Afghanistan

Reason Morning Links: Libyan Rebels Reportedly Kill Muammar Gaddafi, Obama for America Wants You to Design a Jobs Poster (For Free), Afghanistan's Cops Have Asset Forfeiture Down to a Science

|

  • From Reuters: "Gaddafi, who was in his late 60s, was captured and wounded in both legs at dawn on Thursday as he tried to flee in a convoy which NATO warplanes attacked." He is now dead. This is reported to be a picture of him (dead). 
  • More Arab Spring news: Things are getting worse in Syria; the Obama administration finalized a $53 million arms deal with Bahrain earlier this week, which it is now "delaying" until the government of Bahrain stops murdering protestors. 
  • The first Mexican truck is set to carry goods into the United States this week, after years of dropping cargo off at the border. The Teamsters are not happy. 
  • Rolling Stone: "The Obama campaign is soliciting unpaid labor to create a poster 'illustrating why we support President Obama's plan to create jobs now, and why we'll re-elect him to continue fighting for jobs for the next four years.' If you win? You get: A framed copy of your own poster, signed by the president ('approximate retail value $195')." All submissions are property of Obama for America! 
  • David Cay Johnston: "The figures from payroll taxes reported to the Social Security Administration on jobs and pay are, in a word, awful."
  • A school principal is just one of many Afghans who's not happy with the country's new U.S.-trained police forces: "Nur-ul Haq threatened to come with tanks and take us all out of our home and kill us if we continued to complain about him."

New at Reason.tv: "Want to Live Forever? Sonia Arrison Explains How In Her New Book"

Advertisement

NEXT: Dazed and Confused No More

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. We seem to have a tenuous grasp of 9:00AM sharp.

    1. They are just taunting you, FoE.

      Good Morning Links!

    2. I hit “publish” at 8:58 a.m. DO NOT TAKE THAT AWAY FROM ME.

      1. That’s what I mean. You’re all over the place.

      2. Sloppy work does not make for a neat blog. Check over at the Department of Pre-Timing and use the 7:00 AM posting app set two hours past.

      3. Don’t let him get you down, Riggs. I for one am most impressed by your dedication this week.

        1. I agree. Don’t listen to the nitpickers, Mike.

      4. I hit “publish” at 8:58 a.m.

        Photos, or it didn’t happen.

  2. So how many civilians were killed by NATO bombs or rebel artillery, rockets and wild firing of small arms in order to kill Gaddafi?

    Or do only civilians who were killed by Gaddafi count?

    1. Yeah, yeah, that second one!

    2. Of course your last line is the official one.

    3. I just saw a before and after picture of Misrata. Not as pretty picture.

      http://twitpic.com/5mo2kh

      I suppose Paul Krugman would be creaming in his pants if he saw this.

      1. Look at all that stimulation! It’s beautiful!

    4. That is a good question, but iirc the estimates of those killed by Gaddaffi waaay back in March was in the tens of thousands, so the bar is pretty high.

      1. Weren’t those the guesstimates of those who might be killed by Gaddafi, trotted out to justify “humanitarian intervention”?

        Even if they were in good faith, how do the principles of “protection of the innocent” which required all the way back in March that NATO prevent the shelling of cities by the Libyan government to put down a rebellion, suddenly not apply in October when the Libyan government is shelling a city to put down a rebellion?

      2. SO the killing of innocents is a competition? Whoever kills more is worse?

        Who was “worse”, Stalin or Mao?

        1. Trick question! Hitler is the “worse” of course.

        2. Mao FTW.

          1. Bush.

            Oh wait, what was the question?

  3. The Teamsters are not happy.

    *standing ovation*

    1. Sweet, sweet salty tears.

      1. But are they hammy?

        1. Have you ever seen a Teamster? There is more ham stuffed in them than Chicken Cordon Bleu.

          1. +1

        2. They have a lot of umami, balanced by bitter undertones of entitlement and the bright taste of sour grapes.
          Sprinkle with schadenfreude and serve cold.

  4. So, I expect Obama to be condemning the people who released a photo of Gaddafi and didn’t immediately bury him at sea while taking credit for killing Gaddafi while stressing that we were barely even involved in this kinetic action.

    1. No, this is different, because we weren’t trying to find and kill him, so celebrating his death is okay.

      1. It’s okay because we’re happy for the Libyans. Peace in our time, etc.
        When people were happy about Osama’s death, they were happy for their own sake. Which is just tacky.

    2. Could there be any difference in the fact that one was killed by his own people and the other by our special agents in a covert raid?

      1. Yes, that is certainly a difference. But my issue will be if he, or the media, tries to have their (yellow) cake and eat it too.

      2. Not much. “His own people” were fully backed by NATO US air support. The people who killed him were enabled by the US government.

        If it were possible, I’m sure the US would have preferred to “enable” the Pakistani people to kill bin Laden. But you know the difference between Libya and Pakistan, right?

        http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_c5gW…..losion.jpg

    3. No shit, didn’t Gaddafi’s killers worry about pissing off devout Muslims?

  5. The first Mexican truck is set to carry goods into the United States this week, after years of dropping cargo off at the border.

    Probably returning back across the border with their lowrider trucks crammed with free healthcare and… snow.

    1. I thought they got the snow from Columbia?

      1. They do now, but the quality isn’t as good.

        1. IIRC, it’s a little too warm on Columbia for snow. (Too soon?) Perhaps getting it from Colombia would be a better idea.

          1. Correction accepted.

    2. Listening to the raps and shooting all the jobs!

  6. You get: A framed copy of your own poster, signed by the president (‘approximate retail value $195’).” All submissions are property of Obama for America!

    I suppose they think it’s a better deal than writing for HuffPo.

    1. If I were the winner, I’d put the poster on eBay before the election…

      1. If it wasn’t for the EVIL Citizens United ruling, you’d be locked away for life for that.

    2. Don’t forget to pay the taxes on the market value of the compensation.

      1. Only the rich and Windows users are supposed to pay taxes!

      2. Don’t worry – it’s under $600 so no one’s issuing a 1099.

        1. And if you sell it to a Cajun, make sure they don’t pay in cash. You wouldn’t want them to go to jail for using cash, would you?

          1. How could they pass that law when cash says “This note is legal tender for all debts public and private”?

            1. How could they pass that law when cash says “This note is legal tender for all debts public and private”?

              Because they’re fucking morons.

    1. Doesn’t sound too bad overall. I ditch all bread and legumes and make babgabough instead of hummus. The main course is always meat, though. A roasted duck with crispy fat skin or a pork loin butterflied and filled with apples and onions sauteed with butter and herbs. No pasta or bean soup in sight; but I do include a squash soup enriched with cream and nutmeg. Yum.

