Reason Morning Links: TSA Offers Half-Apology to Humiliated Breast Cancer Survivor, Undocumented Families Flee a Newly Martial Alabama, Obama Writes the RNC's Next Campaign Ad


  • The TSA half-apologizes for groping passenger Lori Dorn, whose double masectomy triggered an airport nudie scanner and led to her getting groped: "'We regret that this passenger did not have a positive experience,' the agency said in a statement that was provided to The Hill Monday afternoon. TSA did not, however, say that patting down Dorn was inappropriate. Instead, the agency said that Dorn's medical condition 'should have triggered a more compassionate response from our officers, such as an offer on our part of private screening.'"
  • President Obama to ABC News: "I don't think that they're better off than they were four years ago. They're not better off than they were before Lehman's collapse, before the financial crisis, before this extraordinary recession that we're going through."
  • A California judge goes after the Fullerton Police Department (most recently in the news due to the death of homeless man Kelly Thomas) for putting a cop accused of sexually assaulting and/or harassing seven women back on street duty. 
  • An exodus began in Alabama last night after a judge upheld the state's new Arizona-like immigration law: "They left behind mobile homes, sold fully furnished for a thousand dollars or even less. Or they just closed up and, in a gesture of optimism, left the keys with a neighbor. Dogs were fed one last time; if no home could be found, they were simply unleashed."
  • National Journal: "New e-mails released Monday show the White House was warned about Solyndra's potential problems even before President Obama visited the company's Fremont, Calif., headquarters and used it as a backdrop for his push for renewable energy investment and green jobs."
  • A reporter for Rupert Murdoch's staid iPad app The Daily recreates Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.

New at "Ken Burns on PBS Funding, Being a "Yellow-Dog Democrat," & Missing Walter Cronkite"

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

298 responses to “Reason Morning Links: TSA Offers Half-Apology to Humiliated Breast Cancer Survivor, Undocumented Families Flee a Newly Martial Alabama, Obama Writes the RNC's Next Campaign Ad

  1. I’m beginning to suspect Mallow Cups are just Peanut Butter Cups with cocoa butter cream instead of peanut butter.

    1. Darn it!

    2. Oh great, you just gave Bok his Friday Funny.

      1. I looked it up and it’s Mallo Cup made by Boyer’s, which is apparently a different company than Reese’s. So you tell me, who stole who’s idea? And if there’s no patent, why is nothing else being put into chocolate cup form?

        1. They’re waiting for the whole Cran-____ craze to die down.

    3. Whatever happened to “BUN”? My childhood best-friend scarfed those up while I thought they looked suspect.

      Of course there was the rumor about the guy who knew a guy (who knew a guy) who bought one with chocolate-covered maggots.

      1. I googled “BUN” and your best friend and didn’t find what you’re talking about, which intrigues me even more.

          1. Bun candy bars have a mound of milk chocolate, roasted peanuts and a creamy maple, vanilla or caramel center.

            Suspect? They sound great. You’re off my candy advice list. The occasional maggot is the price you pay.

            1. back then I was definitely geared towards the SweeTarts side of things.

            2. I forgot about BUN – those were a nice diversion from my usual Snickers as a yute.

      2. BUN is in the office vending machine, or at least it was last week when I last used it.

        1. it is your mission to buy and then eat said BUN. Report on the tastiness, or lack of.

    4. snack *mornSnack = (snack *) malloc(2 * sizeof(pbCup_t));

      1. I don’t care what you say, they were a delicious, bite-sized treat for the whole family (except infants and the diabetics). Your science can’t take that away.

        1. Dammit, someone explain db’s joke for me, please.

          1. I will if someone explains the whole mallo cup thing.

            1. Well, there’s no explanation for the mallo cup thing, so I guess I’m S.O.L.

              1. It’s basically “c” for “i wish i had 2 peanut butter cups.” malloc() is a c standard library function for allocating memory and takes the size of the memory needed as an argument, returning a pointer to the allocated memory. In this case, it would sadly be an empty peanut butter cup wrapper.

                1. But it isn’t funny if you have to explain it.

                  1. Well, it’s still clever. Thanks.

  2. …but the unemployment rate is still way too high.”

    No way!


  3. Axe-hole Rose got fat.…..ounds.html

    1. Another victim of inflation.

    2. He’s like the Al Gore of rock ‘n’ roll: fat and irrelevant.

    3. Clearly he has an Appetite for Destruction.

      1. Well, an Appetite for something, anyways. I wouldn’t think Destruction would be so fattening.

        1. Rolling on the floor. Laughing.

          1. If he did more of that he might not be so fat.

  4. “‘We regret that this passenger did not have a positive experience,’

    Holy fuck.

    1. a more compassionate response from our officers, such as an offer on our part of private screening

      Ditto. “How about I feel you up where no one can witness it?”

      1. Please only a SUPERVISOR can squeeze your horrid scar tissue. You should be honored.

    2. “We really wish that she could have relaxed and just had a good time.”

      1. We have cookies!

    3. This is a variation of the “We’re sorry you got offended” non-apology, isn’t it?

      1. We must always be alert to the threat of…



    Emails show top DOJ officials knew about gunawalking. Can we get an indictment for lying to Congress now?

    1. Hold on, we got this whole rock in Texas thing and maybe some more murdering hotties.

      1. Well, in all fairness, we’ve got to give you a pass on the murdering hotties story.

    2. Heard some of that this morning. Part of the problem is that normally an independent prosecutor would be appointed by the DOJ.

    3. I haven’t run this to ground, but the MSM said stuff like these memos referred to some other operation and that Holder misunderstood the Congressional question.

      1. Holder: “oh, rainbows! Yeah I like those!”

      2. Holder: “OH! You mean THAT gunwalker!”

        1. Holder: “Isn’t he some sort of Texas Ranger?”

    4. So this has gotten close enough to the White House now that they’re preparing the “Bush did it too” defense with Wide Receiver.

      1. I’m waiting for the “Reagan did it too” defense.

      2. Hey, if that’s what it takes to get Senate Democrats on board for a special prosecutor, let them.

  6. The exodus of Hispanic immigrants began just hours after a federal judge in Birmingham upheld most provisions of the state’s far-reaching immigration enforcement law.

