. *spits coffee*

              Well played, CN.

          2. When I say the word “light bulb”, what springs to mind? A CFL or an “Edison-style” incandescent?

            A ‘normal’ (ha!) person would think of the incandescent.

          3. Far more lumens of electrically-produced light in the world come from fluorescent tubes than come from incandescents.

            Fixed that for you. Incandescents are still the norm for light ‘bulbs’.

      2. I’m stocking up on 150s for the lamps I read by. I’ll probably get a dozen or so.

    3. While most of the concerns of CFL-haters are just grumpy-old-mannisms, I do agree about the danger of putting a CFL in a fixture where kids are likely to break the bulb. And I obviously don’t think the feds have any authority to ban light bulbs.

      1. I started buying CFL bulbs with high hopes — saving energy/money, not having to haul out the ladder so often, yada yada.. But after using them a couple of years, I have come to the conclusion that they simply suck. They take way too long to warm up — especially in ceiling-mounted cans on cold days. My kids are up and dressed before the lights in their room are even providing good illumination.
        And they don’t last nearly as long as advertised, making them an (economically) inefficient choice.
        I’m betting on LED now. Hope springs eternal, and shit.

        1. God, yes. This.

          I actually CF for a lot of applications, but…

          The response time in the cold makes the useless for outdoor applications in any place that has more than three seasons.

          Plus they are nearly as bad if you let the inside temperature drop below sixty overnight as I generally do in the winter.

      2. The light is inferior. Otherwise I have no problems with CFLs, aside from the govermnet mandating that I buy them.

      3. Hopefully once LEDs get cheap, this whole issue goes away. Plus, we can past the use of point lighting for homes and start using illuminated strips and panels and other more creative things.

    4. Banning crtain types of technologies puts it into the realm of politics, and in the realm of politics rhetoric wins. Acknowledging that in some situations incandescants are clearly preferable downplays that those pushing for the ban in the first place put rhetoric over science.

    5. I’m still trying to figure out what’s wrong with NORMAL bulbs. I just don’t get it. In the realm of… everything else, it’s still my right to pay more to run a better product if I so choose. Right?

      1. Yes, unless the high priests in the Department of [insert ministry name here] decide otherwise.

      2. Resistive incandescent is a bloody inefficient way to generate light in the human visual spectrum.

        It’s only engineering advantage is that it is bog easy.

        ‘Course, in a free country that would be between you and your powerbill.

    6. “”Politicians are starting to notice, “”

      As if they are not the reason it exists.

  13. Mirrored motorcycle is almost stealth.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..oving.html

    1. Bob Arctor finally got rid of his car, I see.

    2. I’ll see your stealthcycle and raise you with the hopes of Olivia Wilde riding on the back of this:

      http://www.geek.com/articles/g…..-20110922/

      1. You had me at “Olivia Wilde riding”.

      2. Olivia Wilde gets to ride on a rusty banana bike with training wheels if she wants.

        1. You had me at Olivia Wilde riding on a rusty banana.

        2. How about Olivia Wilde riding Olivia Munn?

          1. Olivia Munn kissing a chick:

            http://www.starpulseonline.com…..a-munn.jpg

      3. The electric Tron Lightcycle is actually their second attempt at making one. The first ran on gasoline, so couldn’t be classed as a true replica. This second model can though, because it uses an electric motor.

        WTF? I going to go with neither being a true replica as none of them shit out a wall of colored light behind them that only disappears after they crash, and the inability to make perfect 90 degree angle turns.

        1. Yeah. Street-legality and physics eliminated the best features.

    3. Mirrored? Does it have anti-vampire potential?

      1. That whole no reflection thing is a myth perpetuated by vampires so they can hide in plain sight. Don’t be so naive Tim.

  14. Chief Kevin Hamilton said Wednesday the four officers would remain on leave as the FBI conducts a civil rights investigation and the Police Department does an internal probe.

    Yeah, either they’re culpable or they aren’t. This “paid leave” thing is bullshit. It’s been almost three months. They’d get less paid time off if they’d just given birth. Charge them, fire them or let them back on the job standing around listening to civilians beg for their life already. Dragging your feet hoping for things to blow over is no longer an option.

    1. Give them a desk job. I understand you can’t put them back out on the street with this hanging over their heads. But I can’t believe you couldn’t find something for them to do.