      I’ve attended many vegan dinners in my past. Tofurky isn’t all that bad if you overlook the fact that it’s not, well, meat. The worst thing I ever ate was this:

      http://www.freshtofu.com/product-turkey.php

      1. Oh, most of the food sounds delicious. Especially the pumpkin tart.
        I’m just not sure I’d enjoy being a guest at a “massage the host’s eco-ego” event of this magnitude.

        1. “massage the host’s eco-ego”

          My hands hurt after all the rub-downs I had to provide over the years.

          I am no longer friends with any vegans. I tend to become skeptical and then run away if I hear someone announce “I only eat plants…”

          1. funny, i only eat things that eat plants. I am being more efficient.

            1. Only eat things that eat things that eat plants.

              1. Sooooo… fungi and bacteria?

                1. Carnivores.

      2. My biggest problem with tofurkey is that it’s fundamentally a lie, and a bad one at that. You’re trying to take tofu and make it into some bizarre simulacrum of meat. It never ends up remotely like meat, and in the process you ruin your tofu.

        If the people you’re serving to can’t appreciate the food for what it is, perhaps you should reconsider your guest list or the menu.

        1. Exactly this.
          I enjoy a good veggie-burger every now and then, but a good veggie burger is one that doesn’t try to hide the fact that it is made of vegetables.

          1. Yup. Food should be, in my opinion, relatively honest. Alternatively, if you’re going to work so hard to make something be other than what it is, at least make it taste good. Tofurkey fails on both counts.

            1. I agree with the dislike of Tofurky, but I do want to mention that there are a few Buddhist chay restaurants (the Loving Hut chain, Houston’s Quan Yin) that do some amazing things with ersatz meat. The food is tasty and cheap. True, it’s associated with a near-cult, but you can’t have everything.

              I do a decent vegan chili with seitan and tofu. And Madbiker’s menu sounds delicious. I can recommend the red lentil burger recipe that was in Food and Wine a few years back. Of course, it looks nothing like a meat patty, other than being flat and char-able.

          2. I agree as well. I love meat but sometimes like to mix it up. Black bean burgers are pretty good for one thing. The ruining of the tofu is absurd as well. Tofu can be good if cooked right such as in a Chinese dish but as a substitute for meat it is awful.

          3. Speaking as an ex-vegan who hates many vegetables, you guys get it all wrong. Those soy meats are designed to help vegans and vegetarians who love the taste of meat mitigate their cravings. They’re obviously not meat and they taste crappy in comparison, but they’re close enough to do the trick.

            1. Aren’t most soy product chocked full of phytoestrogens? Doesnt that mean that dudes that eat a lot of it become chicks…or really wussy dudes with moobs?

              1. I just ended up losing like 25 pounds during my 2.5 years as a vegan and I was skin and bones before. That’s actually the reason I quit. No moobs for me. I didn’t feel girly, just really low energy.

            2. So tofu is like the patch, but for ex-meat-eaters instead of ex-smokers?

              1. Meat analogs of tofu at least, yes.

        2. This speaks to one of my beefs with vegetarian food. Why try so hard to create meat analogs if you’re entire ethos is based upon the wrongness of eating meat?

          1. This speaks to one of my beefs with vegetarian food.

            Just like my plaints about meat-based food.

            1. There’s a lot at steak in this debate.

              1. Funny, because it involves two nuts.

                **scurries back into hole**

                1. We’re never gonna find common ground here.

                  *also scurries away*

          2. Simple, most vegans and vegetarians were meat eaters at one point. Just because people come to a realization that it’s wrong to kill animals at some point doesn’t mean their tastebuds suddenly jump to craving lentils and brown rice. And I wasn’t even a vegan for animal rights issues (primarily, at least), I just liked the discipline required of the concept.

            1. Going vegan for the discipline. Hmm, give me this any day.

              1. My work filter marked the link as porn for some reason. I’ll have to look later.

                1. It’s an Indian guy lying on a bed of nails.

                  1. And, yeah, he is almost nude. LOL, man that is some seriously sick porn!

            2. I’m not sure that’s true. Many grow up in vegetarian cultures–and yet they’re rife with recipes that create imitation meats. There are old Buddhist recipes that create faux meats–there’s a Peking Duck that uses bean curd skin and tofu to simulate the real thing. Why?

              Because man is an omnivore and the smell of meat makes his mouth water.

              1. Won’t debate that at all.

                Of course, having been a meat eater before makes the cravings much worse. I think many ex-meat eaters miss the texture as much or more than the flavor.

        3. Pleease, be sure to “reconsider” me.

          1. I would, Ice, no worries. What comes off as mean spirited is really just snark. I’d make a vegan Thanksgiving dinner, no meat analogs required, you might love. In my distant vegan past, I’ve made lots of lovely foods that even meat eaters loved: wild rice and cranberry-chestnut stuffing, roasted green beans with almonds and herbs, Three Sisters Stew, potato cakes with vegetarian gravy, pumpkin pudding, apple galette, and a spiced pear tart.

            Oh, I need to skip school today and cook instead. See you all later.

            1. So I’m working out vegetarian gravy in my head. Obviously, oil instead of butter, but liquid-wise do you use vegetable broth? That’s about the only difference I can see you’d need.

              1. I still make veggie gravy from time to time, because it complements some foods better than others.

                You start with a roasted vegetable stock, light on tomatoes but rich in root veggies and leeks. Melt 2 T coconut oil in a pan and add 1T arrowroot or cornstarch to make roux. Once lighlty browned, add warm stock 1/2 cup at a time to make gravy. Bring to a slight rolling simmer and stir until desired thickness.

                Yum. You could use butter also (I almost exclusively use butter as an emulsifier) if you don’t need it to be vegan. This is great on mashed cauliflower and turnips, roasted rutabaga and/or parsnips, or as a base for stews.

            2. Cool, but that actually was for T’s comment.

      1. What’s better than Maddox’s plan?

        Doing it all while wearing the shirt, too [get several so you’ll always have one to wear].

  7. Remember that fucking moron yesterday who said that the choices with the animals were to let them starve or let them loose?

    He’s a fucking moron.

    Los Angeles animal rights activist Martine Collette did not know Terry Thompson, the man authorities say released wild animals from his preserve in Zanesville, Ohio. And she says she can’t begin to understand why he did what he did.

    But she wishes he would have reached out to her. She would have gladly accepted the more than 50 dangerous animals he kept at his 73-acre Muskingum County Animal Farm, or helped find them a suitable home elsewhere.

    1. That was Zhuo from Rowerr.

    2. Seriously, zoos around the US would have killed Mr. Thompson himself to get those Bengal tigers.

      Frankly the whole thing was stupd. How did he legally acquire endangered animals in the first place? Surely there’s some sort of ban in the US for importation like that.

