Reason Morning Links: Energy Department Restructured Solyndra's Loan, Prosecutors Say They Can Make Jared Loughner Sane, No One Gets Off the Terror Watch List

|

  • From the WSJ: "Solyndra's cash-flow problems in late 2010 had previously come to light but it was not known that the company technically defaulted on its loan and violated its agreement with the U.S. government."
  • Terror watch lists are forever, according to a trove of FOIA'd FBI documents: "Even a not-guilty verdict may not always be enough to get someone off the list, if agents maintain they still have 'reasonable suspicion' that the person might have ties to terrorism."
  • By a slight majority, Pennsylvania voters want to preserve the state's winner-take-all Electoral College system. 
  • DoD officials try to walk back a statement by Admiral Mike Mullen, in which he accused the Pakistani government of sponsoring violence against the U.S. 
  • Jared Loughner will be held for an additional eight months before his trial starts. A court psychologist says she can make him sane during that time
  • How to find the weirdest stuff on the Internet. 

New at Reason.tv: "How Housing Policy and Public Pensions are Bankrupting America"

Advertisement

NEXT: Off the Record

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. Morning.

  2. First.

    1. … or not.

  3. First, nice!

  4. I always thought Fark.com was a good starting place to look for the weirdest stuff on the internet.

    1. No, they get their stuff from reddit

      1. Fazed, but they are sporadic.

  5. Insurance costs spike, opening new Republican attacks on health law
    http://thehill.com/blogs/healt…..e-premiums

    Republicans seized on a new report showing a spike in insurance premiums to argue President Obama’s healthcare law has failed to reduce costs.

    The report from the Kaiser Family Foundation, which found that the cost of employer-provided family plans increased by 9 percent to an average of $15,073 in 2011, put the White House on defense a day after it became more likely that the Supreme Court will hear a challenge to the law before the 2012 election.

    1. Oops. Damn squirrels. Yeah, that’s it.

      George Clooney plays the President in new movie ‘Ides of March’

      Clooney’s Gov. Mike Morris is poised to take the Democratic nomination with a platform so uncompromisingly left-leaning it might make Fox News commentators burst into flames. He opposes the death penalty, foreign military intervention and even internal combustion engines and supports gay marriage, mandatory national volunteer service and higher taxes for the richest Americans.

      http://www.latimes.com/enterta…..2149.story

      1. “””mandatory national volunteer service””””‘

        Ah, yes the good old “mandatory” “volunteer”. Anyone who can put those two words together without laughing or crying is either stupid or insane.

        1. Freedom is slavery.

          1. “Arbeit macht frei”

        2. Ah, yes the good old “mandatory” “volunteer”. Anyone who can put those two words together without laughing or crying is either stupid or insane.

          It ranks right up there with “State-Based Free Market Approach.” Which, of course, belong nowhere near each other, much less the same ZIP code.

        3. Sadly, both McCain and Obama piad lip service to this idea. If anything, McCain was more in favor of it.

          If only there were some third party devoted to liberty . . .

      2. Why am I not surprised that Paul Giamatti is the antagonist?

        1. What the attractive, tall, dark and suave character is the hero? And the bald, frumpy, cranky, ginger is the villain? Say it ain’t so!

      3. He opposes the death penalty, foreign military intervention and even internal combustion engines and supports gay marriage, mandatory national volunteer service and higher taxes for the richest Americans.

        I can’t recall Obama coming out for national “volunteer” service, but everything else on this “hard-left” list is straight outta the O-dog’s playbook.

        1. Is the guy who killed Bin Ladin really against the death penalty and foreign intervention?

          1. What am I, chopped falafel?

          2. Oh, he was all about getting out of Iraq and Afghanistan during the campaign.

            I know I’ve seen something on Obama opposing the death penalty. He’s probably gone dark on it, publicly, at least, but like a good campus lefty, you know he’s agin’ it.

            1. gone dark on it

              RACIST!!!!!!one!!11!!

            2. No, he was all for Afghanistan. He criticized Bush for going into Iraq when Bush ‘should have been sending troops to Afghanistan’.

        2. “So when I’m President, I will set a goal for all American middle and high school students to perform 50 hours of service a year, and for all college students to perform 100 hours of service a year. This means that by the time you graduate college, you’ll have done 17 weeks of service.

          We’ll reach this goal in several ways. At the middle and high school level, we’ll make federal assistance conditional on school districts developing service programs, and give schools resources to offer new service opportunities. At the community level, we’ll develop public-private partnerships so students can serve more outside the classroom.” – Barack Obama

          Rahm Emanuel also talked about it during the campaign, and IIRC was clearer about how they wanted the “volunteer” service to be mandatory.

          This has has been a lefty wet dream for a while but they recognize that the idea is very unpopular. They tried to take an incremental step by sneaking a study into the Americorps renewal bill in 2009 (HR 1388):

          “SEC. 6104. DUTIES (a) General Purpose- The purpose of the Commission is to gather and analyze information in order to make recommendations to Congress to [determine] – (6)Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.”

          Once people started catching on, they quietly moved the language into another bill (which did not pass).

          1. It is called “reeducation”

          2. And yet another reason for me to become a sex worker so I can afford to homeschool my children.

          3. I wonder what they’ll call it. “Young Pioneers”, maybe?

    2. It might be good. George Clooney is a good actor.

      1. Too bad he’s gay.

        (That’s what I tell my wife about any actor she finds attractive.)

      2. Only if you like milquetoast.

    3. “Clooney’s Gov. Mike Morris is poised to take the Democratic nomination with a platform so uncompromisingly left-leaning it might make Fox News commentators burst into flames. He opposes the death penalty, foreign military intervention and even internal combustion engines and supports gay marriage, mandatory national volunteer service and higher taxes for the richest Americans.”

      HAR HAR!

    4. “If we’re cut off from oil, we will find a way to power our cars. So say it and make it happen,” Clooney said. “It’s not ridiculous. It is possible. And these are the kind of leadership things I would love to see and could be argued about. People will say, ‘It’s just actors.’ But I truly believe it.”

      Just say it and make it happen! This is how things work, right? I’m good at politics.

      1. “So let it be written, so let it be done”

        1. Go down, Moses
          Way down to Egypt land
          Tell old Clooney
          Let our oil flow!

        2. Cnut made a famous observation about commanding the tide to halt having no effect. I’m sure this is different though.

      2. It makes sense that an actor would equate saying a thing and doing a thing.

      3. A long time ago, in the context of CA’s ridiculous Zero Emissions Vehicle mandates, one of my engineering mags referred to “Disney Engineering”, aka wishing makes it so. This is also closely tied in to the concept that it’s easy if you don’t have to do it yourself.

        1. Disney engineering. I like that. There are lots of sources of cheap available power out there. People just choose not to use them out of kindness to the oil companies I suppose.

          1. I think the actual term, equally appropriate, was ‘Imagineering’

            1. The imagineers at Disney actually build stuff. So don’t tar them with the “wish it so” engineer-wanna-bes that craft public policy.

              1. no tarring or disrespect to real engineers, artists and others was intended. The term, though, isn’t unique, exclusive or owned by disney and seems certainly to fit in other public contexts…like the wanna be’s you rightly identify. I assumed most people would make the jump.My bad.

                1. No problem. Disney uses “Imagineering” with a capital “I”. I don’t know if they trademarked the term, but they clearly promote it as part of their identity. I am not familiar with anyone else using the term.

                  1. From Wikipedia:

                    Imagineering is a portmanteau word combining “imagination” and “engineering” most notably used by Walt Disney Imagineering. However, contrary to popular belief, the term was neither coined by Disney, nor originated there. “Imagineering” was popularized by Alcoa around 1940, and appeared widely in numerous publications and promotional print materials throughout the decade.

                    So much more generalized use than I was aware of.

            2. Moon Rover Ride Narrator: No one really knows when, where, or how man landed on the moon…
              Fry: I do!
              Moon Rover Ride Narrator: …but our Fungineers imagine it went something like this.
              [Animatronic whalers emerge from a lunar lander]
              Animatronic Whalers: [singing] We’re whalers on the moon.
              Animatronic Gophers, Animatronic Gophers: We carry a harpoon.
              Animatronic Whalers, Animatronic Gophers, Leela: But there are no whales, so we tell tall tales and sing a whaling tune.
              Fry: That’s not how it happened.
              Leela: Oh, really? I don’t see you with a Fungineering degree.

        2. There’s an Iron Law for that:

          The less you know about something, the easier it looks.

          1. I love it. That’s what made those “flip this house” shows so entertaining. A couple of guys figuring, sure we can rehab a house… how hard can it be to do basic carpentry, hang drywall, paint, install kitchen cabinets, lay carpet…it all looks easy.

            1. Don’t forget re-tiling floors and having everything come out straight and parallel without globs of grout all over the place.

              1. Fucking grout. I’ll never grout again.

                1. I put down 2,500 sq ft of pergo when I built my house 5 years ago.

                  I hired someone to do the tile.