      1. All six officers involved in the Thomas incident remain on paid administrative leave. Unlike most Los Angeles County cities, Fullerton does not automatically suspend without pay officers charged with felony offenses, said department spokesman Sgt. Andrew Goodrich.

        Sounds like they need to give the two indicted gentlemen desk jobs as well.

      2. It’s a perk of the job.
        Murder is rewarded with a paid vacation, followed by a medal and a promotion once the press finds something else to focus on.

        1. “Murder is rewarded with a paid vacation”

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

    2. I think I’m ok with this, as long as thier salaries can be clawed back and thier pensions revoked if they are proven guilty.

      1. Sorry, Restoras, but any kind of extended paid leave is just more of the double standard.

        Nobody outside of government would get such a thing, so nobody in the Master Class should get it, either.

        1. Some pigs are more equal than others?

  15. Should North Korea Be Provided with Humanitarian Aid?
    http://www.aei.org/article/104175

    Why should Pyongyang–a government that seems to manage such tasks as building and testing atomic weapons and launching long-range ballistic missiles–be so manifestly incapable today of the basic task of feeding its own population? We must address, and convincingly answer, this fundamental question before we can even hope to craft a successful international strategy for redressing hunger in North Korea.

    1. Maybe because the North Korean government doesn’t view feeding it’s people as a priority. Nuclear bombs are much more useful then starving peasants.

      1. Starving peasants can always breed more starving peasants. Nuclear weapons don’t grow out of a rice patty, dammit.

        Go Juche or go home, Yankee imperialist running dog swine. I laugh as your exploitative capitalist ways crash around you and eagerly await the people’s revolution which will assuredly follow.

      2. You’re assumming that any government is capable of “feeding its people”. I don’t know about you, but I imagine that I’d eat just fine without the government.

    2. drought followed by flooding

      1. They have more natural disasters affecting farming in that country than anywhere else I can think of. Poor, unlucky bastards.

    3. Why should Pyongyang […]be so manifestly incapable today of the basic task of feeding its own population?

      Maybe because they haven’t tried Obama’s wonderful stimulus programs that create or save jobs as if by magic.

      1. the stim was ~40% tax cutz which ur forced to also oppose

        1. i uzd my tax cutz to git an anal vibratr.

          my sistr likez it to

  16. A cooking blog trying to create the dishes described in A Song Of Ice And Fire.

    The Inn At The Crossroads

    1. Leaches? No thanks.

      1. I take it back. No sign of Lamprey Pie. But the honeyed locusts certainly are gross.

        1. Picky picky. Strong Belwas seemed to like them.

          1. Strong Belwas wants liver and onions! Liver and onions make you strong!

          2. I must admit I find his culinary digressions amusing amidst all that betrayal, murdering, maiming, dragon flaming and plague raging.

            1. Then you have his vivid descriptions of diarrhea…

            2. One look at Mr. Martin will tell you he takes his food seriously.

              What’s the problem with lamprey pie? I thought lampreys were just eels…

                1. That is like a mini sand worm from Dune. If you eat that, do you get to see the future if you don’t die?

                2. Not that eels look so much better, but OK, that looks kind of nasty….

                  1. It looks like an extremely angry penis demon.

                    1. I saw one in person underwater once, during a SCUBA lesson. They move FAST and that maw with the yellow teeth… yuck. It actually hit me square on the chest, but it didn’t like the wetsuit’s taste so it was gone just as fast.

                    2. A lamprey that is, not SF’s wang.

          3. Would you include Hizdahr’s secret ingrediant?

  17. The third consecutive summer of non-recovery is over; the fall of America continues on.

    1. Leaders of the world’s leading economies…

      Shit like that just pisses me off.
      Economies don’t have leaders. Governments do, but economies don’t. Economies are millions of transactions between millions of individuals. Nobody can “lead” that. They can fuck it up by taking away money from people and then giving it to politically connected industries, or distort the market by encouraging people to buy politically correct goods. But lead?

      Bullshit.

      1. Agree. Just like folks who talk about the President “running the country”.

      2. Not only that, but most governments don’t have leaders either. Just because you’re an elected representative, functionary, bureaucrat, of staffer, doesn’t actually make you a leader.