      1. I’d imagine it’s the fault of the Joos.

        An angle that no one is mentioning is that the dude just got out of prison for owning illegal guns. No one has said what kind of illegal guns, but I’d imagine it was illegal MGs. So those poor kitties are dead because of FDR and Frank Fucking Lautenberg, clearly.

        1. huh? I like your FDR blaming angle, but must admit, I’m a bit lost.

          1. FDR->illegal MGs->jail->despair->Jooz->suicide->sad kitties

            Retard.

            1. I was confused until I saw jooz. Then it all became clear…

        2. I just don’t understand how he ever got them. There is government in action for you. We have permits for these things. Great. But the people who give the permits gave one to this guy.

      2. There oughtta be a law!

        1. I thought there was a law? Here I am not buying exotic animals like a sucker.

          Seriously though, his estate needs to be sued by the county for the damage it caused.

          1. They can seize and sell the pelts to defray the costs.

            1. however, i’m pretty sure there are laws about selling pelts of endangered animals.

              1. Fortunately, the government doesn’t have to obey the law.

    3. There’s tons of people who would have taken in the animals. It’s a tragedy.

      1. There’s no accounting for crazy.

    4. I live 50 miles west of Zanesville, and when this story broke it was pretty freaky. Latest news is that all but one of the escaped animals have been killed, so he didn’t do them any favors.

      1. I heard the one unaccounted for was a rhesus monkey, and the experts were betting it got et by one of the others.

        1. Monkeys are sneaky fucking animals. There was one running around Tampa/St. Pete for about a year after escaping from a zoo. I’m betting on the monkey.

        2. Monkeys are sneaky fucking animals. There was one running around Tampa/St. Pete for about a year after escaping from a zoo. I’m betting on the monkey.

          1. Squirrels are annoying fucking animals that fuck with my postings. Fuck you squirrels. Fuck you.

            1. Foamy will not tolerate your insolence.

    5. That’s pretty much what I figured.

      Make one phone call, to a zoo or sanctuary, tell them what you’ve got and that somebody better come look after them, and then eat a bullet.

      I have no doubt that within hours, a nationwide network would be activated and there would be people on-site who know how to take care of the animals and find them homes.

      1. Doesn’t anybody realize the guy did it for the LULZ? This was a big, fat middle finger to the man.

        I salute him for going out with panache. Just a shame the trigger-happy cops didn’t have the brains to pick up a phone before their redneck-safari started.

        1. The guy sabotaged the pens and the fences surrounding his property. He wanted the predators to go out and fuck with his neighbors.

          My understanding is that the Chief of Police ordered the hunt because the cops got on the scene with only an hour of daylight left, and he didn’t think they could contain the animals in that time.

          Jack Hannah, who is a pretty famous conservationist, says the chief called it right; by the morning they would have dispersed and wreaked havoc on the whole county.

          I honestly can’t fault the chief of police for making the call he did. The guy who owned the preserve, on the other hand committed an act of supreme malice.

      2. true. An old HS buddy of mine works for a sanctuary in FL and GA that rescues chimps from circuses, testing labs, and homes. A few phone calls would have gotten the thing under control.

    6. Roar dead in Ohio

  8. For the most part an appropriate reaction…

    The intruder was charged with assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, carrying a dangerous weapon on school property, illegal possession of a BB gun, and disrupting a school assembly, according to police.

    BB guns are illegal in this state?

    Westford Police Chief Tom McEnaney said the school was placed in lockdown for about an hour while officers searched the building for additional weapons and found none. The students were sent home after the lockdown was lifted.

    This seems like the wrong thing to do.

    1. I’m too lazy to check before I finish my first cup of coffee, but I believe in this state you have to be of a certain age (16?) before you can carry a BB gun without parental supervision. So you could, in theory, get busted for illegal possession of a BB gun. But I think everybody would laugh at the cops over that one down here.

      1. My other guess, other than the age limitation, would be that possessing one within however many feet of school grounds is considered “illegal possession”

      2. Masshole here.
        “Section 12B. No minor under the age of eighteen shall have an air rifle or so-called BB gun in his possession while in any place to which the public has a right of access unless he is accompanied by an adult or unless he is the holder of a sporting or hunting license and has on his person a permit from the chief of police of the town in which he resides granting him the right of such possession. No person shall discharge a BB shot, pellet or other object from an air rifle or so-called BB gun into, from or across any street, alley, public way or railroad or railway right of way, and no minor under the age of eighteen shall discharge a BB shot, pellet or other object from an air rifle or BB gun unless he is accompanied by an adult…”
        I loved my BB gun (Red Rider wood stock – then a pump action which was way cool). No supervision but if I screwed up my ass was grass.

    2. My old man had to register one gun with the state amongst the 20ish that he owns: my brother’s Red Ryder lever action BB gun. NJ took the warnings of A Christmas Story seriously, it seems since the pump action Crossman BB guns he bought before and after that did not need to be registered.

      1. Makes sense, that’s a unique weapon with higher stats.

        1. Borderlands FTW!

      2. True story: I got a Red Ryder BB gun for Xmas when I was 7. If you recall, the actual barrel was an insert which screwed in. I wasn’t allowed any BB’s until I had been schooled in gun safety, so like any 7 yo I was dry-firing it.

        I unscrewed the barrel insert at one point, and didn’t get it back in properly. I cocked it, pointed it at my younger brother, and pulled the trigger.

        The insert flew out and hit him in the face. Voila!! Sore ass and no BB gun for 2 weeks. LOL

    3. I’m pretty sure they are totes illegal in NJ. As are (so I hear), slingshots. And probably breathing.

      1. You are right. NJ has some completely retarded firearms laws.

      2. Well, this was at least 20 years ago. Things were marginally saner here back then.

    4. My dad was having trouble with squirrels raiding his bird feeders (in betwee fucking H&R posts), so I was going to buy him a BB gun at Dick’s sporting goods in his town in PA. The retail guy told me that they were illegal in that township. The funny part was that he was standing in front of a wall of shotguns and rifles, which were perfectly legal.

  9. Ron Paul on the Fed in the WSJ:

    http://online.wsj.com/article/…..on_LEADTop

    A very good read.

    1. There’s some grade A stupid in the comments

      1. Can you imagine if this article were at HuffPo? The stupid would be legendary.

        I particularly like the guy who says Ron Paul doesn’t know what he’s talking about because money can only be issued by a Government.

      2. Stupid? How about this from a tiny man with a tiny brain?

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-…..20681.html

        I like Balkos writing and I understand wanting to make more money but the HuffPo sight is nothing but abject ignorance.