      4. Clooney is a hollywood rube pure and simple. I think he understands it too when you get right down to it which is why he won’t run. Much easier to let other politicians take heat for terrible ideas that you support while raking in the dough.

      5. You’d be surprised what kind of results you can get by shoving guns up people’s asses and disregarding their starvation. Case in point, you can beat those Western Dogs into space with a glorified Radio.

    5. “To me, that’s why the Democrats are so bad at this game. They’re always back on their heels. They’re always playing defense. I would start with an offense, and I would run on this as a candidate. ‘My campaign, my administration, is vehemently against the distribution of wealth by the government to the richest Americans. I’m not going to play your game of, “Are you for the redistribution of wealth?”‘ I want to go to these guys and say, ‘Are you for distributing wealth by the government to the richest Americans?’ Straight aggression ? not this wimpy stuff. Democrats have always been really bad at that kind of version of politics. I say, ‘Get up, stand up.’

      Democrats are totally against redistributing wealth to rich people. That’s why they voted almost unanimously to give billions to failed Wall St. banks.

      1. I support Democrats saying the above. It ensures that no American will ever been confused by their greed ever again. Maybe Republicans need to come out and say “we’re against homosexuality and brown people” while we’re at it. Once the majority of Americans realize that the leaders don’t really want to represent them, they might choose different leaders.

    6. “To me, that’s why the Democrats are so bad at this game. They’re always back on their heels. They’re always playing defense. I would start with an offense, and I would run on this as a candidate. ‘My campaign, my administration, is vehemently against the distribution of wealth by the government to the richest Americans. I’m not going to play your game of, “Are you for the redistribution of wealth?”‘ I want to go to these guys and say, ‘Are you for distributing wealth by the government to the richest Americans?’ Straight aggression ? not this wimpy stuff. Democrats have always been really bad at that kind of version of politics. I say, ‘Get up, stand up.’

      Democrats are totally against redistributing wealth to rich people. That’s why they voted almost unanimously to give billions to failed Wall St. banks.

  6. The myth of Republican unhappiness with the field
    http://campaign2012.washington…..ness-field

    Some Republican elites, not just members of the commentariat but also big GOP money men, are in fact unhappy with the field. But what about the voters? Is dissatisfaction with the Republican field widespread among the people who will actually decide the next GOP presidential nominee?

  7. DoD officials try to walk back a statement by Admiral Mike Mullen, in which he accused the Pakistani government of sponsoring violence against the U.S.

    Yeah, them guys is our friends.

  8. This is really bad

    http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/…..d=14610199

    Nightmare in Libya: Thousands of Surface-to-Air Missiles Unaccounted For

    This is why it is a bad idea to half ass a war. If they wanted to get rid of Kadafi, they should have sent in ground forces and done it right. Instead they just randomly bombed people for three months. If one of these things shows up shooting down a 777 somewhere, this will be on Obama’s hands.

    1. If one of these things shows up shooting down a 777 somewhere, this will be on Obama’s hands.

      I’m guessing a none too furious media will fast from reporting on it.

      1. They will explain it away and ignore it. Of course if a surface to air missile from Saddam’s stockpile had been used for no good, the story would have been quite different.

        1. old news. i posted this [DAZE] ago.

          1. Oh ok, so I guess that makes it less bad now.

            1. more current update – the [BOOTZ] on the ground are tracing & securing these SA’s…in addition to marines surveying the old embassy

              1. But I thought we didn’t have ground forces in Libya. I guess that lie went by the wayside too. And further, once they are gone, you are going to have about as much luck tracing them as Eric Holder had tracing guns to Mexican drug cartels.

                And come to think of it, maybe that is where they went. Maybe Eric Holder sold them to Mexican drug gangs.

                1. we dont have ground combat forces

              2. They have Super Americas in Libya? That’s fucked up.

      2. I blame Halliburton.

    2. If one of these things guns shows up shooting down a 777 border agents somewhere, this will be on Obama’s hands.

      Really, John? You really believe that? Oh looky! I happen to have a title to this here bridge…and Eric Holder is the troll sitting under the bridge.

      1. I meant more in the metaphysical sense. Yes, you are correct, the propaganda machine will ensure that he doesn’t receive any actual blame for it.

        1. “It’s important to remember that these surface to air missiles would have been destroyed but Republicans kept leaping in front of the planes of our NATO allies and spoiling their shot.”

    3. Why didn’t he use them on Nato planes?
      Obama got cut a lot of slack because no American (or Nato) personnel were killed in this little war. A few pilot deaths and maybe there would have been a ground-swell to get out.
      [Or, knowing some gung-ho types, there would have been demands to send in the 82nd Airborne and escalate the whole conflict.]

      1. Because they are old and out of date. Modern fighters are really hard to shoot down with a shoulder fired missile. But 777s not so much.

        1. Surface to air missles are a huge concern for air transport jets. I have been telling people for about 10 years now that someone is going to take out a jet any day now. I’m actually quite relieved to be wrong for so long.

          The good news is that is probably takes more than one missle to take out a large air transport jet. The missles are designed to seek the heat sources (i.e., the engines). The engines are an integral part of the air frame on a fighter and having a engine explode does really bad things for the flyability of the fighter. But air transport jets have the engines hung well below the wings. Air transport jets can, and have, suffered massive engine failures and then continued to a safe landing (the notable exception being the DC10 that crashed in Souix City — which lost the third engine that is integrated into the tail).

          So far we have been lucky. But Libya is not the only place where 10s of thousands of shoulder-launched SAMs have been misplaced. I still think that it is inevitable that a commercial jet will be brought down on approach to a major airport. So we won’t just loose a jet, it will take out a neighborhood or two on the way down.

          1. that worries me too.

    4. “”If they wanted to get rid of Kadafi, they should have sent in ground forces and done it right. “”

      I thought you were against sending ground troops?

      I don’t think we were concerned with getting rid of Kadafi until the rebels started fighting. Kadafi/US relations were improving some what prior to the fighting. We just jumped on the bandwagon after the fact.

      1. If one takes the position that we should have gotten involved in the Lybian conflict, then one can’t really complain that the rebels do what they want, nor not, with Lybia’s weapons stockpiles.

        1. Damn. That should be shouldn’t have gotten…

      2. My position Vic is that we should not have gotten involved. But that if we were going to get involved, we should have gone all in and sent ground troops and ended the war as quickly as possible. As it was, we did the worst thing, we intervened and prolonged a civil war and then had no control of events on the ground once it ended.

        1. Ok.

          And if we didn’t get involved, surface to air missles would have ended up in the rebels hand for them to do what they want.

          You seem to be claiming that, because we did it half ass, it’s Obama’s fault the SAMs are loose. But that would have been true if Obama didn’t get involved.

          1. If we hadn’t intervened the rebels would have probably gotten slaughtered and Gadafi would still be in power and the missiles would be still be under his control.

        2. “”and ended the war as quickly as possible. “”

          But come on, you got to admit that is pretty funny. The Korean war is still in a cease fire, we are still in Iraq and Afganistan. I don’t think we’ve ended a war since WWII.

          1. Well there is the cold war, but yeah…

          2. We ended the war in Kosovo. We would have ended that one. We could have kicked Gadafi out, secured his arms and left. Now, we would have left the place in a mess, but so what? Our problem is we keep trying make victory mean “another America”.

            1. iraq mission accomplished, libya not

            2. “”We could have kicked Gadafi out, secured his arms and left. “”

              We could have and we chose not to.

              Now, if we did Obama, would be responsible for failures. Obama was careful not to “buy it” if you will by being a limited partner. Therefore what happens on the ground isn’t really his responsibility. If we invaded, it would be.

          3. We are still in Germany and Japan

  9. In Scramble for Land, Group Says, Company Pushed Ugandans Out
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09…..nda&st=cse

    According to a report released by the aid group Oxfam on Wednesday, more than 20,000 people say they were evicted from their homes here in recent years to make way for a tree plantation run by a British forestry company, emblematic of a global scramble for arable land.

    The company involved, New Forests Company, grows forests in African countries with the purpose of selling credits from the carbon-dioxide its trees soak up to polluters abroad. Its investors include the World Bank, through its private investment arm, and the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, HSBC.

    1. Yeah, there’s nothing wrong with these green initiatives or carbon credits…

      1. nope nothing wrong w teh [PROFITZ] !

    2. Evict? Sheeet man, you shoulda just killed ’em.

      1. And maybe then had a barbecue. Shame to go to waste.

    3. So, being a “land regulator”/thug, throwing people off their anestoral lands – is this one of those fancy ‘Green Jobs’ the President was talking about?

      1. u mean in obama’s homeland right ?

        1. NO ONE WANTS YOU HERE.

          1. lalalalala (fingerz in earz)

        2. What’s Kenya got yto do with this?

    4. I saw a report on this in some current affairs program but they didn’t mention the carbon credits line. I guess it didn’t fit the narrative of evil Western corporation vs. hapless African natives.