        1. True. Governments are designed to function. Those called “leaders” are really more like “builders” who create more machinery of government, but don’t actually lead.

      3. Whatever happened to the phrase “captains of industry”?

        1. It was replaced with “greedy capitalist pigs”.

        2. Hope and change demoted them to 1st & 2nd lieutenants of industry, and that’s just awkward to write.

          1. Hope and change demoted them to 1st & 2nd lieutenants of industry, and that’s just awkward to write.

            Nice!

          2. If they’re part of the “prison-industrial complex” are they warrant officers of industry?

            1. No one outside the military will get this. It is still a good one.

              1. I’m not military and I got it.

    1. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is concerned that Westchester County is too white and even though the county is outpacing the schedule to fulfill a 2009 settlement with HUD ? in which the county agreed to spend over $50 million on 750 new subsidized housing units to be provided to minorities via a lottery system (630 of which had to be built in neighborhoods with less than 3 percent African-American and 7 percent Latino populations) ? HUD is ordering the county to do more.

      With all due respect, WTF?

      Why isn’t HUD ordering, say, Chinatown to import more Blacks?

      1. It is absolutely outrageous. Although there is a bit of irony seeing a bunch of limousine liberals in Westchester country actually being subject to some of the policies they have been sticking the rest of the country with.

        1. so westchester lub-rahls set policy for the country?

          1. Write in English rather than molespeak and perhaps we can discuss these things. As it is, I have no idea what you are talking about.

            1. “…Westchester country actually being subject to some of the policies they have been sticking the rest of the country with.”
              _
              You wrote that john. explain how westchester lub-rahls set policy for “the rest of the country”

              1. lub-rahls

                That is not any word I recognize. Again, write in English. It is kind of the common language in this country.

                1. John,

                  He can write that in Sanskrit for all you could care. Don’t feed the troll.

                  1. I am not feeding him. I am training him.

            2. Uh, John, you don’t have a leg to stand on when it comes to criticizing the grammar or clarity of other posters. But thanks for taking your meds today.

              1. I have a lot of legs to stand on. The odd misspelled word is a lot different than the molespeak double asshole inflicts upon us.

                1. John’s right, you know.

                  1. And he’s gotten much better. I guess he finally got his meds tweaked.

                  2. He’s also found the absolutely best way there is to perpetuate the neanderthalic grunting from O2.

                    1. watch it – humans had inter-species sex w neanderthrals…which produced wingnutz

                    2. Again O2, no one but you knows what your imaginary words mean. W is not a word. Nutz is not a word. Try again and maybe we can respond.

                    3. deal w ti grampz

                2. John’s got like five legs.

            3. I live in Westchester County in an uber-liberal enclave. It is the most hypocritical place I’ve ever encountered.

              1. Shiiit, and you’ve probably been to D.C.

          2. so john yet again posts mindless radio entertainer type comments as if they make. yesterday writing that the french support palestinians by BLOCKING palestinian statehood & today writing that weschester lub-rahls set policy for the rest of the country. makes absolutely no sense

            1. Again, lub rals is not a word. So what you are writing makes no sense. So no one can understand you or respond to you. Try again and write in English.

              1. take ur meds grampz

    1. hmmm… National Enquirer. They could be right, like the Edwards story.

      1. Also, Todd’s the real mother of Baby Trig.

        1. Ha ha, I had to read this twice.

    2. providing John a chance to make his move.

      I keed, I keed!

      1. You got it baby. What is funny is the ridiculous double standard they will apply to her if it did happen. Tons of male politicians are divorced. Many of them, like Newt Gingrich, under really nasty circumstances. And no one cares. But if Palin gets divorced it would prove she was no good no class slut the media always said she was.

        1. wingnutz persecution complex

          1. Once again, English. It is a beautiful language. It is the language of Shakespeare and Yeats. Try it. No one can talk to you if you don’t speak the common tongue.

            1. like ur commonisms ?

              1. Keeeeeeee-riced you are annoying.

            2. John, methinks thou’rt nought but a silly prig for thy cavils. Seest thou not how vexed snobbish the tongue of thy beloved Shakespeare striketh the ear if assumed by writers of these degenerate days?

              1. ‘Twas brilliant, this. A sonnet for the eyes. Verily, thou dost bring into this foetid abyss a brave ray of the sun’s first light to shine our wat back to Reason.