        1. God. I saw that one too. I got about 1/4 through it before I had to quit. I wouldn’t say Reich has a tiny brain, though. I’ll bet he’s quite smart. He just also happens to be an elite authoritarian ass.

    2. The manner of thinking of the Federal Reserve now is no different than that of the former Soviet Union, which employed hundreds of thousands of people to perform research and provide calculations in an attempt to mimic the price system of the West’s (relatively) free markets. Despite the obvious lesson to be drawn from the Soviet collapse, the U.S. still has not fully absorbed it.

      But Alec Baldwin is still not sure – that counts for something!

  10. U.S. Reps. Duncan Hunter and Bob Filner joined Teamsters President James Hoffa at the border Wednesday to take a bipartisan stand against the pilot project that will allow approved Mexican trucks to come deep into the United States. The first one will enter Texas on Friday.

    Ooo, a Stand in the Schoolhouse Door. I hope President Kennedy doesn’t have to dispatch the National Guard. (Unless they went home because, you know, they were there two days too early.)

  11. So who’s next, Hugo Chavez?

    1. C?mo el infierno sabr?a?

    2. No, no, no. The real Marxists who hate America are safe. Chavez, the Castro clan, that bunch in North Korea, etc. The only dictators who have to fear the wrath of Maobama are the ones who cooperated with the US against groups much worse than they are. Example: if a dictator opposes Ahmadinejad backed opponents, then his days are numbered.

      1. The only dictators that are in trouble are those who have no relation to any US interest and whose demise would make those in the White House feel righteous.

      2. Remember when right-wing nutjobs (and their mental figments) called for Gaddaffi’s death with such gusto (Reagan days)? Who knew all it took was a Democratic President to be involved in it to make it turn so sour to them…

        1. They called for his death after he planned a bombing in Berlin that killed a bunch of American soldiers. If you wanted to whack him in 1986, that would be one thing. But killing him in 2011, after he gave up his WMDs and hadn’t been behind any attacks on the US since the Lockerbee bombing is something different.

          And yeah, doing a victory dance and acting like a jackass when we kill someone is pretty stupid left or right. It is a good thing liberals didn’t do that over the death of Bin Ladin or anything. And it is a good thing liberals are launching a primary challenge against Obama because he assassinated an American citizen who didn’t have so much as a conviction in abstentia and was in a country allied with the US with whom they had an MLAT with.

          But all of the hypocrites and nuts are on the Right. Good to know MNG.

        2. Did you just admit that the leader of the Democrats acts, when it comes to war, like a “right-wing nutjob.” Neato!

          Good thing for most of us we aren’t right wingers

        3. Another edition of MNG can’t read.

        4. I don’t think you’re going to find many here who aren’t glad Ghadaffi (Quadaffi, Gadafi) whatever the fuck ever, is gone, but the process to use our own men and women and military hardware against a nation or force should be respected and followed as spelled out in the constitution. And it wasn’t.

      3. Uh, safe from revolution, maybe.

    3. I vote for Joe Biden.

  12. News from the Euro Death March:
    Here’s a great idea for our ruling class – if those pesky ratings agencies get any ideas about giving out honest ratings about the debt of the multitude of ponzi/nation/states – Shut Them Down!

    Politicians accuse rating agencies such as Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s and Fitch of totally misrepresenting the financial situation of individual countries, thereby only intensifying the crisis further

    Don’t worry folks, there are plenty of lifeboats.
    http://news.smh.com.au/breakin…..1ma8k.html

    1. Just pass a law making all these rating agencies give your country AAA all the the time. Seriously, do these idiots honestly believe that by banning rating companies investors would not be able to figure out that countries like Greece have their finances in the sewers.

    2. The best move they are making so far is to outlaw naked credit default swaps on the currency. The CDS market has been out of control for a long time, this will help limit liability.

      Meanwhile, our banks are in up to their ears in naked CDS’s on the European situation.

      1. The problem with banning naked CDS is that it means there is no way to hedge your sovereign bond risks – so suddenly, all those bonds that looked so stable a day ago are now going to jump up and down with every rumour.

        1. That’s the price to pay for less systemic risk. The bonds wouldn’t be so volatile if the governments were more constrained by the market in the first place. As it is, we’re going to end up in the same situation or much worse than 2008 if Europe goes bust. BOA is already moving CDS’s from their investment arm into their banking division which puts the taxpayer on the hook for covering their losses.

          http://www.prisonplanet.com/ho…..rades.html

        2. The problem with banning naked CDS is that it means there is no way to hedge your sovereign bond risks

          I fail to see the downside.

        3. Just to clarify, they’re not totally banning CDS’s against currencies, just naked ones. So if you own a naked CDS against a currency, by definition you do not own the currency (or bond).

      2. How can you outlaw a contract?

        1. Can you buy insurance on your neighbor’s house?

          1. companies buy insurance on employees all the time, even if that employees family will never see a dime.

    3. So, if the rating agencies aren’t allowed to rate EU debt, then for non-EU nations whose banking regulations require banks to be capitalized with a certain amount of high-rated debt, would they have to sell off all EU government bonds to buy rated debt? Because that would be a fucking hilarious unintended consequence. Even funnier if they forget to change the law and even EU members’ banks have to sell off sovereign debt.

  13. Gaddafi, which one’s he again? Seems like that was the name of Reagan’s boogeyman when I was in junior high, but it’s been so long now I don’t remember.

    1. He is the one that has a different name spelling for every news service. He became a Reagan “boogeyman” by blowing up a bunch of US soldiers and making claim to too much of the Mediterranean Sea. Later, Clinton blew up one of his aspirin factories.

      1. Actually, that was in the Sudan, under the recommendation of Richard Clark, for making WMD. And, of course, it turned out later that the factory really was just making aspirin.

        1. Not aspirin. The factory was used primarily for the manufacture of anti-malaria medicines.

  14. The first Mexican truck is set to carry goods into the United States this week, after years of dropping cargo off at the border. The Teamsters are not happy.

    The fun will be watching those who claim to care about the poor of the world defend the Teamsters.

    1. Giant Sucking Sound!!! NAFTA tuk ur jerbs!

    2. Like many things, the Left is very confused about trade and third world poverty. They care so deeply about the poor of the world that they want to send endless humanitarian aid, which destroys whatever agricultural infrastructure they have and props up dictators with repressive policies. But they also want to prevent jobs going overseas by any means necessary, even though these jobs would do far more to improve quality of life for the poor by bringing outside capital directly to workers.

      Since the conversation is largely driven by unions who don’t really care about the third world poor pandering to Left-wingers who do, the argument is now about how sweatshops are exploitative. No question, yeah they often are – because these are the best options those people likely ever had.