  10. Even a not-guilty verdict may not always be enough to get someone off the list

    “Fuck you, that’s why.”

    1. “Not guilty” doesn’t mean “Factually innocent.” It just means the defense won.

      It’s not uncommon for people acquitted of crimes to fail background checks for security clearances, etc.

    1. Dang, just missed it.

  11. Jared Loughner will be held for an additional eight months before his trial starts. A court psychologist says she can make him sane during that time.

    Isn’t sane a legal term? Can’t we just make him sane by declaring it so. Which is, I guess, how psychiatry works in general.

    1. Yes it is. It means he has to be aware enough of reality to assist his defense. At this point the guy is obviously nuts. Why don’t they just commit him and call it a day? No one is a bigger hard ass about these things than I am. And even I realize the guy is a lot more insane than a hardcore criminal.

      1. The defense will just try and prove he was insane during the shooting, so why would him being sane during the trial help that defense?

        1. *take the 4, carry 10, divide by zero…*

      2. Am I understanding you? Does that mean he can be nuts at the time he commits his crime but if he can be made not nuts for a trial he can be tried for the crime? Surely not. If that’s the case, a little Thorazine here and there would obviate all insanity defense.

        1. Yes. Think about it. Suppose I am suffering from some untreated mental illness and think that the woman next to me is a alien trying to steal my brain. So I kill her not knowing what I am doing. And I have a good insanity defense. So they arrest me and I start getting treatment. The treatment is successful and I get a grasp of reality again. The fact that I am no longer insane does not preclude me from claiming that I was insane at the time of the crime.

          Further, if the treatment fails and I am still such a whackjob I can’t appreciate the charges against me or meaningfully assist in my defense, I by definition can’t get a fair trial and can’t be tried. In those cases, the defendant sits in a mental ward until he is well enough to have a trial.

          1. The fact that I am no longer insane does not preclude me from claiming that I was insane at the time of the crime.

            Perhaps so, John. Loughner did record his adventures into the mental abyss, but if he is presented to a court and jury with most of his cans of a six pack handy, it would prove very difficult to convince a jury of the depth of his mentally ill state at the time of the crime.

            “Well, he seems perfectly lucid now! FRY HIM!”

            1. Yeah, there is something inherently wrong with this. A little Vitamin H and you’re good to go. Sheeesh.

            2. Insanity defenses are notoriously hard to win.

        2. Ice, one of the commenters here, Tulpa I believe, actually made the claim that sanity was superfluous, and forced medication was entirely permissable.

          What matters here is JLL’s intent, regardless of whether JLL wanted to whack someone in “our world of reality” or “Loughner-Land.”

          I, for one, found that line of reasoning, as well as Loughner’s forced medication, repugnant.

          1. Aren’t mens rea and actus reus the predominant judgements in cases like Loghner’s (or any other ‘insanity’ defense)?

            1. There was a lot of decent commentary about Loughner’s insanity defense in this thread a few months ago.

              Arizona has a particularly tough difficult burden for a defendant to successfully claim insanity as a defense. Clark v. Arizona is a fairly recent Supreme Court case that looks at the AZ insanity defense in detail.

              Cliff’s Notes version: If Loughner knew the difference between right and wrong and knew his acts were wrong, he can’t successfully claim the defense. This is an incredibly high hurdle to overcome. Keeping him incompetent to stand trial may be his best bet to keep him out of prison/death row.

        3. I see the Reason commentariat is finally coming around to my position.

          At the time of the shooting the people here all wanted to fry him, because even schizos aren’t necessarily violent or incapable of moral judgement.

          But IMO…THIS GUY? This guy is so barking at the moon crazy that if he can’t use the insanity defense, nobody can. That’s not because you’d have to be crazy to shoot five people, it’s because he thought that Gabriel Giffords was using grammer to control his mind.

          It doesn’t get crazier than this guy, people. Of course, that doesn’t mean the jury won’t be on a witch hunt to fry someone for shooting a congress woman. And it doesn’t mean that certain portions of the public won’t be in total denial and insist that he’s a right winger driven by Tea Party rhetoric.

          I’d say his chances of getting off on the insanity defense are about 50/50. They should be 100%.

    2. It won’t be good enough to remove him from the FBI’s Insane in the Membrane* list, though.

      *relic of the Clinton Years

  12. Euro Crisis Makes Fed Lender of Only Resort as Funding Ebbs
    http://www.businessweek.com/ne…..-ebbs.html

    The Federal Reserve, chastised by Congress for lending money to foreign institutions such as the Central Bank of Libya, is once again the lender of last resort for banks around the world it knows little about.

    1. and the Fed’s own futile actions will bring about its end as it attempts to prop up a failing global system. i guess the only question left is why bother?

      BEAUTIFUL

  13. Solyndra’s cash-flow problems in late 2010 had previously come to light

    Good one, guys.

  14. THREADJACK

    Last night I linked the H&R article about Elizabeth Warren to the C-SPAN Facebook page. Here is the response I received from one Boris Tadethsky (a fellow who, the previous day, was insisting that government never intervenes in markets, they only intervene in society because korparayshuns can’t be trusted to “act like markets”). I leave it here for all our amusement. The stupid, it burns the eyes.
    “1)You missed the point there. The point is the mantra of objectivism or what I call, “being an Aynhole” is so overly simplitic that a semi snarky tone needs to be added so goofball right wingnuts don’t take themselves so seriously that they drive off a bridge….or in an Aynhole’s case a “not bridge”.

    2)It’s only class warfare when she fires back. Remember she represents “government intervention” to you.

    3)No the question is much much more complicated than that. How much? Of course. Captains of Industry? It’s a shame that you even limited it to those folks. The question is: What is fair? Fair and mandatory if you want to be a citizen of this country. Because if you do, then you must realize for over 2 hundred years we have found reasons to tax. Tax is just one of those sad facts of life, like death. Hey! That’s pretty good! Someone ought to make up some sort of expression that has taxes and death together in a figurative way of illustrating the inevitiability of obligations. But any way I’ve been looking at your numbers and how you divide the “class” in “class warfare” and I have to call bushit on you. You’ve taken a great number of “the rest of us” class away from what tax increases have been proposed lately. So, BULLSHIT!

    4)This is overly simplistic as well when considering taxes are under scrutiny for being raised or decreased. I say raise, on only certain incomes, over a certain amount. But I also say we, the people, have the power to audit your foreign accounts and that before you go get one, you have to have it reported from the place you are putting your money. No more hiding it………….of course the GOP is trying every way possible to prevent that from happening. And the GOP are the same who spout Randy dandy slogans.

    5)You want more for the same money?

    6)You keep calling profiteers “employers”. Where is that codified that anyone with a business has to hire workers?

    7) Your idea of steep is the 4th lowest steep in the world. If you think you can’t compete in the 4th lowest taxing country on the planet, then go try your luck in Turkish markets. And “the industiralist”? next you’re going to speed away in your 2 horse buggy. Seriously, the profiteers do owe society payment of all lawful taxes. Not just for the sake of revenue, but for the sake of fairness, order etc. That’s part of the contract.

    8) We live no where near the state of paranoia that 21st century right wingers whine about….constantly. But I’m curious, is our popultaion getting smaller?….Hmm? No? how about wealth? Is wealth not being created? Well then how about technology? What about anything that we are? What is shrinking that government should just revert to the size it was when we had 1/100 the GDP, 1/100 the population etc etc? This is a huge country. To think that silly slogans like “small government” could mean anything real is beyond crazy. It’s extreme. Besdie small government could mean a King. And look how good that worked last time. One really really wealthy “industrialist” taxing as he sees fit. You’d flip your buggy.”

    1. Ah Facebook, a never-ending stream of economic illiteracy. Another response to the Warren takedown –
      “Crystal Vega-James – You are doing circular reasoning. According to your premise, we have the farmer to grow the food, to feed the worker to work in the factory, the garment district to make the clothes, the construction worker to build the house for the worker, the school to educate or train the worker, the automobile factory to build the car, the machinists to create the nuts and bolts, the engineers to build the engine and design the brakes, the oil companies to find the oil to put in the car, it’s a miracle the worker got to work, the factory was successful, and both should be compensated for their worth and value. I see value with the worker, not just the Factory owner. In the Norwegian Countries the minimum wage is about I think $17-$19 per hour. We pay one of the lowest minimum wages, then an inmate we clothe, provide shelter, healthcare, and education, food, and utilities. This cost society much more than $17 – $19 an hour. How can we afford to house in jails 743 per 100,000, people, While Americans only represent about 5 percent of the world’s population, one-quarter of the entire world’s inmates are incarcerated in the United States. That is than 1 in 100 adults. Something is very wrong.”

      1. arent the majority drug-related ? if so, another GREAT VICTORY in the FAILED war on drugz

      2. Crystal Vega-James, what the f*ck are you talking about ?

        1. What Crystal fails to realize is that the Scandinavian countries have no minimum wage laws. Of the European countries with minimum wages, the US minimum is higher than all but 6 of them: Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Belgium, France, the UK, and Ireland.