    A real life A Day Without a Mexican. Paradise or perdition? Let’s see how it turns out.

    1. “”””Dogs were fed one last time; if no home could be found, they were simply unleashed.”””‘

      So the NYT accuses illegals of being cruel to animals.

      1. That is pretty sad, actually…

      2. Who let the dogs out?! Who! Who! Who! Who!

      3. Anyone who doesn’t adopt one of those dogs is heartless!

      4. Mexicans are as a group cruel as hell to animals. That probably shocks many people’s delicate PC sensibilities. But it is true.

        1. It’s a cultural thing. I’m sure Hindus consider us cruel to animals. I’m not offended.

          1. It is a sick cultural thing. My sister lives in a town that is 70% illegal Mexican. The things they do to dogs are just disgusting. I am not letting them off the hook. Fuck them the sick bastards.

            1. I meant to say that I wasn’t offended by your comment. I do find wanton cruelty to animals offensive.

        2. I worked with this Mexican who told me a story about passing time on a long bus ride. In the back of the bus there were chickens in cages. So for fun he and his buddies would jerk off onto the cages and then laugh as the chickens ate the stuff up.
          Totally gross.

          1. Those people have issues if jerking off on chickens was the best entertainment they could figure.

            1. They also have pointy shoes


              1. Maybe they’re compensating for something.

          2. Is this game called choking on the chicken?

          3. Human/chicken eugenics in its infancy.

    2. The exodus of Hispanic immigrants began just hours after a federal judge in Birmingham upheld most provisions of the state’s far-reaching immigration enforcement law.

      Wait, what? What a strange law that specifies Hispanic immigrants rather than just illegal immigrants.
      Gotta love the NYT.

      1. because there’s soo many somalis in bama ?

        1. Why don’t you go look and report back to us?

    3. Kind of blows a hole in that whole stupid “they’re already here, we can’t ship X million of them out of here tomorrow” argument, doesn’t it?

      1. “Waaaaaaaaahh!!!”

      2. Not really. They could just be shifting preferentially based on differences in local law in the absence of a compelling reason to stay in Alabama.

        That is dramatically easier than actually having to enforce the law, if they had nowhere else to go but Mexico.

  7. EU carbon trading scheme pays for murder of 23 farmers in Honduras

    In Scramble for Land, Group Says, Company Pushed Ugandans Out
    …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…

    …But in this case, the government and the company said the settlers were illegal and evicted for a good cause: to protect the environment and help fight global warming.

    The case twists around an emerging multibillion-dollar market trading carbon-credits under the Kyoto Protocol, which contains mechanisms for outsourcing environmental protection to developing nations….

    1. Just wait, if they ever get the Doha trade deal done, this will open the door wide open to third world plantations supplying food to the first world. It will be easy, just make a deal with a local third world leader, take over the best land, kick out most of the locals, build the plantation and profit.

      1. This plan is clearly ethical because:
        – Eminent domain
        – Commerce clause

  8. Liberal Fascism is the new black

    Most IPCC coordinating lead authors work for WWF
    …She has compared two lists. One of them is a list of scientists hired by the World Wildlife Fund, a huge international ecoterrorist corporation. According to the WWF, these “scientists” work for the WWF to support the claims by “Climate Witnesses”.

    The other list is a list of authors of the 2007 IPCC report. She found 78 people in the intersection of these two sets….

    1. I still always think wrestling first when I see WWF.

    2. WWF is not “ecoterrorist”. You seriously need to find a Drama Queens Anonymous group.

      1. Yeah, I found that assertion to be questionable as well.

  9. Question, is the angry protester with the geek glasses currently pictured in the middle of the Drudge Report over the headline Wall Street Protesters Call For Re-election of Obama? a male or female? I can’t tell.

    1. Those are girl glasses, so let’s give it the benefit of the doubt.

      1. Very well, then.

    2. Definitely a woman. A somewhat Madovian woman, NTTAWTT, but I’m 99% sure.

    3. I followed some links from there, and arrived at Prison Planet. (I know, I know.)

      The video is really entertaining though. Highlights include saying the government has been privatized and force is justified if it increases freedom.

    4. If you can’t tell, it doesn’t matter.

  10. In a move to lighten the atmosphere at screening points, TSA to distribute “Show us yer tits” ball caps bought at Spencer gifts.

    1. I heard they’re also going to give kids one of these to wear during the pat down.

    2. They were going to name the agency “FBI” but that was already taken. Spencer’s lost out on a huge uniform contract there.

  11. New e-mails released Monday show the White House was warned about Solyndra’s potential problems…

    In Obama’s defense, those emails went right to his Blackberry’s spam box, based on a rule set up to look for views contrary to his own.

    1. He may share an inbox with Eric Holder. No one, officially, reads any emails that are sent there.

  12. I’m afraid to read the F&L in LV piece. I foresee bad mojo.

    1. I tried, but it’s too boring.

      1. Your words, oddly enough, give me hope.

        1. I hit 26 years at my publication this week. My book will be called Ennui & Cocooning in Columbus.

          1. Not bad.

            1. BTW, I agree with Warty. That article was boring as all get-out.

  13. ‘should have triggered a more compassionate response from our officers, such as an offer on our part of private screening.’

    Bull-fucking-shit. From yesterday’s article:

    When she was told her breasts would have to be subjected to a pat down by a female supervisor, Mrs Dorn explained that she had a Device Identification Card, issued to patients for exactly this type of situation.

    She asked them if she could retrieve it from her bag.

    Instead, Ms Dorn claims she was told loudly in front of the other passengers that she could not retrieve the card and must submit to a physical exam in order to be cleared.

    So they’re still saying the card she had designed to avoid exactly this humiliation was not acceptable. She could just get groped in private. Rage.

    1. ive got a card for my metal teatz

  14. Drudge made me watch several minutes of The View yesterday. If you dare, you will notice Shepherd is in the Jesus spot of that Last Supper scene, and Walters is apparently Judas for the betrayal of being white and saying the word. And, God help me, Whoopie was making the most sense.