  15. A Long, Steep Drop for Americans’ Standard of Living
    http://www.cnbc.com/id/44962589

    Think life is not as good as it used to be, at least in terms of your wallet? You’d be right about that. The standard of living for Americans has fallen longer and more steeply over the past three years than at any time since the US government began recording it five decades ago.

    Bottom line: The average individual now has $1,315 less in disposable income than he or she did three years ago at the onset of the Great Recession ? even though the recession ended, technically speaking, in mid-2009. That means less money to spend at the spa or the movies, less for vacations, new carpeting for the house, or dinner at a restaurant.

    1. Hope Change. Rot in fucking hell Obama.

      1. I think a lot of Americans are still hesitant to lay all that blame on Obama. Stock market tankings tend to precede things like recessions and iirc that happened shortly before he took office.

        I think Obama should be judged by his own promises and rhetoric though, and by that criteria he has failed.

        1. Obama made things worse. It is that simple. He wasted almost a trillion dollars on a stimulus that did absolutely no good other than just raise spending and pay off Dem interest groups. He passed a health care law that made the labor costs of every business in America completely uncertain, thus making it impossible to hire. He continued TARP, which we know now didn’t fix the banking sector and just delayed the pain. And he continues to make rhetorical war on business and the rich for short term electoral gain.

          All of his policies have failed. Name one thing he has done right that you can say “yes, this made things better”. There isn’t anything. He owns the economy. Maybe Bush owns some of it too. But Bush isn’t running any more.

          1. “Obama made things worse. It is that simple.”

            It’s hardly that simple since with complex things like, I dunno, national economies, it’s quite plausible that the effects of policies are not felt for a while after enactment and are still felt years after they are no longer in place.

            1. If Obama were a Republican, you would find it that simple. And again, name one thing he has done that has made things better? People compare him to Reagan’s first two years. Well, Reagan’s first two years were tough, but he ended inflation. Even with high unemployment, that was an accomplishment and something that set the table for the growth that came later.

              What is Obama’s accomplishment? He has raised government spending to such a degree that the country will either face austerity or massive tax increases to support it. That hardly sets the table for success.

              You are grasping at straws.

              1. “Well, Reagan’s first two years were tough, but he ended inflation.”

                You have an interesting idea about what President’s can do. By your logic Clinton improved our economy vastly over Bush I.

                “What is Obama’s accomplishment?”

                Freedom in Libya, killing our number one enemy? That’s what he’s going to say…

                Hey, I think he’s failed by his own criteria, but I don’t think everything in this economy can be hung on him any more than I think all the economic boom of the 90’s can be laid on Bill Clinton.

                1. “You have an interesting idea about what President’s can do. By your logic Clinton improved our economy vastly over Bush I.”

                  No, Reagan allowed Volker to raise the interest rates that killed in inflation and he didn’t let the treasury print a bunch of money Geittner style. In 1980, the inflation rate was over 13%. By 1983 it was down to 3%. That is a real accomplishment and it happened on Reagan watch and in no small part because of his policies.

                  As far as Obama goes, Libya is in chaos and there is no guarantee the government is going to be anything like “free”. And Bin Ladin was found after years of hunting. It is not like Obama did anything different that caused it to happen. They caught him on his watch.

                  By any standard, Obama is the biggest failure since Hoover. You have to go back that far to find a President under whose administration the country has suffered such a steep decline in standard of living and misery. Sure some of that would have happened anyway. But he did nothing to stop it and actively made things worse with his insane and useless spending and regulation and his disastrous health care law.

                  1. Everything good is the doing of the most recent Republican president, and everything bad is the fault of the most recent Democratic president. I think we have your number John.

                    1. Gets in car.
                      Starts engine.
                      Races away from subthread.

                    2. Ever notice that the back and forth shit slinging generally takes place between Team RED and Team BLUE cheerleaders.

                      It’s like going to some dude’s house, shitting on the floor, then complaining about how bad the place stinks.

                    3. Tony you can at least try to read. Above I said some of that would have happened anyway. But the fact that Obama made it worse than it would have been is why he is such a failure.

                    4. It’s not that Tony can’t read, it’s that Tony is dishonest.

                  2. Of course we’re going to re elect Obama.

                    He brought freedom to Libya so that makes our suffering acceptable.

                    1. You should reelect Obama because in the realms he actually has power he’s been outstanding. If you’re upset about the economy, blame the Republicans who control Congress.

                    2. As opposed to the Democrats who owned Congress and the White House. Tony, you are beyond satire.

                    3. And it will come as a big surprise to Harry Reid that the Republicans control Congress.

                    4. The Republican minority controls the Senate.

                    5. John/Sterling Archer: Lana. Lana. Lana. LAANNAAAAA

                      MNG/Lana Kane: WHAAAATTTT?

                      John/Sterling Archer: Danger Zone.

                    6. You mean the Republicans who have controlled ONE HOUSE of Congress for the past year…REALLY? Last time I checked, the Donx have controlled both houses since 2006.

                      Regardless, they’re ALL to blame.

                      And Tony, you’re just a shit infested fuckpuddle.

        2. Re: MNG,

          I think Obama should be judged by his own promises and rhetoric though, and by that criteria he has failed.

          I’m willing to cut him some slack on this one, MNG. He unfortunately is SO and woefully clueless about economics that he relied on someone just as clueless but had a [fraudulent] degree to flash around, plus looked like a bulldog. He got bamboozled. What could the poor guy do?

      2. Pretty much anyone after Coolidge can rot in hell.

        1. I think it’s goofy to think Silent Cal’s administration didn’t have some part in the Crash of 29 and subsequent woes.

          1. Re: MNG,

            I think it’s goofy to think Silent Cal’s administration didn’t have some part in the Crash of 29 and subsequent woes.

            Don’t be so quick to showcase your ignorance, MNG. Coolidge had NOTHING to do with the Fed inflating the money supply to bailout the British pound. Besides, it was NOT Coolidge who made the ’29 stock market crisis worse (which was not that bad to begin with) it was his successor and his successor’s successor.

            1. Yes, yes, I know the libertarian line about making the Depression worse. I’m saying it’s hard to think Cal’s administration had nothing to do with the initial collapse.

              1. It is not a line. It is the truth. The economic figures of the 1930s don’t lie. Things were worse in 1937 than they were in 1932.

            2. Bullshit!

              Coolidge appointed Hoover to run the department of Agriculture, and of course Hoover fucked up that sector of the economy very thoroughly as he tried to make the high food prices of WW-I permanent through a series of increasingly destructive ham-handed interventions.

              1. He also caused the dust bowl by artificially propping up wheat prices, which in turn caused wheat farmers to plow over every inch of the prairie in the 1920s. Hoover was just a loser.