      3. Seems like her math is a little shaky as well. 743/100,000 is not 1 percent, let’s try about 3/4 of 1 %.

    2. Re: l0b0t,

      “What is shrinking that government should just revert to the size it was when we had 1/100 the GDP, 1/100 the population etc etc? This is a huge country. To think that silly slogans like “small government” could mean anything real is beyond crazy. It’s extreme. [Besides] small government could mean a King.”

      Worse yet, it could mean a midget king!

      1. Then we’ll see who truly runs Barter Town.

      2. Only if it’s Tyrion Lannister.

        1. Lamprey pie and Dornish hookers for all!

    3. Boris Tadethsky responds again (this is fellow who also claims that “class-warfare was the crux of the Enlightenment”, so he well be a graduate of Patrice Lumumba University)

      “you read more into Warren’s statment that what is actuallybeing suggested when it comes to taxes. If you are willing to pigeon hole Warren, at least put her in the correct slot. The issue isn’t about so monsterous tax increase that wipes out mom and pops little factory. The entire point Warren is trying to make is that if “YOU” (wealthy and profitable business owner) are going to continue to make ever increasing amounts of profits while paying your workers less, then the government needs to step in and give you a tax increase, so government can maintain our way of life. Because “YOU” the wealthy person, are merely taking from this country and leaving it worse than what was provided to you, in order for you to thrive. “YOUR” success was at “OUR” expense, so “WE” get to impose a slight tax increase on “YOU”.”

      1. Re: l0b0t,

        Boris Tadethsky:

        “The entire point Warren is trying to make is that if ‘YOU’ (wealthy and profitable business owner) are going to continue to make ever increasing amounts of profits while paying your workers less, then the government needs to step in and give you a tax increase, so government can maintain our way of life.”

        How quaint. It’s been some time since I’ve seen a clueless bastard use the old, tired, debunked (and left for dead) Marxian theory of wages. I thought only Latin American college professors still espoused this claptrap, but I guess not.

        Oh, by the way, for the Tony’s of the world: The theory states that capitalists make their profits by underpaying their laborers. This idiocy was easily debunked by Eugen von B?hm-Bawerk by pointing out that wage levels are a function of time preference, that is: laborers are paid in advance at a discount because it is the industrialist who takes the risk of selling the product in the future. The laborers could perfectly share on the total sale of the product – all they have to do is wait until it sells. Tell that to auto workers – see if they would like to be paid when the cars they make actually sell.

        Does this mean Marx was an ignorant boob when it came to economics? YES, that is what it means.

        1. teh [CORPORATIONZ] export teh [PROFITZ] fm selling durable goods made by chinese slaves

          1. Re: Double Asshole,

            You would be at least a meaningfully competent spoofer if you typed real words, O2. You simply suck.

            1. esp writz words i licks…err, likes

        2. No surprise,in our previous encounters, Boris has been the most ardent defender of the LTV with whom I have ever interacted. BONUS – Boris at his best:

          Boris – Business owners are not job creators. They hire and fire folks as it lines their own pockets. If they could figure out how to get cheap machines to do your job, you are history to them. Get rid of one, another will come to take his/her place. This is the very theory Uncle Milty put forth. You either support it or you don’t.

          Me – Of course they are the job creators, to deny that basic fact is really silly. Those jobs may go to a person in one geolocation or another or it may go to a machine. Regardless, it is in fact the business owner creating jobs. This not the CCCP, you do not have some sort of ‘right’ to employment. The onus is on the individual to posses a skill-set for which someone else is willing to exchange something in a voluntary transaction. Remember, the LTV has been thoroughly discredited for more than a century.

          Boris – If it goes to a machine, it isn’t really a job, the way “job creator” is meant by the currenct crop of right wingers who are using the term. Of course no one has a “right” to employment, but you are passing over most of the implicit meaning in “job creator” to support weak rhetoric. Labor value has not be discreditied. It has been offered by right wingers as meaning less that what it truly means. This is the typical ploy of the right to find the smallest segmnt of meaing which can be applied to a term and then inflate that meaning to be the entire significance. And of course that is too easy to smack down. So let’s say corporations one day adopt a policy of laying people off, in order to boost stock prices…..OOPS! Too late! I guess those businesses aren’t really job creatrs at all. They are merely looking for the easiest way to make profit and make stock prices go up. Therefore we can call business and business owners, “self serving”. That would always apply, regardless of any Austrian economics theory that has been debunked.

          Me – First of all, I must stress that “the current crop of right wingers” is composed almost wholly of blithering idiots who posses only a rudimentary understanding of economics. Of course individual actors in a market are pursuing enlightened self-interest, that is exactly how markets are supposed to function. The question becomes how best to ameliorate negative forces. I posit that unfettered competition is the best remedy for the trend to monopoly that results from growth. We have a very long history of empirical evidence that government regulation leads to rent seeking and regulatory capture. This is bad for the consumer. Corporatism and mercantilism benefit no one but the few large players currying favor with the state. As for the drive towards increased efficiency and automation, that is pressure exerted not so much by greedy tycoons as it is by the mass of consumers who are pursuing their own enlightened self-interest through paying less. This is good, it is good for business to change and even fail. This is the heart of creative destruction, the market signaling to participants that capital is being misallocated and should be put to better use elsewhere. Attempts by the state to prevent this change only result in opportunity costs for everyone.

          Boris – And so every automated system that replaces a wage earner creates more unemployment. You can’t have it both ways. If consumers want goods and servces that cost less, it’s partially because they earn less than what consumers, who are also wage earners, deem necessary. See? Your limited theory cuts both ways. To your pont about state intervention, the states role IS to intervene and regulate.

          Me – No the role of the state is to guarantee the protection of natural rights. Market interventions are merely a way to aggrandize power to a select elite. As for a limited theory, not so much. You are completely disregarding creative destruction and the more productive allotment of resources thereby produced. It is a GOOD thing that fewer people can produce more goods in shorter time. That frees up labor and capital to do more productive things. Also, some consumers may desire lower prices because of their own reduced wage, many desire lower prices because they would prefer to allocate their resources elsewhere (opportunity cost is the reason the broken-window fallacy is a fallacy) and others will pay more for brand cache, product quality, or intangibles like jingoistic patriotism; this all self-interest and it is good.

          Boris – The state does not intervene in markets. The state intervenes in society. A business that is creating a product or service is a part of society. It is not acting like the market when it is operating. Again you are conflating apples and oranges. What you are saying about allotment of resources is a diminshing return.

          Me – So things like minimum wage laws, professional licensing requirements, zoning laws, compulsory unionization, price supports, subsidies, loan guarantees, grants, ad nauseam are NOT market intervention? Why would you think that? What do you think they are?

          Boris – Those are societal. Professional licenses are in place not to limit markets. They are occupational requriements to fit the standard, in order for quality to be maintained. They offer a way of tracking unethical behaviors and subsequesntly, but not functionally, create a safeguard for markets. When businesses are not acting as the market, they are not the market. When businesses are going about trying to make money, they are members of society. It is entirely goverments role to regulate and intervene in society.

          Me – Nonsense, things like licenses for barbers, bartenders, and interior decorators are nothing but artificial scarcity created at the behest of entrenched players. But please, continue to shuck and jive, tell me how price supports, subsidies, loan guarantees, grants, and the entirety of monetary policy are not intervening into markets? Boris, you may not want to admit that government routinely intervenes in markets but government does. Here is link to the website of the Federal Reserve where they explain in great detail how they intervene in markets – http://www.newyorkfed.org/abou…..twedo.html The Fed even has a program named U.S. Foreign Exchange Intervention. From its webpage – “Congress has assigned the U.S. Treasury primary responsibility for international financial policy. In practice, though, the Treasury’s FX decisions typically are made in consultation with the Federal Reserve System. If the monetary authorities elect to intervene in the FX market, the intervention is conducted by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. When a decision is made to support the dollars’ price against another currency, the foreign exchange trading desk of the New York Fed buys dollars and sells the foreign currency; conversely, to reduce the value of the dollar, it sells dollars and buys the foreign currency. While the Fed’s trading staff may operate in the FX market at any time and in any market in the world, the focus of activity usually is the U.S. market.
          Because the Fed’s purchases or sales of dollars are small compared with the total volume of dollar trading, they do not shift the balance of supply and demand immediately. Instead, intervention affects the present and future behavior of investors. In this regard, U.S. foreign exchange intervention is used as a device to signal a desired exchange rate movement.”

          Boris – Once again you are referring to regulating business. Not picking winners with governmnet money. Businesses are not obligated to do good in markets if they get a subsidy. Businesses make their own way with watever they are lawfully able to obtain. That’s what every right wingy dingy tells me. Your one size fits all just doesn’t match reality.