    3. It wouldn’t be all that surprising, IMO. There’s a lot of pressure on the Palins from various sources, some of it gratuitously inflicted on them, and I think at some point even a loyal partner might decide he’d had enough. (Bearing in mind I have no idea if this news story is true, just that I think Todd Palin must have the patience of a saint in general.)

      1. It very well may be true. I don’t know. But even if it is, so what?

  18. http://thehill.com/homenews/ho…..nor-rangel

    Serial tax cheat Charlie Rangel back in the club. Disgusting.

    1. Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) lauded his “long and highly decorated checkered service”

      1. Official absolution for the sin of getting caught.

  19. When does Real Steel open?

    It’s going to…rock…and… sock

    1. Hasn’t that movie already been done?
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6Y9FwBSKdI

    2. The first time I saw an ad for it I stopped to watch the whole thing just waiting to confirm that they had made a movie called “Rock ’em Sock ’em Robots.” I don’t know if I was disappointed.

    1. When there’s a bulletproof trenchcoat for less than $200 dollars, I’m buying. Though I imagine it will get me on a list somewhere.

  20. OT: so I went and bought a Kindle. Oddly enough, I haven’t bought a single book for it. I’ve been busy enjoying the “public domain” books instead.
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/searc….._15=public domain&p_36=0-0&redirect=true

    That aside, any recommendations for eBooks? I still prefer the ol’ paperback, but the Kindle is a good thing to have around for vacationing.

    1. How is web based email access thru the built in browser?

      1. Web browsing on the Kindle is crap. Everything else is awesome. Like everyone told me I would, I actually read more now that I’ve got one.

      2. I would call it functional, but not enjoyable. If you look at it the right way you can think of it as a perk.

        1. I’m reading the Song of Ice and Fire. Bout a quarter into book 3 when my Kindle dies. First time I’ve ever run the battery down.

          Anyone who reads should own one. Especially if you read long books that weigh a lot. Also, use Calibre to manage your library it’s like iTunes for books. Very helpful.

    2. Probably about a hundred of the books I have (maybe 120 total) on the Kindle are free ones. Amazon occasionally offers non-public domain books for free or at a hefty discount, too.

      Of what I’ve paid for, I have yet to pay full price for anything. Lately, I’ve been buying The Destroyer novels for $0.99 each. Those are a fun read.

    3. Amazon also offers free books, not just public domain. Sometimes things like the first book in a series to get you hooked. They also offer discounts on a bunch of things.

      I don’t know if you have seen this, and this is a really ugly link but it goes to their top 100 free and top 100 paid books.

      http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sel…..QCCVJ5H44Q

      1. That free list looks like it would destroy more brain cells than five minutes of huffing carbon monoxide.

        1. It has almost all of PG Wodehouse’s early stuff on it. Some of his later stuff is not even available for sale in a Kindle version in the US unfortunately.

          Copyright issues between the US and the UK apparently.

          I’m now sure I’m in the market for an ereader. I don’t want to commit before I convinced myself which one is the best.

      2. Lots of “chick lit” on that list, but I’ll take a look.

        1. It changes ever now and again. I got a good copy of The Count of Monte Cristo off of that list (public domain but well-formatted public domain).

          1. yep – just downloaded The Count of Monte Cristo.

            1. One of my favorite novels. Love that Dumas!

              1. I’ve never actually read it – but the Kindle is a chance for me to revisit the classics that I never had time for before.

          2. Is it the unabridged version.

            I bought anabridged version a wahile ago. Luckily it was at a used bookstore so I’,m not out that much.

            Up till the time I saw the fine print I wasn’t aware that this was an issue for The Count of Monte Cristo.

    4. There’s quite a few free eBooks up on Mises.org in the ePub format. There’s also Project Gutenburg if you want a big pile of free books.

    5. Matt Welch would no doubt appreciate it if you subscribed to the Kindle version of reason.

      1. You can buy the book for Kindle, too.

        1. What book? Where would I have seen a book written by Matt Welch advertised?

  21. “I don’t care if you’re running for dog-catcher,” said LaSalvia. “If a soldier asks you a question, the first thing out of your mouth is: ‘I thank you for your service.'”

    That is pro forma, politically-correct twaddle. That phrase has taken on all of the sincerity of “Have a nice day.” (I’m a VN vet, FWIW.)