              2. Bullshit!

                HARDING appointed Hoover to COMMERCE.

                Coolidge said of Hoover: “That man has given me nothing but advice, and all of it bad.”

  16. Rumour is that Quaddaffi will be appearing as a guest star in The Walking Dead as “Zombie in robe”.

    1. Walking Dead was the first thing that popped into my head when I saw that picture. The second thing that popped into my head was how lucky dude was to get the picture before his battery died.

    2. That purple robe he sported? That would be sweet.

  17. Ron Paul: Blame the Fed for the Financial Crisis
    http://online.wsj.com/article/…..on_LEADTop

    To know what is wrong with the Federal Reserve, one must first understand the nature of money. Money is like any other good in our economy that emerges from the market to satisfy the needs and wants of consumers. Its particular usefulness is that it helps facilitate indirect exchange, making it easier for us to buy and sell goods because there is a common way of measuring their value. Money is not a government phenomenon, and it need not and should not be managed by government. When central banks like the Fed manage money they are engaging in price fixing, which leads not to prosperity but to disaster.

    The Federal Reserve has caused every single boom and bust that has occurred in this country since the bank’s creation in 1913. It pumps new money into the financial system to lower interest rates and spur the economy. Adding new money increases the supply of money, making the price of money over time?the interest rate?lower than the market would make it. These lower interest rates affect the allocation of resources, causing capital to be malinvested throughout the economy. So certain projects and ventures that appear profitable when funded at artificially low interest rates are not in fact the best use of those resources.

    1. Money is not a government phenomenon

      What the … That does it, Paul! This time you’ve gone too far!

      1. Congress shall have the power to…coin money and regulate the value thereof.

        1. You understand, of course, that Congress is not exercising either of these powers now? The dollar consists of federal reserve banknotes, essentially, IOUs issued by a private (albeit state-chartered) bank?

          1. It’s a line of reasoning that’s familiar: all the powers assigned to Congress under the Constitution are ideally performed by government. The idea that some power was assigned to Congress, but is better performed NOT by Congress doesn’t register with some, but does with Ron Paul.

    2. I think some guy beat you to it.

    3. sorry for the repeat – that’s what I get for going to another department meeting.

      1. The offer of complimentary bagels has claimed another victim.

      2. Great minds think alike. 😉

    4. lolz grampa wingnutz at it again

      try chaining ur dependz n make centz

  18. The former principal of a local school said that he and his eight brothers were forced to leave their village after they reported to the government that the local police had seized their family’s land. “Nur-ul Haq threatened to come with tanks and take us all out of our home and kill us if we continued to complain about him,” the man claimed, adding that he and his brothers were considering moving to Pakistan.

    Just wait until they bring in the pet-shooting instructors.

    1. “STOP RESISTING!!”

  19. Battle of the CLASS Rationalizers, Part I: WaPo’s Ezra Klein tells his flock not to worry, the lesson of the CLASS long-term insurance debacle is “Trust CBO”:

    [T]he problem with CLASS isn’t that it unexpectedly failed in practice. It’s that further analysis showed it worked exactly as the Congressional Budget Office predicted: it saved money in the first 10 years and cost money after that.

    http://dailycaller.com/2011/10…..trust-cbo/

  20. Obama still flush with cash from financial sector despite frosty relations
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..ml?hpid=z1

    Despite frosty relations with the titans of Wall Street, President Obama has still managed to raise far more money this year from the financial and banking sector than Mitt Romney or any other Republican presidential candidate, according to new fundraising data.

    Obama’s key advantage over the GOP field is the ability to collect bigger checks because he raises money for both his own campaign committee and for the Democratic National Committee, which will aid in his reelection effort.

      1. But who bought who?

    1. The banking folks really are like battered wives, just keep on giving to President Obama because they know, deep down, he really does love them and he’s only abusive because of all the stress he’s under.

      1. There are still a bunch of rules for the financial sector to be written by the executive branch under Dodd/Frank, so it’s more a case of “Nice investment bank you’ve got there; shame if anything happened to it.”

  21. OWS: Raymond Flynn to Occupy Boston: ‘Time to pack up… and leave’
    Calls for end to tent city as crime spikes
    http://bostonherald.com/news/r…..id=1374637

    According to a Boston police report, a disgruntled homeless man got into an argument at 6:15 p.m. with Occupiers because he “had nowhere to stay.” The man urinated on a tent and then allegedly pulled a knife on a group of 10 shocked protesters. No one was stabbed but several protesters later told cops they felt “threatened” by the incident.

    Cops assigned to the site grabbed the man, searched him and found a hypodermic needle and a knife. The blade was seized, but the alleged victims would not provide their names to police, so the man was not arrested, police said.

    1. How are you supposed to lead a revolution if you can’t deal with one bum with a knife? Stupid kids.

      1. “It’s easy to renounce physical violence if you aren’t any good at it.”

    2. The shithead trustifarians don’t like “the people” after all.

    3. “It’s turning into us against them,” Warner said. “They come in here and they’re looking at it as a way of getting a free meal and a place to crash, which is totally fine, but they don’t bring anything to the table at all. It gets really frustrating.”

      I’d say something like, “Well. Now you know how your critics, the ones who see you Occupiers as nothing more than mooching entitlement whores who expect to be given everything they desire, for free, indefinitely, feel”, but that may be too much self-insight for some.

    4. Those homeless guys, I have a lot of sympathy for where they’re at. I mean, the system totally failed them. And something ought to be done about that.

      But they’re not really part of what we’re all about. We’re about speaking truth to power, and they’re only about soup and peeing on tents and being threatening. They’re not the 99%.

  22. Obama might be a psychopath. Or any of our elected officials.

    How to Spot Psychopaths

    1. They also found more dysfluencies ? the “uhs” and “ums” that interrupt speech ? among psychopaths. Nearly universal in speech, dysfluencies indicate that the speaker needs some time to think about what they are saying. With regard to psychopaths, “We think the ‘uhs’ and ‘ums’ are about putting the mask of sanity on,” Hancock told LiveScience.

      Uh …

      1. So how are you supposed to tell the difference between someone who carefully ponders their words or is trying to overcome a speech impediment and a psychopath who is faking it? Not a very helpful observation from Hancock.

        1. I don’t remember that from the movie. Apparently, they did not do the book justice.

        2. further evidence that social *sciences* are bullshit.

          I always thought the obsessive research I did about prospective employers and rehearsing answers to interview questions I considered bullshit where more evidence of psychopathology than sanity. I’ve worked for eloquent speakers whom I considered sociopathic if not outright psychotic. Just goes to show you what my ignorant puny brain knows.