          Me – Boris Your attempts to move the goalposts are amusing. We are not talking about the government picking winners, we are talking about government intervention into markets. You claim government does not intervene into markets, you are incorrect. I have shown you many ways in which government intervenes into markets, even providing a link to the Fed’s website wherein they explain in great detail some of the ways in which they intervene in markets (including a program that has MARKET INTERVENTION as part of its bloody title). Give up already, you have lost this argument.

          Boris – I understand what you are claiming, but when business does not act like the market, it isn’t the market. If government give a loan, grant etc to a person,organization, business etc, then government is intervening in society, not markets. Just because the limitations of your thinking make you conflate the two, doesn’t make your idea any more accurate.

          Me – Businesses “don’t act like the market”, whatever that is supposed to mean, they are participants in the market. ALL businesses are part of the market, always and forever. You have been going through these ridiculous semantic gyrations on this and other threads to avoid admitting facts that conflict with your preconceived (and wholly nonsensical) notions of how economics works. Fair enough, you are welcome to wallow in your economic illiteracy.

          Boris – That’s a typical limited right wing frame. Businesses are part of society.

          1. Re: lObOt,

            That was a great exchange! Your replies were cogent, coherent and well thought out. It is clear the Boris character conceded he lost the argument by relying on the Ad Hominem “That’s a typical limited right wing frame.”

            1. Thanks (blushes). It’s amazing how much serious economic and political theory I’ve learned by lurking here at H & R. Also, some great beer recommendations, clever nicknames for the POTUS (Hopey McChange is my favorite), and a thorough disrespect for all those who stand athwart Homo sapiens’ quest for individual liberty.

        3. This idiocy was easily debunked by Eugen von B?hm-Bawerk by pointing out that wage levels are a function of time preference, that is: laborers are paid in advance at a discount because it is the industrialist who takes the risk of selling the product in the future.

          Not always and perfectly true, though, since many companies are quite sure their product will sell.

          However, you see this a lot with start-ups who offer stock in lieu of wages.

          1. Re: Baked Penguin,

            Not always and perfectly true, though, since many companies are quite sure their product will sell.

            You misunderstand – the wage is a function of time preference regardless of how sure or sanguine the company is about the product. The product has to be produced first, then sold. This is regardless of payment terms: Even with an advanced payment, you cannot secure the cash until the exchange of title happens, and you still have to pay your laborers – if that was the deal.

            However, you see this a lot with start-ups who offer stock in lieu of wages.

            Yes, that is correct. But both cases are subject to time preference regardless – that was Bohm-Bawerk point.

    4. #6 is just incredible. In-fucking-credible.

  15. >another downside of using mercenaries IN ADDITION TO BEING 4 TIMES AS EXPENSIVE AS SOLDIERS

    Injured war contractors sue over health care, disability payments
    By T. Christian Miller ProPublica
    Published: September 28, 2011

    Private contractors injured while working for the U.S. government in Iraq and Afghanistan filed a class action lawsuit in federal court on Monday, claiming that [CORPORATIONZ] and [INSURANCE COS] had unfairly denied them medical treatment and disability payments.

    The suit, filed in district court in Washington, D.C., claims that private contracting firms and their insurers routinely [LIED, CHEATED, & THREATENED] injured workers, while ignoring a federal law requiring compensation for such employees. Attorneys for the workers are seeking $2 billion in damages.

    The lawsuit, believed to be the first of its kind, charges that major insurance corporations such as AIG and large federal contractors such as Houston-based KBR deliberately flouted the law, thereby [DEFRAUDING TAXPAYERS & BOOSTING PROFITS].
    http://www.stripes.com/news/us…..s-1.156334

    1. Re: Double Asshole,

      another downside of using mercenaries IN ADDITION TO BEING 4 TIMES AS EXPENSIVE AS SOLDIERS

      Because of the nagging fact that mercenaries can quit…

      You sure are stoopid, you direct result of the Amerikan Pulbic Skool Seistem. You don’t even read what you post, thinking yourself the cleverest person in the whole goddamned world.

      1. i m militery vetern and have 27 confirm combot kills so i know wut i m talkin about old mix so stop talkni out youre ass

        1. You are clearly not a veteran of US military. They still require recruits to be able to read and write in English.

          1. u responded to a spoofer sherlock^

            1. Hard to tell the trolls apart these days

        2. Re: Double Asshole,

          i m militery vetern and have 27 confirm combot [sic] kills

          Well, I have stepped on a few toy robots myself! Killed a few combots in PS3 as well! Why, those combots are mean machines.

          Or – learn to TYPE.

          Look, you proud killer, don’t give me this false outrage/editorial: Mercenaries are 4 times as expensive because you want to keep them there, as they can QUIT. Soldiers may enlist voluntarily (so far….) but they can’t quit lest they want to be thrown in jail, which is why the US Gov can pay them much, much less (indentured servitude, anyone?) Which way is more moral, you lousy sack of pus? Go fuck yourself.

          1. ^and another sherlock responding to old mex’s spoof

            1. ^a nother spoff ^^

          2. that waznt me that waz some1 spoffing me this is the real me

            1. i been spoffin my nob all day

              1. im closet [GAYZ]

        3. Huh,

          I thought you were a Harvard English professor.

      2. im not the author einstein

        1. Multiple personality disorder troll.

          All of the manifestations are double assholes, either way.

          1. no since old mex is the ongoing spoofer. want me to try?

            1. HA HA HA HA!!!

              Now, THAT’S funny!

              But since you’re not teh rael o2, the real O2 cannot take credit for it. The joke’s on you.

              1. i luvs my jokes cause i am a jokes

                1. even my spoffs are tarded well mom alwayz sed i wuznt too brite

            2. no since old mex is the ongoing spoofer. want me to try?

              I would love to see you try to spoof OM. I doubt you are capable. You do understand that the point of the spoof is to make it look like it could have come from the person you are spoofing, and not your own dumb self, right? Hah, look who I’m talking to… of course you don’t. But hey, give it a shot anyway.

              1. me luvs some old mex

                1. iz not possible

    2. Oh look, another handle to click ignore on!

      And the gibberish magically disappears – just like walking away from the homeless guy threatening to tell the wall’s wife about how the wall’s been going behind her back..

      1. if only the insurance cos could ignore!…all would be well in the libtoid fantasy that financial crime doesnt exist

        1. herp! Herpity flerp derp gluble snarg!

          1. i hatz me some lawsuitz

    3. most contractors are not mercenaries.

  16. How to find the weirdest stuff on the Internet.

    Paging Saccharin Man…Paging SugarFree…Please pick up the white courtesy phone…

    1. I was thinking the same thing. That one guy who thought he was God’s physical son and that the Bush administration was spying on him? Absolutely, brilliantly bizzarro.

      1. Sadly, his blog is no more.

    2. I do what I can.

      1. And I, for one, thank you.

  17. Scientologists are idiots.

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

    1. I will give them credit. That is a lair worthy of a super villain.

      1. Tonight on a new “Househunters: Supervillains”

      2. The difference between an ordinary villain and a super villain is presentation.

        1. And a snazzy velvet cape, diamond topped cane, top hat, and monocle. Or so I have been told.

          1. That would be included in “presentation”.

            1. Ah, so sorry. I thought you were referring strictly to the domecile without the inclusion of duds.

              1. Presentation covers the entire package.

                1. Not always.

        2. So true. I watched Batman last night. The version with Jack Nicholson as the Joker. Heath Ledger’s performance in the Joker role showed me what a shitty actor Nicholson is. Ledger was awesome.

          1. That’s not fair.

            Remember that Nicholson’s Joker was directed by Tim Burton (Pee Wee’s Big Adventure, Mars Attacks!), while Ledger was directed by Christopher Nolan (Memento, Inception).

      3. I prefer the Old World villainous layer styling of the Freemasons.

    2. I wonder who cleans up the barf when they use the “antigravity similuator” to develop their superpowers?

    3. A theme park for the nucking futs.

    4. I, for one, will welcome our new Scientologist overlords.

      1. Under President Cruise, at least presidential motorcades will move much faster.

  18. And voters say 51 – 38 percent that the switch will diminish Pennsylvania’s importance as a key presidential swing state.

    Otherwise, presidential hopefuls would forget the Commonwealth even existed.

  19. “There has been a lot of criticism about the watch list,” claiming that it is “haphazard,” he said. “But what this illustrates is that there is a very detailed process that the F.B.I. follows in terms of nominations of watch-listed people.”

    Right.

    1. They are real good about nominating the right people. The problem is that once someone goes on the list, everyone with a similar name and birth date goes on with them.

      1. Fucking Social Security numbers, how do they work? /sarc

        1. Many of them are not citizens so they don’t have SS numbers.

          1. They jolly well *should*. We’re just making the terrorists’ job easier by not providing SS numbers to *everyone*.

  20. “If an individual is acquitted or charges are dismissed for a crime related to terrorism, the individual must still meet the reasonable suspicion standard in order to remain on, or be subsequently nominated to, the terrorist watch list,” the once-classified memorandum says.