    1. The current state of US race relations – and one of major causes for that condition – could not have been better exhibited than by Shepherd’s idiocy yesterday.

      1. Agreed. Completely irrational.

      2. Nigger, please!

  15. Man-Cave Masculinity:
    A man’s quest for his soul starts with a walk downstairs.…..aces_.html

    Staying home and declaring, “I’m totally OK with that!” produces its own peculiar macho code. At its simplest level, a man cave, like a saloon, represents an escape hatch. “I feel like when I shut the door, I’m isolated from all the frustrations of being a dad and a husband,” one man caver told the Nashville Tennessean. Another told the Calgary Herald, “It’s almost like you walk down the steep stairs and everything else is forgotten.” James B. Twitchell, author of the book Where Men Hide, compared this downstairs walk with ones that lead to other illicit male redoubts?strip clubs, opium dens?where there are no windows, where the outside world can’t see in.

    My own man cave used to be in the garage. With my new house, I’m down in the basement. There I have my stereo setup (vintage Threshold gear, Magnepan speakers, VPI turntable), my computer for the occasional video game, my workstation for soldering my own DIY creations, and a weight-bench for keeping fit. It’s a slice of heaven.

    1. What about the litter box?

      1. my tomcat is afraid of the washing machine (!), so it’s in the upstairs bathroom.

        1. Cats are so neurotic.

          1. It’s the litter box. Seriously.

      2. way to [GAYZ] it up fellas

    2. …strip clubs, opium dens…

      Wow. I just had a great idea for a business.


    Florida city officials worried about new law that will actually punish them for violating state law and banning guns in their city.

    Along with objecting to the loss of local control, Gallegos wrote that threatening local officials with $5,000 fines “speaks to a degree of intimidation seemingly unprecedented.”

    Jeri Muoio, mayor of West Palm Beach, was so alarmed by the idea of guns at City Hall that last week she arranged for police escorts for armed visitors to the building. She retracted that decision on Thursday, after learning that requiring the escorts might also violate state law.

    Now armed visitors will be allowed into City Hall. But they will be restricted to the first floor, she said.

    1. John,

      Nothing about Foxy Knoxy’s acquittal? I thought for sure you’d be waiting at Sea-Tac to help her re-acclimatize to freedom.

      1. If only I were single, I would have been offering her free legal services and representation.

      2. If only I were single, I would have been offering her free legal services and representation.

      3. If only I were single, I would have been offering her free legal services and representation.

        1. Not only are you non-single, you’re triple!

        2. Damn, John. Squirrels really got ya.

          1. Q got a better line than me.

  17. The Constitutional Populist Realignment Of 2012…..t-of-2012/

    It’s easy to forget, once we’ve cleaned them up and chiseled them into nice, sanitary, granite that the Founders were, literally and figuratively, the Tea Partiers of their day. They too were scorned by their elitists, the Royalists, as seditious riffraff. Polite society heaped our Founders with much the same contempt as our governing class now reserves for the modern Tea Party.

    And most, if not quite all, of the Founders virulently attacked the same darn thing as did Mr. Perry: funny money. Those who wrote and championed the Constitution and the statesmen of young America detested the idea of funny money like Federal Reserve Notes. Real money was, exclusively, gold and silver. They, like Perry, considered their era’s “quantitative easing” both immoral and economically toxic.

    1. Uh. How the hell do you make this statement and use Perry instead of Paul?

      1. dont bother him, he’s on a roll

      2. Remember the First Rule about Paul Club.

  18. Cain is now “top tier.”

    So let’s see, Paul was solidly in third for a quite a while, but got the cold hard diss after Ames, and hasn’t gotten any traction. Meanwhile, Cain wins the P5 straw poll, and it gets hyped to the stratosphere, and, oh! he goes up in the polls. I’m sorry, but that is some serious media manipulation.

    Glad to see Perry is crashing back to earth, at least.

    1. Not that I’d vote for him yet, but I do get the feeling that a Cain nomination is far from the worst thing that could happen. I might even be okay with it.

      1. At least it would make for an entertaining race before Obama’s inevitable, depressing victory.

        1. Obama is going to lose. I think the Democrats are going to dump him before the election.

          1. I think you underestimate the average voter’s resistance to change.

            1. Resistance to “Change” or change?

        2. Cain as the nominee would be even lulzier than Trump; it would be sweet watching a bunch of “tolerant” progs unleash their inner Klansman.

          1. u mean that uncle-rick sellout?

          2. I still maintain a Palin/Bachmann ticket would be the lulziest.

      2. One interesting thing about Cain getting the nomination and beating Obama is that it would destroy the all “Republicans are racist” meme.

        Honestly, the more I think about it, the more I think Cain would be the GOP’s best long term hope. He’s a pretty middle of the road conservative, his business executive experience and lack of political experience have to be positives.

        And if the economy actually improved during his term, with black unemployment decreasing, what happens in 2016 when Cain is running for re-election, probably against another white guy? Do 90% of blacks still vote Democrat?

        1. Do 90% of blacks still vote Democrat?


          1. Nah, I’m honestly thinking high 80s.

        2. Destroy that meme? Silly boy.

          1. I think it only reinforces the meme since Republicans would clearly only consider Cain as a serious candidate because of his race.

        3. lack of political experience have to be positives.

          Not IMO. I’d like to have some indication of how he would handle political situations. I don’t think going straight to the US presidency is a good idea. A political record of some kind is a prerequisite.

          1. Ahem…

            1. Wasn’t Washington a major figure in the Continental Congress prior to maneuvering himself into command of the army?

              1. Yes. He was a wickedly experienced and smart politician. Any general be it Washington, Grant or Eisenhower is a shrewd political operator or they wouldn’t have made general.

                1. So… what you’re saying is: Wesley Clark 2012?

          2. He has executive experience though.

        4. destroy the all “Republicans are racist” meme

          You can have my race card when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.