    1. If a soldier asks you a question, the first thing out of your mouth is: ‘I thank you for your service.'”

      Barf.

      The first thing out of your mouth should be a concise, accurate, truthful answer.

      Which I have no doubt is what the soldier would prefer, as opposed to be greased up by a smarmy reptile.

      1. If you don’t want to be greased up by a smarmy reptile why would you ask Rick Santorum a question?

        1. Good point.

    2. I am so glad I’m not the only one. I am tired of having what I’m doing interrupted by someone coming up to me wanting to shake my hand or hug me. As much as I hate whining about people being nice to me just because of my profession, it’s been going on for 10 years. There are some days I actually go home to change out of my uniform before I go by the grocer for milk, even though I pass right by the store on my way home.

      I appreciate the sentiment, I really do. And I’d much rather have people supportive or ambivalent over the alternatives, but, eesh… I just want to walk in and out of the gas station like everyone else.

      1. I agree. I hate that. It always made me uncomfortable. Once in a while I will see some lower enlisted in an airport obviously going somewhere I don’t want to go and I will quietly pick up their check. But I never make a public scene or bother them.

        1. We’ve got a training base here in town, so you see groups of soldiers getting lunch pretty regularly.

          I’ve picked up some lunch checks, but always anonymously. I can tell they’re good kids, because they generally look a little embarrassed. But I know what they’re making.

          Applause for groups of soldiers coming home from overseas? Every time. You see it quite a bit at DFW.

          Other than that? Just fellow citizens, going about their business.

          1. I get hugs and voiced thanks from people every now and again for my work in keeping the economy alive, despite our government’s best efforts to kill it.

    3. That is pro forma, politically-correct twaddle.

      I thought the same thing; PC run amok.

  22. http://latimesblogs.latimes.co…..-ohio.html

    The intercontinental railroad!!

    1. Liberals just want to play with choo-choo trains. Oh, those kids! Takes me back when…

      1. I didn’t know we built a railroad to Siberia or Europe. Wow. The things the great BO teaches you.

    2. THE PRESIDENT: Hello, Cincinnati! (Applause.) Well, it is good to see all of you. It is good to be back in Cincinnati. (Applause.) I have to say I drove by the Bengals’ practice — (laughter.) And I was scouting out some plays in case they play the Bears — (laughter.) Did I hear somebody boo the Bears?

      “Hello, [city name]! It’s great to be back here in the great city of [city name]! I just flew in, and boy, are my arms tired! Say, how about [local sports team]?”

      The insincerity, it burns.

      1. But he is a great speaker you know.

        1. I wonder: Does the audience know how much he despises them?

          1. “Finally, the Rock haaaaaaaaas come back…to Cincinnati.” :::People’s Eyebrow:::

          2. Probably not. Anyone smart enough to realize that wouldn’t go to one of his speeches.

      2. I’m surprised the prez didn’t comment on the Bengals first place record for scoring…pot arrests.

      3. LOL, it reminds me of that episode of The Simpsons where Bart went to a Spinal Tap concert and the guitarist did that: “…nobody rocks like (looks at sign taped to the back of his guitar) Springfield!”

    3. So how can we now sit back and let China build the best railroads?

      Jesus. He needs to tell his writers tofollow the news.

      1. You sugarfreed the link. I thought we eradicated the virus that causes that. I guess we may have a new epidemic on the rise.

        1. Crap. I’m pretty good about using preview, but I got in a rush.

      2. Heh, I thought that Obama was going to bring an end to the smug mindless nationalism of this country. I mean, really, trying to frighten us with the Chinese? It’s a replay of Dr Strangelove-type Cold War bullshit.

  23. The Real Elizabeth Warren

    She reminds me of the “you’re nothing without Leadership” crowd that drove me out of church an into agnosticism. One more bit of proof that a progressive loon is just an evangelical loon who has blown off all that God business.

    1. Pretty much. And actually if you go to the mainline Protestant Churches you will find plenty of progressive loons who still buy into the most misguided parts of the God business. It is a horrible combination.

      1. the most misguided parts of the God business

        I can’t help but wonder which parts those are.