        3. Um, I, ummmm, don’t, ummmm, exactly, uhhhhh, know.

    2. I always check to see if they drive a BMW. Beemer ownership in itself could be listed in the DSM IV.

      1. A “beemer” is a motorcycle. The car is pronounced “bimmer.”

        1. I would exempt the BMW bikes. Toys for guys with expendable income and they tend to not be the assholes on rice burners (or “loud pipes save lives” Harley fags) giving bikers a bad name.

          Never heard anyone refer to the cars as anything but Beemers. Maybe they just talk funny where you are, if they’re pronouncing them as “bimmers.”

      2. Q. Whatls the difference between a BMW and a porcupine?
        A. With a porcupine, the pricks are on the outside.

    3. Yeah, they’ve recently expanded the definition of psychopath. A lot. Nothing sinsiter about that happining at the same time the gov has demanded access to all medical records. Nope, nothing at all.

      1. What’s interesting is that self-interest and matters of survival indicate psychopathology; belief in God, tendencies to spirituality or membership in a religion do not. The exact opposite of what I find to be true.

        How can being concerned with your own survival be wrong? How is believing in a sky-daddy any less crazy than wanting to eat?

        I get that it’s wrong to kill someone, but I’m starting to wonder at our own subjective judgments of right-and-wrong murder. The people who killed Gadhafi probably don’t think they were acting like psychopaths. It’s just so gray, its depressing.

        1. What’s interesting is that self-interest and matters of survival indicate psychopathology; belief in God, tendencies to spirituality or membership in a religion do not. The exact opposite of what I find to be true.

          Once again, not a coincidence. One of those attitudes lends itself to submitting to authority, one does not. Shit, isn’t there a new “disrespect for authority” diagnosis in DSM IV?

      2. Well, it’s also way overused to diagnose corporate types as nuts. Or that BS film The Corporation. I had a high school English teacher show us the first part of that film. The next day, most of the class came back with examples of how it was bull. God, that was a great day

  23. Kinda makes the trillion dollars and thousands of American lives spent to oust Saddam seem like a waste.

    1. Hearts and minds, etc.

    2. Both actions were wasteful. Wrap your tiny brain around that.

    3. You might want to go ask the Black Libyans that are being purged from their own country. Since we half assed this and let the nuts run things, that is what is happening. And that blood is on Obama’s and his cheer leaders like you’s hands. But fuck it, they are brown people and no one will vote about it so it doesn’t really matter. And Susan Power feels better. And that is what it is really about isn’t it. Fuck you and die in a fire Tony.

      1. Ouch, Tony’s comments really hurt, eh John?

        1. No, they were just exceptionally stupid. Dumber than yours. And that is a mighty high bar.

          1. Sorry, can you repeat that?

        2. No, they were just exceptionally stupid. Dumber than yours. And that is a mighty high bar.

          1. Oh, okay.
            Thanks.

            1. Well played.

      2. John…. please, bombing brown people is the only thing we can do worth a fuck any more. Please don’t take that away from us.

        1. Give it time. Another two or three years of Obama and we won’t even do that well anymore.

          1. Just in time for our war with Iran.

        2. The idea was that we were bombing brown people to keep those brown people from slaughtering many other brown people. But don’t let that nuance keep you up at night.

          1. But we suddenly stopped when “our” brown people began slaughtering other brown people.

            NATO and the US sitting on their hands while the new government of Libya shelled cities pretty much shows that the whole protection of the innocent thing was a fraud from the start.

          2. The U.S. bombing was to support militias that were following the lead of an Al Queda ally. And the U.S. government knew this guy was allied with Al Queda from the get go.

            Now, MNG, quick multiple choice,

            When Al Queda allies take over a territory, what happens:

            a) they bring order and a reduction in homicides,
            b) they engage in an orgy of executions and murders, usually using horrific and gruesome ones to intimidate any nascent opposition into silence.

            Any notion that the NATO kinetic military action was “saving” lives was laughable. These guys are going to rule with an iron fist. All the signs to date point to them playing Rehoboam to Ghadaffi’s Solomon.

            1. We don’t know what will become in the New Libya, Foxnews reports of al Qaieda dominance notwithstanding.

              1. Ooooh! Fox News says the sky is blue! Obviously that means it’s pink!

            2. Any notion that the NATO kinetic military action was “saving” lives was laughable. These guys are going to rule with an iron fist. All the signs to date point to them playing Rehoboam to Ghadaffi’s Solomon.

              Sure, but one of their first acts was creating a Libyan central bank, so their not completely crazy.

        3. We can’t make a TV anymore, but we can bomb the shit out of your country!

      3. I bow before your moral righteousness. I bet you’re totally not wishing horror on the Libyan people just so you can feel satisfied that Obama is as catastrophic a failure as Bush.

        1. I bet you’re totally not wishing horror on the Libyan people just so you can feel satisfied that Obama is as catastrophic a failure as Bush.

          Being as catastrophic a failure as Bush would be an improvement.

        2. While you are down there, shine my shoes.

    4. Hey, remember toppling Saddam wasn’t what cost the most in terms of money or lives. It was the occupation and the power vacuum.

    5. I tend to oppose interventions, but yeah, if you’re going to do them to topple governments I think the Democrats (Libya, Kosovo) have a much better product than the GOP (Iraq) lately.

      I wish we had done that approach (air support of native elements) in Afghanistan too.

      1. And when Libya slips into chaos and there are purges and genocides like what is going on with the black Libyans, we just ignore that? And the intervention in Kosovo resulted in a bunch of mass killings of Serbs before the UN got there.

        It is not so simple as to just bomb and kill a bunch of people and go home. As ART points out above. Toppling Saddam was easy. It was the aftermath that was hard. And that is what we are going to find out in Libya.

        1. And there were no killings and purges in Iraq and Afghanistan John?

          But there was this key difference (look at the number of American lives lost in those two compared to the same number in Kosovo and Libya).

          1. So as long as Americans don’t get killed it is okay to intervene in a civil war, killing a bunch of people and leaving the country in chaos?

            Yeah, Democrats won’t commit ground troops and try to do it properly. That isn’t much of an endorsement.

            1. “try to do it properly”
              Yeah, properly like in those two great successes, Iraq and Afghanistan…

              1. Iraq is a safer country today than Libya is. And again, your big “accomplishment” is intervening in a civil war, putting God knows how nominally in charge of the country, and leaving them to murder and purge their enemies.

                You really think Libya was a good idea? Just because we didn’t take an casualties doesn’t make it a good idea or well executed.

                1. “putting God knows how nominally in charge of the country”

                  Like Karzi or those guys in Iraq John?

                  “You really think Libya was a good idea?”

                  I don’t, but I don’t think it was self-evidently a bad one or that those who advocated it have no argument.