    2. Once again, Johnson not an option in the poll.

  19. ‘Durbin fee’ will cost bank customers billions

    Durbin pitched his amendment, which empowered federal bureaucrats to fix the fees banks can charge merchants for each debit card transaction at 24 cents, as a blow to the “excess profits” of “big banks.” Banks currently charge an average of just 44 cents per transaction, but for big retailers like Wal-Mart, all those transactions can add up. Analysts estimate that the Durbin amendment will be a $6.6 billion boon for the Targets and Walgreens of the world.

    But big banks didn’t become big by eating billion-dollar losses. Last week Bank of America announced it will start charging customers a $5 fee every month they make at least one debit transaction. And BofA is not alone. Wells Fargo, Chase and SunTrust are all instituting similar versions of the “Durbin fee.” Washington Mutual says it is not adding any debit fees, but is tightening restrictions on free checking accounts. The bottom line is that whatever extra cash retailers are picking up from debit card transactions, consumers are losing from banks.

    1. which is why for small users (e.g. me) , i use a credit union, not a bank. little to no fees, WAY better customer service, great loan rates, personal service, etc.

      1. USAA. I haven’t gotten a loan from them yet, but everything else has been great.

        1. The best.

        2. Same here. Great bank. All online, they refund ATM fees, I download directly into Quicken.

      2. Me too, but my credit union is located 600 miles away from me… And since I may be moving frequently, it sucks having to write a damn notarized letter every time I need to do something with my account.

        1. USAA is set up for service members who move constantly. Seriously – look into them.

      3. ^^^MALL COP ALERT^^^

  20. Obama now wants to let debt collectors call people’s cell phones. Regardless of the wisdom of such a plan, how stupid does a president presiding over falling poll numbers and the worst recession in 70 years have to be to think this is a good political idea?

    1. I’m for it, as long as they preface their statement with “Hello, this is Creditor X calling with permission of President Obama”.

      1. Now that is funny, +1

      2. Go Speed Debtor, go!

    2. Is there some reason I am missing why debt collectors should not be allowed to call people’s cell phones?

      1. I didn’t say it was a bad idea. But I can’t see it being a good political idea.

      2. When I had a land line, we got calls all the time from debt collectors looking for some random assholes who either had that number in the past, had a similar number or address, or just made shit up. The same thing happened at work (different asshole, different DC) — just got calls every single day, and then they’d hang up when it wasn’t the person they were looking for that answered.

        Try that shit on my cell phone, and there will be hell to pay.

    3. Like anyone is going to answer their cell phone if a debt collector calls them.

      Good luck with that, debt collectors.

  21. Greece now in a death spiral of borrowing and debt. But the US’s only rational choice is to borrow a couple of trillion every year.

    1. I’ve got some friends honeymooning in Greece right now. I’ll be interested in their report when they get back (assuming they’ve even noticed the world around them.)

  22. Nine inches of snow has already fallen in West Virginia at Snowshoe Mountain, and it hasn’t even been fall for two weeks yet.

    Remember when those doofuses in England were saying that we would never get to experience snow again thanks to global warming? Those were the days.

    1. That much snow this early is a direct result of global warming, don’t you know that?

    2. Sweet! I hope it stays around. Building a base early is always nice.

    3. MMmm……skiing…..*droooooooool*

      1. I know, I mean have to get out there in the next couple of weeks or so!

    4. weather = climate

  23. “At the end of the day, the city put Rincon back onto the streets to continue arresting women despite a pattern of sexual harassment allegations. A reasonable juror could conclude based on these facts, that the city simply did not care what officers did to women during arrest,” Guilford wrote in denying a motion by the city to dismiss the case. The judge said the city’s actions “suggests a tacit authorization.”

    I don’t know if it’s authorization. To me it appears more likely to be a case of simple unwillingness to deal with a situation. From what I’ve read, the Fullerton City Council is too friendly with its police department.

  24. A Pennsylvania woman was awarded $100 in damages from Walmart over a 2-cent disparity between an item’s tagged price and its scanned price.

    Murrysville District Judge Charles Conway sided with consumer activist Mary Bach of Murrysville, whose civil suit against Walmart claimed the company intentionally charged 2 cents more for Banquet “Brown ‘N Serve” sausage than the price on the tag

    Read more:…..z1ZowT0Fwm

    1. I hope Walmart pays that $100 in pennies…

    2. Nothing wrong with that…if they overcharged 2c on 1000 of those things that’s $20.

      1. I think it was alleged Wal-Mart did this a lot so the fine was probably more punitive than anything else.

  25. from Powerline, so take it as you will.

    Bloomberg Whiffs, Part 1…..part-1.php

    The Bloomberg article appeared today with more of a whimper than a bang. It promised much and delivered little. The printed version is titled “The Secret Sins of Koch Industries,” while the online version is titled “Koch Brothers Flout Law With Secret Iran Sales.” The printed version includes a summary paragraph that says in part, “David and Charles Koch, billionaire brothers and major Tea Party backers, run a corporate empire that has made illicit payments to win contracts, sold chemical equipment to Iran in defiance of a U.S. trade ban?.”

    So both versions explicitly claim that Koch broke the law by allowing a foreign subsidiary to make sales in Iran. But if you actually read the article, you find that Bloomberg contradicts its own lurid claim by acknowledging that in fact, Koch was careful to make sure that its subsidiary’s conduct was fully lawful.

    1. It was a hit piece. And what is funny is that the Kochs give like 15 million or so a year to political causes. That is really not that much money in the bigger picture.

      1. I’ve always said the Koch hysteria on the left is silly, partly for that reason. The left is genuinely concerned about the influence of money and the Kochs have become this easy symbol of that, but the substance behind it is a bit much to say the least.

        1. The left is genuinely concerned about the influence of money


          Which is why they freaked out over a reform in Wisconsin that would have stopped union $$ from going directly from members to Democrats. Oh, and the left doesn’t deliver to the trial bar, either.

          1. One can be genuinely concerned about something without being totally nuanced about all the aspects of it.

            1. Or they can be genuinely unconcerned yet feigning concern to score political points.

            2. One can be genuinely concerned about something without being totally nuanced about all the aspects of it.

              If by “without being totally nuanced about all the aspects of it”, you mean
              very concerned about the corrupting influence of money going to the other team, and very concerned that their team isn’t getting as much money as it wants, I would agree.