        1. If you have a few hours sometime I will educate you. But you could always educate yourself. Start by reading Augustine and Aquinas (get a good abridged version of the Suma Theologica you don’t have to read the whole thing), then read Paul Johnson’s History of Christianity, and anything by N.T. Wright.

          After you have done that, we can talk.

          1. Are you morphing into Gary Gunnels right before our eyes? “Read a book before you embarrass yourself further!”

            1. What the hell are you talking about. I have read all of those books. And I would gladly talk to you about any of them. And they pretty my view of metaphysics and my distrust of organized religion. What is your problem Tulpa? Do people who actually read and think seriously about these issues make you uncomfortable?

              1. Notice the quote marks around Tulpa’s last sentence? They are key in understanding the meaning of written English.

          2. After you have done that, we can talk.

            We could have started talking sometime in the 80’s then. Do you have a point?

            1. Do you? If you want to know what parts of it I don’t like go read the books and it should be obvious or at least it would allow us to have an intelligent conversation about it.

              Now if you have something to say, say it. Otherwise making glib, smug comments like “I wonder what those are” like no one but you ever had a serious thought, is just wasting yours and my time.

              1. Do you?

                Yes. Telling me that you’ve read some basic texts doesn’t tell me which parts you find objectionable.

                If you want to know what parts of it I don’t like go read the books and it should be obvious or at least it would allow us to have an intelligent conversation about it.

                I have read those books. It is not obvious to me what YOU think are “the misguided parts of the GOD business.”

                I wonder, still what they are.

                Now if you have something to say, say it. Otherwise making glib, smug comments like “I wonder what those are” like no one but you ever had a serious thought, is just wasting yours and my time.

                You brought it up. Where is that serious thought?

                1. My though is just what it says. The people who run the mainline churches the worst parts of liberalism with the worst parts of organized religion. That speaks for itself. And you didn’t say “I wonder what those would be” to make a serious point. You did it to be your usual smug, concern trolling self. And it frankly wasn’t worth a serious response. If you want to give a serious response and explain why you think they don’t combine the worst parts of those feel free. Or if you want to make a point without being a concern troll you can do that too. But unless and until you are willing to do that, I will continue to give you the smart ass answers your points deserve.

                  1. Still not getting what you think the worst part of Christian theology is.

                    Me, it’s the part where you go to hell for not believing that Jesus is God and go to heaven if you do, no matter what else you do in life.

                    Not sure how that relates to progressive douchebags.

                    Maybe I would if this sentence had been written in English “My though is just what it says.” or this one ” And they pretty my view of metaphysics and my distrust of organized religion.”

                    1. Read the below post. The other problem with many organized religion is that they worship at the alter of government. Sorry, but if you think government is the answer to fixing this unfixable world, you missed the point.

                  2. You are so pleasant in the morning John.

                2. If you meant question seriously, the worst parts are the controlling, only we have the answers and you must join and do as we say. Yeah, I think organized religion is like all human endeavors profoundly flawed and doomed to fail. And I also believe that as human beings we are incapable of having the knowledge to know really what the greater good is. And therefore the greater good we try to accomplish the more evil we do. We just can’t help ourselves. That is the reason why the biggest evils are always perpetrated in the name of the highest and most noble goods, be that Christianity or Utopian Socialism or whatever.

                  1. That’s your serious point?

                    Maybe you need to read some more books on the protestant reformation.

          3. I think he was asking your opinion. To some of us all parts of this god business are equally misguided.

        2. I would also reccomend the Sickness Unto Death and the Brother’s Karamazov, particular the chapter on the teachings of the Elder Zosima. A little Plato or Platinus wouldn’t hurt either.

  24. Well, this is refreshingly shameless.

    Do Taxes Narrow The Wealth Gap?

    I thought it wasn’t about straight-up redistribution of wealth, but about fairness, right guys?

    1. We know the rich don’t pay their fair share because they’re rich.
      If they paid their fair share then they wouldn’t be rich.

  25. Did the GOP debate audience boo a gay soldier last night? No, one person did. Did Rick Santorum answer the question horribly? Yes, apparently, because he did not begin his answer with, “I thank you for your service.”

    Santorum would still be an asshole even if he did.

    1. It’s interesting how not overtly political sites like Gawker or BuzzFeed run with political slander/innuendo like that. The right does that, too, but I’m always surprised when media, businesses, or plain old citizens take up lies they know to be lies for a political purpose. Leave the lying to the professionals.