    And, since Federal law enforcement is known as the standard-bearer of reasonable judgement…

    1. No worries. Thanks to the new Obama/Gadafi supply of shoulder fired surface to air missiles, they won’t have to get on the plane to take it down. They can do it from the comfort of their own backyard. Hijacking is so 2001.

      1. Admittedly, didn’t Saddam have a pretty good stash of MANPADS too? And it’s not like we were practicing that much inventory control of his materiel when we invaded. Airliners haven’t been falling out of the sky since OIF, so perhaps the Libyan SAM threat is overstated? Not to mention that the very large engines on airliners like the 777 may be less vulnerable to the small warhead on a e.g., SAM-16/18 than you’d think at first. It’ll still scare everyone half to death though, even if you don’t cause the airliner to crash.

        Then again, if you can get a submarine load of coke into this country, you should be able to get enough ordnance here to do quite a lot of damage. I’m surprised it hasn’t happened yet.

        1. Actually we did a tremendous amount of inventory control in Iraq. They spend a good year or so cleaning out Saddam’s weapons stockpiles. They did a great job on that. That said, it only takes one to get out. And surely some got out of Iraq. Yet, nothing has happened.

          Perhaps they are not that big of a threat. I certainly hope they are not.

          1. Or they simply made it to Afgahnistan or bought by some third world shit hole like North Korea.

          2. “”Actually we did a tremendous amount of inventory control in Iraq.””

            Not always.

            http://www.usnews.com/usnews/n…..eapons.htm

            It is believed someone those weapons were used against US troops. Would that mean Bush is responsible?

  21. From the WSJ: “Solyndra’s cash-flow problems in late 2010 had previously come to light but it was not known that the company technically defaulted on its loan and violated its agreement with the U.S. government.”

    It’s the gift that keeps on grafting!

  22. Jared Loughner will be held for an additional eight months before his trial starts. A court psychologist says she can make him sane during that time.

    You mean he will be able to know the difference??? Wow! What a medical genius!

    1. Jared Loughner will be held for an additional eight months before his trial starts.

      Didn’t there used to be something about speedy trials?

      1. Not if the delay is because you are too crazy to assist with your defense. Then it is your fault not the government’s.

  23. Paging Gaius Marius, please pick up the white courtesy phone….

    http://dailycaller.com/2011/09…..s-on-jobs/

    1. That woman is criminally stupid. And I love how the media is excusing her as “well it was just a joke”. I am sure they would be so forgiving if Michelle Bachman made such a joke.

      1. so the daily caller is teh [MEDIA] ?

        1. Daily caller is what? You are getting closer to English, but you are not quite there yet. We need to work on your articles and capitalization.

          1. made equal sense as ur post calling one publication “the media”

          2. inglish is teh langage of oprezzion

            1. Just like kenyan socialist oprezzion

      2. Her press secretary says “obviously” she was using hyperbole to make a point. I suppose it’s as obvious that Rick Perry is OUT OF HIS MIND when he said SS is a Ponzi scheme.

        1. except perry wrote that in his book & continues to claim he is serious

          1. herp derp!

          2. btw wat is ponzi? iz it like ping-pong? man dat perry dood is stoopid lol lol lol

            1. i luvs me some ponzi

    2. Wow. She makes John Edwards look good by comparison.

      1. edwards alwayz looks gud so dreemy sigh

        1. Edwards is another socialist kenyan like Obama

    3. http://jammiewearingfool.blogs…..ed-in.html

      Apparently she has other problems as well.

    4. As one of the commentators pointed out, this is a trial balloon.

    5. The original news report:

      http://projects.newsobserver.c…..he_serious

      Perdue’s full statement:

      “You have to have more ability from Congress, I think, to work together and to get over the partisan bickering and focus on fixing things. I think we ought to suspend, perhaps, elections for Congress for two years and just tell them we won’t hold it against them, whatever decisions they make, to just let them help this country recover. I really hope that someone can agree with me on that. The one good thing about Raleigh is that for so many years we worked across party lines. It’s a little bit more contentious now but it’s not impossible to try to do what’s right in this state. You want people who don’t worry about the next election.”

      “I really hope that someone can agree with me on that.”

      More people than you think, Ms Perdue – remember Bill “Let’s have a dictator!” Maher??

      1. Or Thomas, if we could just be the Chinese for a day, Friedman.

        1. Re: John,

          … And a cast of thousands. It’s quite revealing that self-labeled “liberals” would have no qualms about placing an illustrated and wise notable (in their minds, of course… nobody has seen Obama’s SAT score yet…) yet call a democratically elected representative a Nazi or a dictator if he happens to be from the other team.

          1. And at the same time they will bend over backwards to defend people like Chavez and Castro.

            1. Both socialist kenyans like Obama.

    6. There are some things you just don’t joke about if you are a state governor – this is one of those. “Joke” or not, still a huge error in judgement.

  24. “Even a not-guilty verdict may not always be enough to get someone off the list, if agents maintain they still have ‘reasonable suspicion’ that the person might have ties to terrorism.”

    Please send your letters of outrage to the FBI at: Lubyanka Square, DC.

    1. To help save your government money in these difficult economic times, please send in three copies of your letter of outrage and several manila folders for it to be filed in – compliance will be noted in your favor.

  25. But Mr. Healy said the government could not reveal who was on the list, or why, because that would risk revealing intelligence sources. He also defended the idea of the watch list, saying the government would be blamed if, after a terrorist attack, it turned out the perpetrator had attracted the suspicions of one agency but it had not warned other agencies to scrutinize the person.

    Your rights are completely meaningless in the face of a government agency chief’s need to cover his ass.

  26. How to find the weirdest stuff on the Internet.

    You’ve found the writings of Sugarfree; you can stop searching now.

    1. Damn! Sorry Groov, didn’t see you up there.

    1. I’ve got plenty, thanks for asking.

  27. How to find the weirdest stuff on the Internet.

    I’ve been to the end of the internet, and it’s just one big fart joke. And there’s a sign that reads, “We apologise for the inconvenience.” Wow!

    Jess
    http://www.anymouse.com

    1. AnonBot stepping up the game.

      Nice

  28. I just have to get this into the mix for those yet unaware: NC Democratic Gov. Beverly Perdue recommends suspending congressional elections. This is *truly outrageous*. Unfortunately, I have yet to find a video, which I imagine will put an end to the “she was only joking” spin.

    1. Even if she was joking, you can’t as an elected official joke about that kind of stuff.

      1. The bombing starts in ten minutes.

        1. He said in private before a radio show started. This women said it in a public speech to the Rottary club.

          And beyond that, even if there wasn’t, “they did it too” is not a fucking defense.

          1. “bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb-bomb iran”

            1. Then I guess McCain isn’t fit for office either. Since no one here thinks he is anyway, that is hardly news.

              Once again “they did too” is not a defense past the third grade you fucking half wit.

              1. they’re all jokes einstein

                1. No one wants you here, you know.

              2. Since no one here thinks he is anyway, that is hardly news.

                No one? I mean, I agree he’s not fit, but surely someone will stand up for Johnny Mac and his inability to understand the Constitution, right?

                1. The best you can say for McCain is that he might not have been as bad as Obama and he objects to torture.

                  1. I’ll go with he objects to torture. That’s about all the praise I can manage for the guy.

                    1. wy du you hat mavkerick

                    2. mccain knows nada about tortures

                    3. Well and the fact he actually flew combat missions and acquited himself well as a POW. Doesn’t mean he should be an elected official though.

    2. Secretly they all yearn for that kind of power.

    3. She was joking about the jobs part…

      1. +9.1% unemployment

    4. Upon more careful reading, I see that PR had already mixed it up @ 9:26. Et tu …?

  29. http://www.people.com/people/a…..10,00.html

    Normally don’t follow the local murder stories that hit the national media. But this case is flat out creepy. I am thinking the poor woman figured out her husband and father in law were deviants and they whacked her to keep her from going to the cops.

  30. http://www.foxnews.com/politic…..-economic/

    NC Governor suggest that since the people in Congress are incapable of fixing unemployment and the economy we need to keep them in there until they do something.

    1. Bah, I see Rich beat me to it.

    2. Not only was this mentione twice above but yesterday also…comn people this is the TUBES!!!

      1. Has anyone heard about that mosque they want to build in NYC?

        1. Mosque? Nope not heard anything.

  31. I’m blind! Nancy Grace graces eyes with a glancing shot.

    Nancy Grace has made a career of baring her teeth. Now she’s baring something else. TheDC’s Michael Watson reports: “During Monday’s episode of ‘Dancing with the Stars,’ HLN host Nancy Grace had a nipple-slip moment after the final move of her quick-step routine with dancer Tristan MacManus. ABC cut from the shot of Grace to a shot of the stunned audience. When the camera re-focused on Grace and MacManus, she hid her face in his chest. During the cut-away, Grace re-adjusted her clothing. Host Tom Bergeron joked about the wardrobe malfunction, saying that ‘On the European version that would be perfectly fine.'” This kind of thing never happens to Judge Judy.