        2. *cough*Solyndra*cough*

          The only concern the left has about money in politics is that some of it goes to their opposition.

          1. That’s why the Citizen’s United case they were so up in arms about involved a law that applied to unions as well as corporations…

            1. Yet they received far more “illicit” money during the last election than did Team RED.

              1. What do you mean by “illicit?”

                1. Prepaid credit cards.

            2. They can’t overturn a Supreme Court decision. But they can stoke outrage among their marks base to get more votes and donations, with a remote chance of even ginning up enough support for new speech restrictions which would be more carefully crafted to punish only their enemies. SCOTUS might strike those down too, but unlike LEOs, legislators can’t be held accountable for violating people’s civil rights, so there’s no reason not to keep flinging shit at the wall until something sticks.

        3. I’ve always said the Koch hysteria on the left is silly…

          I think it was Balko who compared it to the Soros hate on the right.

          1. Except Soros gives an order of magnitude more money to his political causes.

          2. Yes, though when I saw that I thought “some con will be unable to resist making some distinction, like Soros gives more”. But T beat me to it. Cons always will rush to your rescue when you are arguing about them.

  26. So I guess ESPN is pulling the plug on the God awful Hank Jr. opening. That is a good thing. But I really can’t see where Williams said anything that bad and certainly no worse than what liberal celebs say every day.

    Williams, whose song “All My Rowdy Friends” has been the Monday Night Football theme on both ABC and ESPN since 1991, told “Fox and Friends” that he thought Speaker of the House John Boehner playing golf with President Obama “would be like Hitler playing golf with (Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin) Netanyahu … In the shape this country is in?”

    Told by anchor Brian Kilmeade that he didn’t understand the analogy, Williams said: “I’m glad you don’t, brother, because a lot of people do. They’re the enemy.” Asked who, Williams said: “Obama. And Biden. Are you kidding? The Three Stooges.”…..pening-mnf

    1. It’s better than that god-awful NBC thing with Faith Hill singing Joan Jett…

      1. True. The Faith Hill one is worse. Why do they have to have an opening at all? For forty years they broadcast football games without such nonsense. Once in a while on NFL network they will replay the broadcast of an old Super Bowl from the 1970s. It is amazing how quiet those broadcasts were. None of the jumping and yelling or endless computer graphics. Just very clean cometary and information presented in a simple fashion. They were a lot better back then I think.

        1. I have to say I have come to truly hate the NBC announce crew as well. And I used to think highly of Colinsworth and Al Michaels, but lately they come off as so insulting to the intelligence of the football fan that it drives me crazy.

          1. I think the best football announce crew is Ron Gilmore and Joe Tessitore. Chris Spielman is great as well.

            1. Agree 100% on Spielman. He’s like a football savant.

              1. And he’s willing to criticize the refs when it is called for. Any announcer who shirks on that I dislike.

            2. agreed on spielman. lou holtz is very diff to understand when excited

              1. He had a stroke or something didn’t he? I give him a pass. The man knows about football and seems like a genuinely nice guy.

            3. The MNF team is awful.

              My favorite announcer is Troy Aikman. Shame they partnered him with that Buck guy.

          2. I always found Colinsworth to be condescending and dickish. The only opinion I have of Michaels is that he sometimes did and OK job of shutting John Madden up.

          3. You can’t do it with NBC, but with Fox and CBS you can use SAP and just get stadium noise. The announcers don’t tell you anything that isn’t on the graphics anyway.

        2. The version that Pink did the first year of SNF was pretty good. Why they switched to Hill is beyond me.

          1. Bigger tits. Southern-friendly.

            1. Faith has bigger ones than Pink? I demand a measurement on that claim.

              1. I’ll need some side-by-side photos to be able to make an informed judgement.

            2. I can’t tell whether those are two separate arguments, or the one implies the other.

    2. Sadly, Hank Jr. does not have half the talent of his father.

      1. Fortunately, Hank III is not only a spitting image of grandpappy, he’s got a metric shitload of talent compared to his old man.

        1. I don’t listen to (much) country, but my philosophy teacher also said the Williams fam was evidence that talent sometimes skips a generation.

          I’m starting to think this is a consensus.

          1. Hank III’s solo shows consist of an hour long country set, break, and an hour of face-melting metal. It’s fucking awesome.

        2. Hank Jr. can sing exactly like his old man. Listen to the sound track to the Hank Williams story sometime. It is Hank Jr. and it might as well be Hank Sr. Hank Jr. just went his own way because he didn’t want to live in the shadow of his old man. The grandson can embrace it a little bit easier.

  27. “”I don’t think that they’re better off than they were four years ago. They’re not better off than they were before Lehman’s collapse, before the financial crisis, before this extraordinary recession that we’re going through.”

    But see, a lot of Obama supporters argue that it takes time for the effect of economic policies to be felt and just like Hoover had to govern during economic woes that were created by Harding-Coolidge so does Obama have to govern in an economic climate ruined by the Bush policies. In both cases the economy went into a tailspin right as the previous administration was getting out and so the supporters of the later administration can make this case with some sense. It’s plausible that structural damage to the economy could be long in the making and long in the fixing despite of the later administration’s policies.

    However, I think Obama should be held to the standard of his own claims, such as that he would prevent unemployment from going over 8%, hope and change and such, and on that criteria he has thus far failed,period.

    1. Agreed. I did not vote for Obama and I think he has been a disaster (just as Bush was) but the current problems were decades in the making (starting when the Carter administration decided to push home ownership). And it will take a lot more than four years for things to improve. No one person could turn things around in the time Obama has been in office.

      That said, its still no excuse to do things which are actually making things worse (e.g. Obama care, harassing businesses like Boeing, etc).

      1. Of course no one person (or the government in general) can turn this around, but Obama said he could do it, spent a trillion based on that conviction, and should be held to account for that. In other words, the man used this crisis as a political opportunity, and I can’t think of a worse thing to say about a leader.