  26. Bank of America is looking to dump $880 million in commercial real estate–at a discount!

    I’ve always wanted to start a real estate investing company… Sounds like a good start for me!

    As long as they don’t mean dumping commercial real estate in down town Detroit….

    1. In the land of Detroit, where the shadows are.

      1. “where the shadows lie” /geek

  27. Angela Merkel is an unfuckable lard-arse.

  28. It’s bizarre to watch a bunch of conservative creeps attack grandmothers over their looks.

    Indeed.

    1. I find it a lot more bizarre that someone who believes in the dangerously stupid things Warren does is given so much influence and importance.

      1. And your response is to call her ugly?
        Sounds like a man without an argument.

        1. john’s usual wingnutism

          1. Again O2, no one knows what you mean when you use an invented language.

            1. u speak for all grampz?

            2. Obviously I need to pretty up my views by reading some theological texts.

              1. That is not a bad idea. But since you don’t seem to speak English and they are not written in your imaginary language, it is doubtful you would get much out of them.

                1. For all your bitching about others “not speaking [writing] English,” you seem to understand them just fine…

                  So, that leaves you with whiny posturing and bitchy grammar criticism.

                  1. So, that leaves you with whiny posturing and bitchy grammar criticism.

                    John and grammar have a very contentious relationship…but they both hate his “ex,” Spelling.

              2. Not sub-literate enough. D-.

            3. Don’t speak for me, asshole. I know what he meant.

        2. We have made lots of arguments about it. Read the threads. And yeah, she is a homely woman. Is no one allowed to point that out? And if you think she is smart make an argument that she is and defend her rather than your usual concern trolling.

          Clearly you don’t have an argument to defend her ideas or you wouldn’t be whining.

          1. Clearly you don’t have an argument to defend her ideas or you wouldn’t be whining.

            Why do I need to defend her ideas? They aren’t mine.

            1. Oh that is right. I forgot you have no ideas you will own up to. You just come on here and troll.

              1. The first time I heard the term “troll” it was when I first started posting on H&R using my given name (John).

                When it became apparent that I wasn’t you, the group was very nice to explain that I shouldn’t use the name John as there was a prolific “troll” named John that posted endless, useless conservative screeds.

                So I started using made up handles.

                True story.

                1. This was a LONG time ago.

          2. So your insightful contribution is that corporations should be able to freeload on society, and grandmothers ought to sexually arouse you.

            1. Re: Sockpupet,

              So your insightful contribution is that corporations should be able to freeload on society[…]

              You’re so funny when you speak without taking your thorazine, sockpuppet. It’s like listening to a drunk man ranting about how all women are sluts.

    2. We’re talking about the internet, right? All I can do is sigh.

      1. ;^)

        Of course internet and bizarre behavior go together, but the lameness factor is high with this one.

    3. Its not like we don’t mock the ugly men, either.

      Our contempt knows no bounds, after all.

      1. Exactly. We call Henry Waxman mole man. It is a tough room.

        1. So you only make fun of women and Jews.

          1. Re: mustard,

            So you only make fun of women and Jews.

            Not them only. Also, mimes.

          2. And blacks! Every chance we get!

            1. I really don’t mind the niggers and the chinks, but I can’t stand the Irish.

              1. I went to the park one day and discovered the sprinkler was racist.

                It kept repeating the same thing:
                chink chink chink chink chink spic nigger nigger nigger nigger

        2. A room full of internet tuff guyz.

          I think the term is “validation trolling.”

          Right guys…you’re with me…right?

      2. My rule, and I imagine others here have the same rule, is that I wouldn’t mock Henry Waxman’s hideous physiognomy if he weren’t an asshole. Since he is an asshole, it’s no holds barred.

        I also follow the rule that Howard Stern stated when asked why he never made fun of Chelsea Clinton’s appearance. Kids of public figures are off the table. It’s really hard, though, not to make an exception for Rick Santorum’s kids.

    4. Re: Neu Mejican,

      It’s bizarre to watch a bunch of conservative creeps attack [ugly and frightenly stupid liberal] grandmothers over their looks.

      Maybe not so bizarre once one elaborates on it.

  29. Why would BAC sell those loans off at a discount when Bennay will pay full price?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.