    1. I never realized she was such a large woman. And they had some pics in the NYPOST the other day of her leaving a workout without makeup, it was like having bleach poured in your eyes.

      1. and grace’s beauty is enhanced by her venom

        1. Ok, now that is actually funny.

          1. Remember that he’s the spoofer, John, not teh rael O2. So the real one cannot take credit for that one.

            1. this is teh real me old mix taht othere me isnt the real me

              1. There’s no point in clearing that up, double asshole. The joke’s on you now.

                1. take ur spoofer malox old mex

        2. At least she wasn’t a contestant on the Voice of America.

    2. Huh, I never realized she had such a huge rack. She usually dresses pretty conservatively; I guess that is why.

      1. She’s bloated on the human misery she has feed on for decades, and ripe. She’ll slim back back after she lays thousands of bile-filled eggs in Bergeron’s thorax.

        1. Either that, or burst.

    3. She’s much fatter, older, and uglier than I realized. No wonder she’s such a vile spitewhale.

      1. She looks like one of the pigs in Angry Birds. She actually might be as physically unattractive as she is personally unattractive.

        1. Re: John,

          She looks like one of the pigs in Angry Birds.

          Now we all know what you do in your spare time, John 😉

          1. That game is worse than crack.

  32. Hmm… Planet Rand? Planet Reason? or perhaps “The Jacket”. Let’s go start a colony.

    One-Third of Sun-Like Stars Have Earth-Like Planets In Habitable Zone
    http://www.technologyreview.co…..EQ.twitter

    1. Glibertopia.

      1. Are us inarticulate fellow travelers welcome? I’m not glib like you, SF.

        1. Only if you’re a truly disgusting creature like the rest of us. Are you?

          1. I’ve been here for years, Warty. Something must have rubbed off on me by now.

            1. Have you tried wiping it off with Clorox?

        2. I believe that you could be glib, as glib as any of us. It’s time for you to believe in yourself.

          1. Yes, whether you believe you can, or you can’t, you’re right!

            1. “I don’t care what you make fun of, as long as you make fun of something. Now, go on boy.”

  33. With friends like these, Part I.

    What does the US get for its unprecedented economic, tactical and diplomatic support for Israel? The face-slap.

    US expresses deep disappointment as Israel announces new settlements

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..story.html

    1. the netahyahu coalition remains teh [GODZ] of incompetence

      1. Supposedly he was under pressure from his right to ‘respond’ to the Palestinian statehood request at the UN. What’s remarkable is how little Israel’s government cares about slapping us in the face relative to its domestic political concerns. They’re like a welfare recipient who feels entitled to it rather than grateful to the giver.

        1. MNG,

          Please, don’t feed the troll.

        2. kadema are israeli wingnutz

    2. Due to Israel’s obvious lack of interest in not exacerbating the situation with Palestine, the US should let the Palestine vote pass the Security Council. At first, I didn’t think rushing the peace process was a good idea and Netanyahu made good points in his speech, but I see no hope of it ever happening with the idiots in control of both governments. Israel continuing to encroach on Palestinian land with military-defended settlements is a provocative act of war, as far as I’m concerned. It’s really no different than an invasion.

      1. i agree. unfortunately the netanyahu coalition has driven off all their regional allies & continues to unnecessarily complicate US regional efforts.

      2. Israel continuing to encroach on Palestinian land with military-defended settlements is a provocative act of war,

        I wouldn’t have authorized more settlements, either, but:

        (1) Technically (and pedantically), you can only be at war with another sovereign nation. The Palestinian areas are currently stateless.

        (2) Aside from that, I think its pretty clear that a state of war (or at least armed conflict) has existed between Israel and the Palestinians for quite some time now. Compared to randomly mortaring and rocketing Israelis, building some apartments is pretty tame.

        The first order of business should be drawing the borders. If the Palis aren’t willing to agree to borders, then the Israelis should set their own, and defend them. And not go outside of them without permission or provocation.

        Of course, the Palis will never agree to borders, so this approach gets around that. Once Israel has announced its borders, it should also announce that it will have no objection to the recognition of a Palestinian state. And that it will regard attacks from the territory of the Palestinian state as acts of war, and will respond as necessary to terminate such attacks. Permanently.

        That’s my middle east “peace” plan. Israel gets defensible borders, the Palis get their state, and I suspect it would result in peace, after a brief but intense escalation of violence.

        1. “a state of war (or at least armed conflict) has existed between Israel and the Palestinians for quite some time now”
          _
          u mean hamas ?

        2. “Technically (and pedantically), you can only be at war with another sovereign nation”

          So technically (and pedantically) the American Revolution, Texas Revolution and the Civil War weren’t really wars because they were over disputed, non-sovereign territories?

          “Compared to randomly mortaring and rocketing Israelis, building some apartments is pretty tame.”

          Not when you consider the fact that Israel takes their military deep into Palestinian territory to “protect” these settlements, I don’t see how it is any different from an armed invasion. That doesn’t justify how Palestinian terrorist groups target innocent Israeli citizens, but if they merely defend their terrority by engaging the Israeli invaders, Israel will simply bomb their cities and kill lots of civilians as well.

          Your solution may not be the worst idea, but I would bet Israel would try to hold on to every last settlement and continue to slice up and invade Palestinian territory even if that country is nominally independent.

    3. JOOOOOOS!!!!1!111!!!1

      ……./\………
      ___/__\___..
      \…/……\…/
      .\ /……..\./…
      ../\………/\…
      /__\___ /__\
      ……\…/……
      …….\./…….

  34. With friends like these, Part II.

    As we welcome the Arab spring one of our ‘key allies in the region’ answers with this bit of enlightened policy

    Two days after Saudi King Abdullah’s decision to allow women to participate in elections, two Saudi women were punished for breaking the ban on female driving: One was sentenced to 10 lashes by a court in Jeddah and another was detained in Riyadh.

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/…..1A74E9.DTL

    1. Re: MNG,

      Two days after Saudi King Abdullah’s decision to allow women to participate in elections, two Saudi women were punished for breaking the ban on female driving: One was sentenced to 10 lashes by a court in Jeddah and another was detained in Riyadh.

      Seeing how frightenly incompetent some Arab female drivers are here in Houston, I’m almost driven to take them out of their minivans and give them 10 lashes myself… Maybe the Saudis are on to something here…

      1. Seeing how frightenly incompetent some Arab female drivers are here in Houston…

        Don’t be racist and stuff, OM. We have shitty drivers of every race, creed, nationality, color and species here in Houston. It’s truly a multi-cultural smorgasbord of incompetence.

        1. Whenever I’m in a real city, I like to play the “guess the age/sex/race of the shitty driver” game. Here in Cleveland, our racial choices are pretty limited, and you can tell if the driver is black or Puerto Rican by the car having temporary tags or Puerto Rican flags everywhere.

        2. I would *never* volunteer to wield the lash against some of those hot female Saudi drivers, so just get that idea out of your heads.

      2. Actually, I find where I live the best predictor of slow, awful driving is a US flag and/or yellow ribbon on the back of the vehicle. If any vehicle with that turns out in front of you, give yourself an extra five-ten minutes travel time.

        1. Yeah, it was really bizarre. After 9/11 an American flag was almost a guarantee that the driver would be crappy. I pointed it out to my parents and they came to agree with me.

          I can’t tell you how many of those drivers would swerve and cut me off while driving at about 20 miles per hour.

        2. Nope…the ichthys. Or people who physcially have a phone pressed to the side of their heads.

        3. You know I have come to the conclusion that by and large any sort of bumper sticker, or magnent on a car signifies a shitty driver.

        4. Here in NYC, the red-flag is the Zip-Car logo. You are now driving behind someone who doesn’t own a car, in all likelihood hasn’t driven one in several years, and is utterly unprepared for our traffic.

  35. Quick question about Herman Cain’s “9-9-9” plan which I heard discussed on NPR this morning. It was said the plan aims to lower corporate taxes to 9% and institute a 9% sales tax while doing away with capital gains and estate tax and setting income taxes at 9%. Does this mean if someone makes his living through profits other than income they will only pay the sales tax?

    1. Income, as defined in the tax code, means “all income from whatever source derived.” Unless Cain proposes to change the statutory definition, I don’t see where you would get “profits” that aren’t also “income.”

    2. Yeah, I’d guess income from capital gains would be essentially subject to the 9% rate as well, just would be folded into income.

  36. Veterans attempt citizens arrest of Rumsfeld in Boston Posted on 09.27.11
    By David Edwards

    Several members of the group Veterans for Peace were escorted out of the Old South Meeting House in Boston Monday night after they attempted a citizen’s arrest of former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

    “I went down in front and looked Donald Rumsfeld in the eye and said, ‘I’m making a citizen’s arrest,'” protester Nate Goldschlag told WCVB-TV.