        I might have given him a pass here on the grounds that he fell victim to a Keynesian mass-deluision on stimulus 1. But now that he’s trotted out stimulus 2, we see just how empty and ideological he really is. It’s not a jobs bill but a “God damn America” act.

        1. Agreed. He’s in way over his head and everybody, including his own party, knows it. Sometimes I wonder if he would rather not be president now that he knows what it involves.


    Hank Junior gets canned for saying that Boehner playing golf with Obama is like playing with the enemy.

    But when Chris Matthews says of Obama speaking at West Point that he is in the enemy camp, nothing happens.…..pening-mnf

    1. And Williams is an aging has been crank singer. Matthews is supposed to be a “journalist”. Shouldn’t Matthews be held to a higher standard of conduct than Williams?

      1. Why, yes.

        I was kind of tired of that song, and although Williams’ comments are gauche and an example of why most celebrities should keep their political views to themselves, I don’t see why ESPN removed his song for such a faux pas. It’s not like he’s a diplomat (well, not a real one).

      2. matthews is a entertainer like rush, not a journalist

    2. I think any fair reading of Matthews saying that is he was using political metaphor; the military, especially the officer corps, is about as hostile to liberals as academe is to conservatives. He didn’t mean they were literally Obama’s enemy, just a way of saying it was “unfriendly territory” (which of course doesn’t literally mean that the people there will be unfriendly either, see how hard metaphors are?).

      1. Fair enough, MNG. But using a military metaphor when referring to military cadets is just a little confusing.

        1. Art, are you arguing that any thinking person watching Matthews make that remark was in danger of being confused into thinking that it was literally enemy territory, that Obama was at risk of being captured and held as a POW?


          1. Nah, that’s not what I’m arguing. But I think anyone who has been watching Matthews has already been psychologically pummeled enough to not deserve to have to figure out yhat metaphor. It’s like saying a pastry chef had a half-baked idea, but not trying to be funny. Unless Matthews was trying to be funny. I’m unsure.

            1. P-p-p-preview?

            2. Oh, I see your point (nicely done with the chef analogy).

              I never get worked up about someone like Matthews, who has terrible logorrhea, anyone that talks that much is going to have many clumsy things said. I pity those who actually listen to him for more than ten minutes at a time.

              1. Maybe I should give Matthews the benefit of the doubt here, because military metaphors are fairly prevalent in the English, though.

              2. “…anyone that talks that much is going to have many clumsy things said.”

                That applies to most politcians as well, but awkward turns of phrase from a Bush or Palin is evidence of intellectual inferiority but from an Obama an honest mistake. The gotcha games in politics are getting tiresome.

          2. Thinking people watch MSNBC?

            Don’t confuse emoting for thinking.

            1. Says the “thinking person” who wants to euthanize liberals.

              Go fuck yourself nut.

          3. Art MNG, are you arguing that any thinking person watching Matthews Williams make that remark was in danger of being confused into thinking that it Obama was literally the enemy territory, and that Obama Boehner was at risk of being captured and held as a POW?

      2. That is just not true. Not even close. There are lots of liberal officers. I would say at least 30% of the officer corps could fairly be described as “liberal”. There is no comparing that to the academy where maybe five percent are conservative.

        Further, it is deeply insulting to the military to imply that the CinC is an “enemy”. Mathews was accusing them of being a banana republic Army that only obeys who they like.

        What he said was despicable. And he should have been fired on the spot.

        1. This.

          Let’s dig up the numbers on how many military absentee ballots were cast for Obama.

          1. Millions. A significant portion of the military are black. You don’t think most of them voted for Obama?

            1. A poll conducted late last year by the Military Times found that 57 percent of those surveyed consider themselves Republican, while 13 percent identified with the Democrats. Among the officer corps the numbers were different. Nearly 66 percent of officers considered themselves Republican compared with 9 percent Democratic.


              1. And the Republicans of course are any Democratic President’s “enemy”. It is not that they are dedicated professionals who will do as ordered no matter who the President is. Nope, they consider him their “enemy”.

                1. And here is the classic John Two-Step that fluffy called him out on recently. He makes a factual assertion, in this case “That is just not true. Not even close. There are lots of liberal officers. I would say at least 30% of the officer corps could fairly be described as “liberal”. There is no comparing that to the academy where maybe five percent are conservative.” Then he gets called on it, in this case my numbers from the Military Times.

                  So he changes the subject rather than admit he was wrong. Now he wants to talk about professionalization since he can no longer claim the officer corps is not overwhelmingly conservative.

          2. For Tulpa

            The difference between officers and non-officers, how does it work?

        2. Even by your numbers, 70-30 can reasonably be thought of as “enemy territory”

          1. No it can’t. He was going to a graduation of professional army officers not a biker bar. They are not and God willing will never be the “enemy”. The use of that term is disgusting. Matthews questioned the loyalty and patriotism of everyone there. Matthews is an ignorant clown. But that one was bad even by his admittedly low standards.

            1. It’s obvious to anyone not in the victimization routine what he meant; he was speaking to a group that did not prefer him politically.

              1. That is the new meme with you and Tony. Every time someone points out some appalling behavior on the part of some liberal you scream that they are just being the victim.

                In a way you are right. It is a victimization routine. But that is not a bad thing since in this case the people at West Point were the victims of a nasty slur.

                Yes MNG, when someone says something unfair and untrue about someone else, that person is a victim and has a right to call the other person out for doing it.

                1. It is funny. Folks like you on the right like to point and scream about the “PC police” but when it is a group that the right likes or protects then they scream just as loud with a victimized shrill outrage. Think of cons complaining about “anti-Catholic bigotry” or Palin attacking Obama’s “special olympics” comment, or here, the oversized umbrage over this comment which any fair person would rightly see as a reference to a group that doesn’t support the President’s policies.


                  “when someone says something unfair and untrue about someone else”

                  But it is neither unfair or untrue:

                  70-30 can reasonably be thought of as “enemy territory”

                  1. 70-30 can reasonably be thought of as “enemy territory”

                    No it can’t when those people are officers sworn to defend the Constitution and the nation. That is the point.

          2. I hate to be on MNG’s side about anything, but in my experience it is extraordinarily routine to describe any audience made up primarily of one’s political opponents to be “enemy territory”.

            If I went to speak to a group of liberal senior citizens, that would be me going to “enemy territory”.

            Anyone upset about what Mathews said really, really needs to stop clutching their pearls and pretending to faint, because it’s both ridiculous and sad.

            1. But in the end, the Commander-in-Chief is the head of all the military, so how the hell could it be ‘enemy territory’? That’s the part that struck me as a little ‘off’ about the phrase.

              1. Well, if the CEO heads to a union meeting, that could be considered enemy territory, even though they all technically work for him.

                Granted, there’s no real culture of honor, loyalty, or service among union guys, and they actually do think of management as the enemy.

    3. We’ve got a president who described his short stint in the private sector as “going behind enemy lines”.

  29. Finally! Change I can believe in!

    Obama seeks debt collector proposal

    WASHINGTON (AP) — To the dismay of consumer groups and the discomfort of Democrats, President Barack Obama wants Congress to make it easier for private debt collectors to call the cellphones of consumers delinquent on student loans and other billions owed the federal government.

    The change “is expected to provide substantial increases in collections, particularly as an increasing share of households no longer have landlines and rely instead on cellphones,” the administration wrote recently.…..4-06-36-08

  30. Too fat to have an abortion.

    Yo momma so fat, she had you!

    1. I thought the abortion doctor wearing a t-shirt that said ‘No Fat Chicks’ was a bit unprofessional.

    2. Well that was fucking revolting…

      1. She was only 250, though, Rex. For some reason, I was picturing more obscene obesity.


    Armageddon never happened. Newly released data for Chicago shows that, as in Washington, murder and gun crime rates didn’t rise after the bans were eliminated — they plummeted. They have fallen much more than the national crime rate.

    Not surprisingly, the national media have been completely silent about this news.

    One can only imagine the coverage if crime rates had risen. In the first six months of this year, there were 14% fewer murders in Chicago compared to the first six months of last year ? back when owning handguns was illegal. It was the largest drop in Chicago’s murder rate since the handgun ban went into effect in 1982.

    Meanwhile, the other four most populous cities saw a total drop at the same time of only 6 percent.

    Similarly, in the year after the 2008 “Heller” decision, the murder rate fell two-and-a-half times faster in Washington than in the rest of the country.

    It also fell more than three as fast as in other cities that are close to Washington’s size. And murders in Washington have continued to fall.

    If you compare the first six months of this year to the first six months of 2008, the same time immediately preceding the Supreme Court’s late June “Heller” decision, murders have now fallen by thirty-four percent.

    Wasn’t somebody claiming “more guns = more shootings” just yesterday?

    1. OMG, P Brooks has data from a Fox News opinion article reviewing six months worth of information, by God that settles this complex and long debated issue!

      You’re funny Brooksie.

      1. For Brooksie, your morning smack in the face:…..ERSHIP.pdf…..6-0071.pdf

        Take that and stack it up with your FoxNews article.

        1. Neither of those things say anything about Chicago. The fact is none of the horror stories that people like Mayor Daily claimed would happen have happened. That is significant whether you admit it or not.

          And what the hell is up with you and guns? Is this your way to try to change the subject from the gun walker scandal? You used to be anti gun control.

          1. I am and always have been anti-gun control, but I’m also anti-sloppy thinking of any type. Crime rates have been declining in a lot of places for a while, they may well be declining, in such a small sample and time frame, for a number of reasons and in spite of any recent legal changes.

            It’s common sense that if a dangerous item is more readily available then accidents and such involving that item are going to increase. Gun rights should be argued on different grounds, that the rights of the many who don’t harm anybody should not be restricted based on the accidents and wrongs of a few.

            1. Common sense is de facto sloppy thinking. If you are going to play statistician or econometrician you should probably refrain from using the term common sense. It makes you look like a public policy academic instead of someone who is actually,”anti-sloppy thinking of any type.”

              1. “Common sense is de facto sloppy thinking.”

                Actually commpon sense is more often right than not. The “wisdom of crowds” or as Burke, the father of conservatism called it the “bank of the ages” is more often than not correct.

                Here what I mean is actually economic thinking. The easier something is to get the more people are going to have it and, of course, the more things associated with the having are going to occur (mishandlings, suicides, etc).

                1. the easier something is to get the more people are going to have it and, of course, the more things associated with the having are going to occur (mishandlings, suicides, etc).

                  That is not true. There is no correlation in the US between rates of gun ownership and homocide rates. Indeed, many cities like Chicago and Washington that have low gun ownership rates have very high homocide rates. You assume that all gun ownership is the same. But it is not. There is a huge difference between a criminal owning a gun and an average person owning a gun. Gun control restricts average people from owning guns but doesn’t affect criminal possession of guns. When you end gun control, you increase the positive possession of guns.

                  And you fail to mention all of the positive things that occur with increased gun ownership. Those things increase too. And the benefits of that increase greatly outweigh the downsides.

            2. “It’s common sense that if a dangerous item is more readily available then accidents and such involving that item are going to increase.”

              No it is really not. That is a sloppy and shallow way to think about it. The number of people killed in gun accidents each year is extremely small. More people die in swimming pools. So even if accidents doubled or tripled it still wouldn’t be a significant number.

              What is significant is the deterrence factor of criminals knowing that law abiding people have guns. Live break ins are much more common in areas with strict gun laws than those that don’t. There is a whole book called More Guns Less Crime that shows how property and physical assault crimes go down in places where people are armed.

              It is funny that you claim to be so concerned about sloppy thinking and then you give out kindergarten logic in response.

              1. “The number of people killed in gun accidents each year is extremely small.”

                Yes, and this is a good argument for not restricting their use. As I said:

                “that the rights of the many who don’t harm anybody should not be restricted based on the accidents and wrongs of a few”

                But you’re making a sloppy move here, the above being true and important doesn’t preclude the fact that the more of something you have around and the more available it is the more likely accidents related to it are going to happen.

                But we don’t need just common sense, as the more rigorous statistical analyses I provided above show there is a strong correlation between gun availability and gun deaths internationally.