    “He lied us into Iraq. He lied about weapons of mass destruction. He lied about Saddam Hussein being involved in 9/11.”

    http://www.rawstory.com/rawrep…..in-boston/

    1. The Boston Herald story on that contained what can only be described as one of the best comments ever. It read as follows:

      “One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.”
      –President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

      “If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”
      –President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

      “Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.”
      –Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

      “He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.”
      –Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

      “[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.”
      Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
      — Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

      “Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.”
      -Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

      “Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.”
      — Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

      “There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.”
      Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
      — Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

      “We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them.”
      — Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

      “We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.”
      — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

      “Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.”
      — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

      “We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.”
      — Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

      “The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons…”
      — Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

      “I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.”
      — Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

      “There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.”
      — Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

      “He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do”
      — Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

      “In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members … It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.”
      — Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

      “We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.”
      — Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

      “Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real…”
      — Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

      1. all based on intentionally misleading “intel” cooked-up by rummy’s team.

        1. LOL You are funny. So Rummy was misleading Bill Clinton, Madaline Albright and Nancy Pelosi in 1998 and 1999 when he wasn’t even in public office? Wow. He is a regular super villain.

        2. the 9/11 commission & the senate select cmte BOTH reviewed team boosch’s “intel” & concluded:

          1) no evidence of an iraq/aQ connection.

          2) no evidence of nukes…like the IAEA warned.

          1. An no claim that Iraq was ever involve din 9-11. I suppose they also concluded Libya wasn’t involved. And of course none of the statements above relate to AQ.

          2. also neither cheney, boosch, nor rummy can travel to some EU nations, like the UK, because of war-criminal indictments

            1. Do they plan to indict Obama for continuing the war and killing civilians with drone strikes in Pakistan and engaging in an illegal war in Libya?

              1. no [BOOTZ] on the groud so it not real war so it is not unlegal

                1. But what about all the Marines who are allegedly accounting for all those surface to air missiles you told me about above? No boots on the ground? And yes, bombing someone is a war and illegal.

                  1. no the marines are doing embassy surveys.

                2. old mex spoof^

            2. our [BOMBZ] in libya only rain flowerz on the heds of libyan civilyunz its bootiful

              1. libya shot the illegals so we should too

          3. Re: The unreal Double Asshole,

            the 9/11 commission & the senate select cmte BOTH reviewed team boosch’s “intel” & concluded:

            1) no evidence of an iraq/aQ connection.

            2) no evidence of nukes…like the IAEA warned.

            And yet the Dems voted for the war! With glee! Imagine that….

            1. They were fooled Old Mexican. Double asshole’s only defense of the Democrats is that they might actually be dumber than he is.

              1. except that the intel was cooked

                  1. is that when iraq had nukes?

                1. i cooked intel wunce didnt taste gud atall

                  1. my illegal relatives cook good

  37. Here you go Sugar Free. My fiance wants a sex change operation.

    http://dearwendy.com/?p=5535

    1. How the fuck is the response not, “Dump him, you stupid girl?”

    2. I’ve been with my fianc? for three years. We’re both at least 21. I care about him more then anything, but he recently informed me that he was really considering getting a sex change and becoming a woman. I only want him to be happy, so I would never keep him from this decision. I also recently lost my virginity to him,

      Unless you are hyper-religious a 18-20 year-old guy who is OK not having sex for three years is a huge red-flag. Of course, if having sex with her convinces him it’s time to geld himself, there might be something wrong with her too.

      1. I wonder how much crying on his part was involved on that special night.

        1. “Why are your eyes closed? Don’t you want to look at me when we make love?”

  38. I still contend that Roy Cohn wasn’t a HUAC lawyer as claimed in a previous article.

    1. How so? I thought that was how he got famous.

  39. Dispatch from the fainting couch.

    the country will probably be wrung through several more near-shutdowns as the 2012 budget process stumbles along, all prompted by conservatives in the House who will use any choke point to achieve their obsessive goal of shrinking government.

    —-

    The next fight is likely to be over bigger issues. House Republicans have already made it clear that they want to slash the budget for the Environmental Protection Agency and curtail its regulation of air pollution through the appropriations process. They also want to cut back severely on a nutrition program for low-income women and children. And guess what is likely to happen if they don’t get their way? Another shutdown fight, and yet another, over more stopgap spending bills.

    Each one of these confrontations has a high cost. They eat up valuable legislative bandwidth; they add uncertainty to the lives of federal workers, those who depend on federal programs, and the financial system; and they contribute to a cynicism and lack of confidence in the political system that damages everyone. They are a principal reason for the nation’s low esteem of Congress.

    Republicans should think of the broad American public, rather than catering to the extreme elements of their base, the next time they push the government to the brink.

    Maybe we should dissolve the Congress; then we could get this country on the right track.

    1. Eat up legislative band width. How are they supposed to complete the task of regulating and controlling every aspect of every person’s lives if they spend their time fighting over the budget? Think of the bureaucrats. Does anyone think of the bureaucrats?

    2. The worse things get, the better. In an emergency, it may well be necessary to suspend elections, dissolve Congress, completely ignore the constitution (90% there anyway)

  40. How the fuck is the response not, “Dump him, you stupid girl?”

    What? How could you get any more cosmopolitan than a gay transgender relationship with your “ex-boy”-friend? That’s lkie the trifecta of empathy politics, dude.

  41. Nothing on Andy Rooney retiring?

    1. He is still alive?

    2. Meh. He retired in place decades ago.

  42. From above, but still very funny. How libs think (with l0b0t’s permission):

    Re: l0b0t,

    Facebook post from Boris Tadethsky – a leftist boob:

    “The entire point Warren is trying to make is that if ‘YOU’ (wealthy and profitable business owner) are going to continue to make ever increasing amounts of profits while paying your workers less, then the government needs to step in and give you a tax increase, so government can maintain our way of life.”

    How quaint. It’s been some time since I’ve seen a clueless bastard use the old, tired, debunked (and left for dead) Marxian theory of wages. I thought only Latin American college professors still espoused this claptrap, but I guess not.

    Oh, by the way, for the Tony’s of the world: The theory states that capitalists make their profits by underpaying their laborers. This idiocy was easily debunked by Eugen von B?hm-Bawerk by pointing out that wage levels are a function of time preference, that is: laborers are paid in advance at a discount because it is the industrialist who takes the risk of selling the product in the future. The laborers could perfectly share on the total sale of the product – all they have to do is wait until it sells. Tell that to auto workers – see if they would like to be paid when the cars they make actually sell.

    Does this mean Marx was an ignorant boob when it came to economics? YES, that is what it means.

    1. me luvs some chinese slavez

      1. Interestingly enough, there’s NOTHING in the above statement that relates to anything I wrote, before or now. Double Asshole is just showing how incompetent and lazy a thinker he is.

        1. lulz grampus go wahtc sienfield

        2. btw ho many slaevz do u haz?

          1. Where’s the funny O2? Or was that the spoofer of O2 being funnier than any of O2’s iterations? What a sad comment about a troll whose spoof is funnier than him.

            1. i spoof my own spoofs

    2. I hear that claptrap all of the time. People who should know better will tell you the problem is that corporate profits are going up while wages are going down.

      1. chinese slaves good

        1. shorter troll. I am too stupid to engage in a debate so I just shit on everyone. Isn’t that funny?

          1. i cant counts words

    3. Slow down – wages have gone down?

      The BEA tells me total private industry wages in 1Q 2009 were $5.11BB, and in 2Q 2011 were $5.46BB. That looks to me like an increase of nearly 3.5% per year.

      1. ya fr rich wite guys

        wat bout the [workrz]?

        1. yellow workers pay low

      2. Re: R C Dean,

        Slow down – wages have gone down?

        That is what the post implies. Remember, this is some lefty with whom l0b0t is arguing on Facebook. He [the lefty guy] really seems to think wages have been going down overall and whence the ‘profiteers’ (as he calls them) get their profits. Forget about selling products with added value, no: Companies make their money by shortchanging their laborers.

        This is the kind of economics ignorance one finds in books like “Nickled And Dimed” despite the fact that a) Wages have been going up and b) It is NOT true that companies obtain their profits sorely by paying their laborers decreasingly less. That’s a Marxian fallacy which was very elegantly debunked by Bohm-Bawerk, in such a way that anybody who espouses such claptrap ends up looking the most pitiful of fools.

      3. Population growth. Per capita wages have been stagnant or shrinking after adjusting for CPI (and getting crushed if using a real measure of inflation) for decades.

  43. And the BLS tells me that private industry wages increased by 2.3% year over year for 2Q 2011 (most recent data).

  44. Don’t you want to look at me when we make love?

    The jiggling makes me seasick.

  45. At the Solyndra hearings today, the implication was that DOE did not perform good due diligence. That was a totally erroneous assumption. This has nothing to do with good or bad due diligence. What this is about is that in a 2008 meeting: Lachlan Seward, Matt Rogers & Steve Spinner pointed to a piece of paper and, essentially, said: “these are our friends, they will get money. These are their competitors and our lobbyists competitors, they will not get money.” All so-called due-diligence thereafter was purposely non-existent or steered towards those friends and against those competitors. I was there!

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.