                1. The way I argue for gun rights is to say “sure, there may be some more amount of overall harm in some forms connected to greater availibility of guns. After all being raised around guns my father would tell me that a gun could be a very dangerous thing, so the more of them it’s not crazy to think the more dangerous things could happen. But lots of things liberals allow can be connected to some dangerous things. Not just obvious things like cars and pools, though true. But take things like speech the First Amendment allows. It’s not unlikely that some people somewhere harm someone in large part because of some speech they were exposed to, but liberals insist the good of allowing free speech outweighs this. Ditto with guns.”

                2. Hmm. I seem to recall Japan is the confounding country on the suicide study. Very low gun ownership, very high suicide rates.

                  1. Very tall buildings?

                    1. I don’t recall the method of choice. Hanging, maybe? That was kind of a side track on some suicide research I was doing a while back that I never pursued.

                  2. Lots more expensive train track cleanups.

            3. I think you’re setting the standard of proof too high.

              You’re right that since crime rates are declining anyway long-term, we can’t really point at Heller and say that it caused further declines in crime rates. Those further declines might have happened anyway, for any number of reasons.

              But we CAN say that Heller has not led to any INCREASE in the crime rate.

              If getting rid of gun control doesn’t increase the crime rate, why continue to have gun control? Out of perversity? Just to be dicks?

              We don’t have to prove any improvement in our crime situation post-Heller. We just have to show that we didn’t shit the bed. That makes correlation / causation hair-splitting moot.

        2. “For Brooksie, your morning smack in the face”

          What an asshole.

    2. MNG, why can’t we just say that the data since the Chicago gun ban was struck down shows a decrease in murder and gun crime that exceeds the decline nationally?

      Isn’t that accurate?

      Wasn’t somebody claiming “more guns = more shootings” just yesterday?

      Why yes, somebody was. As if it was axiomatic, in spite of all the data to the contrary.

  32. I read the “Fear and Loathing” piece – thought it was pretty entertaining. Vegas always sucked and was kind of sad – now it sucks worse. Wow…

    I’ll go back for parts 3 and 4.

    Thanks for the linky, Riggs!

    PS Riggs! Cop killers!! *throws gun to Riggs*

    /Lethal Weapon 754

    1. Cut it out.
      He’s too old for that shit.

      /been holding that in far too long

  33. You’re funny Brooksie.


    Yes, I am.

    And tomorrow, I’ll still be funny, and you’ll still be an obnoxious barking dog.

  34. The exodus of Hispanic immigrants began just hours after a federal judge in Birmingham upheld most provisions of the state’s far-reaching immigration enforcement law.

    In other news, tickets being issued for running red light at busy intersection; drivers now stopping and going.

    1. That’s not the greatest analogy for this crowd, as Reason is against enforcing red light laws too.

      1. Reason is against enforcing red light laws
        Speaking of tools…

  35. Really? Illegals leaving Alabama is an “exodus”? There ain’t no need for a Mexican Moses to tell the governor “let my people go”, bubs.

    Reason’s melodramatic tic with regard to illegal immigration remains unscathed, it appears.

    1. The Mexican Moses is parting the Gulf of Mexico as we speak.

    2. Hey, Tulpa. Maybe now you can finally get that job trimming hedges.

      1. THAT’S RACIST!!!!!1

    3. Any time any large group of people leave an area it’s routine to describe it as an exodus.

      The word does not solely belong to downtrodden slaves fleeing an evil pharaoh. If it did, we’d have to strike the word from the dictionary because circumstances permitting its use would no longer exist.

      BTW – Can I assume that now that the illegal immigrants have all left Alabama will turn into a paradise, with no unemployment, lots of economic growth, farm workers earning $15 an hour, schools that it’s easy to fund because no illegals are sending their kids there, a state government that can easily afford to pay its Medicaid bill and prisons bill, and all the other stuff I’ve been led to believe would magically happen if there were no illegal immigrants in a given locality?

      Let’s watch.

      1. Did you check that strawman’s I-9 form before employing it?

  36. Which “red light laws”?

    I support a free exchange of bodily fluids for a mutually agreed-upon price between two willing post-pubescent individuals.

    1. free exchange
      mutually agreed-upon price

      Might wanna tighten up that wording just a bit.

  37. “Two (or more)” I should say.

  38. Here’s an interesting piece at ThinkProgress, of all places, explaining that the Occupy Wall Street protests are not anti-capitalist. This part in particular is really impressive:

    But the actual organizing principle of the demonstrations is to speak with moral clarity of the economic inequality of our current system. The purpose is not to attack capitalism but rather an industry whose wealth was guarded to the hilt by government intervention ? backed up by trillons of dollars of taxpayer money through programs like the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and near-zero interest Federal Reserve lending ? a form of government intervention that the banking industry received but millions of foreclosed on homeowners and debt-laden students did not get.

    During a teach-in at Zucotti Park, the site of the occupation, Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz explained that what Wall Street is practicing is “not capitalism.” “We are bearing the costs of their [bankers’] misdeeds,” he said. “There’s a system where we socialize losses and privatize gains. That’s not capitalism. That’s not a market economy. That’s a distorted economy, and if we continue with that, we won’t succeed in growing.”

    1. That would only make sense if this protest was an Occupy The Capitol protest and these kids were shutting down Constitution Avenue.

      1. The fact that someone is talking about socialized losses and privatized gains in front of that crowd is pretty great.

        As for Wall St. vs the Capitol, well, it’s a bit of a chicken/egg problem at this point. Although it would be a serious man bites dog story if the lefties went to DC and protested government bailouts and intervention as “not capitalism”.

        1. “The fact that someone is talking about socialized losses and privatized gains in front of that crowd is pretty great.”

          Until you consider that they just want to change that to “socialize the loss and socialize the gains”.

  39. But we CAN say that Heller has not led to any INCREASE in the crime rate.

    Contrary to many widely-disseminated predictions.

  40. Your essay is good, I like it very much. Here I would like to share with you some things :
    Ugg Boots On Sale
    —- cong dong

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.