                  “well executed”

                  It was poorly executed, I’ve said that from the start. The timing of the intervention couldn’t have been worse.

                  1. Like Karzi or those guys in Iraq John?

                    He was elected. We didn’t just leave. We stayed and stabilized the place. That is what you have to do when you throw out a country’s government. Yeah, it sucks and it is hard. But if you don’t want that responsibility
                    don’t intervene.

                    I don’t, but I don’t think it was self-evidently a bad one or that those who advocated it have no argument.

                    What is Obama’s accomplishment?”

                    Freedom in Libya, killing our number one enemy? That’s what he’s going to say…

                    MNG. It is like two commentators in one.

                    1. “He was elected.”

                      Indeed, many people voted for him several times!

                    2. That is what you have to do when you throw out a country’s government.

                      No, actually we don’t. We can bomb them back to the Stone Age and walk away after pointing out that we can do it a gain if they get uppity. Don’t want to get bombed? Don’t become a terrorist training ground.

                    3. We can do that T. But first no way would Tony or MNG endorse punitive expeditions like that. And second, Libya didn’t do anything to justify such treatment.

                      Tony and MNG are basically saying it was okay to bomb Libya and send it into chaos with a new and improved murderous government. Basically, we destroyed the village to save it.

                    4. You are confusing the motives for fighting the fights. In Libya we were explicitly helping one side against another, we didn’t (sans accidents) bomb that other side. Now that the one side has won it is not criminal to not occupy beside them. We’ve helped more than we had to.

                      If we fight a country in general then you can certainly bomb it and just walk away no problem.

                  2. Shorter MNG: I gonna say that Libya was a bad idea, then go ahead and defend it anyways because it was Team BLUE that went ahead with it.

                    Back to the competition of who kills more/has more of their own killed is “worse”.

            2. I like this squishy pacifist version of John, even if it is the product of mindless partisanship.

              1. This sudden concern for black people is nice too. But we have an election coming soon, so catch it while you can!

                1. Obama is the one who put the people in power who are doing this MNG. And he is doing nothing to stop it.

                  You don’t like that fact. But it is true. And fuck you, stop playing the race card and own up to the massive fuck up that is that war.

                  1. By this logic Bush put the Sunnis in power who are murdering Shiites in Iraq, eh John? And with you cheerleading the entire thing for years!

                    1. By this logic Bush put the Sunnis in power who are murdering Shiites in Iraq,

                      Shias actually murdered a lot of Sunis. And we spent 8 years trying to keep them apart and the country together. Remember the whole “you broke it, you own it”. That was true. We couldn’t just throw out Saddam and go home leaving a blood bath.

                      Obama in contrast is doing just that in Libya. And you think it is great.

                    2. “And you think it is great.”

                      I think it is preferable to letting Gaddaffi slaughter the rebels and better than putting our troops in harms way, but hardly great.

                    3. “I think it is preferable to letting Gaddaffi slaughter the rebels and better than putting our troops in harms way, but hardly great.”

                      Why? IF we hadn’t intervened the rebels would have been routed in a matter of days and the war would have been over. Yeah, Gadafi would still be in power. But a lot fewer people would have been killed. And there is no guarantee that the government that replaces him won’t be as bad or worse. Indeed, for black Libyans they are worse.

                    4. “But a lot fewer people would have been killed.”

                      You’re pulling this out of your ass and you know it. Several sources more, ahem, reliable than you, were putting the casualties at tens of thousands in the early days of Gaddaffi’s advance. The same sources extrapolated that things would have gotten far worse.

                      Could the new government turn out worse? Yes, and that is one reason to oppose the intervention. But it could also turn out better, we just don’t know right now. In Kosovo for example the alternative turned out to largely be better, even in the long run.

                    5. In Kosovo it turned out to be better because the US put ground troupes in there for more than a decade and counting. Had we never sent any ground troupes in there, it would have turned out much much worse.

                      And the evidence of the actual killing in Libya is very sketchy. There was a civil war. Sure people were dying. But as shown with the indiscriminate shelling of towns, our people were no better.

                    6. “Shias actually murdered a lot of Sunis”

                      That’s right, I guess Bush and his cheerleaders are to blame for that too, eh?

        2. And when Libya slips into chaos and there are purges and genocides like what is going on with the black Libyans, we just ignore that?

          Yep.

      2. “I tend to oppose interventions, except when I don’t. That just happens to be when Democrats are doing it.”

        1. Here is why you are an idiot. I opposed the Kosovo intervention, I was in college and in addition to writing my reps to use the WPA to cut off funding I marched in the streets against it.

          So, you’re an idiot, but we knew that.

          1. Forget that I am defending the Kosovo intervention now.

      3. The Kosovo Intervention almost triggered a war with Russia, guy. I would hardly call that “doing it right.”

        1. if you’re going to do them to topple governments I think the Democrats (Libya, Kosovo) have a much better product than the GOP (Iraq)?

          Interesting reading comprehension there Right Reverend!

          1. I said I prefer interventions that put less of our soldiers and dollars at risk to ones that have increased risk. Don’t take that as a ringing endorsement.

            Kosovo was much more complicated than we were led at the time. Google “KLA”

          2. Re:MNG,

            if you’re going to do them to topple governments I think the Democrats (Libya, Kosovo) have a much better product than the GOP (Iraq)?

            Atta boy, Mr. Utilitarian! You show them who was the less bad murderers of foreigners!

            1. If a foriegner is trying to kill you and I kill him to stop him am I a “murderer of foriegners” OM?

              1. Kaddafi wasn’t trying to kill Americans. And neither were the Serbs. The US had no interest in either of those wars.

                1. That’s a valid argument against intervening (though wasn’t it you who, during a Libya discussion no less, argued we should not differentiate or privilige American lives over Libyan and Serbian lives?). But I’m not talking about the wisdom of intervening, I’m saying if there must be interventions I prefer the way Democratic Presidents have done it ove the way GOP ones have (at least in recent decades). And I feel that exactly because I value American lives so very much.

                  1. It is nice to know that foreign lives have no value in your eyes. Look, if you are not willing to sacrifice American lives for a cause, why are you willing to take foreign lives for it? Their lives count too. This idea that any intervention no matter stupid and useless is okay as long as no Americans get hurt if fucking immoral. The wisdom of an intervention is not measured just by the loss of American lives. They are soldiers, they get paid for that. And if you want to intervene, you shouldn’t just bomb people and then leave the country to its own devices after you wipe out its government.

                    Unless you are willing to buy into the idea of punitive expedition, of which there was no justification for in Kosovo or Libya, you shouldn’t do that.

                    1. “Look, if you are not willing to sacrifice American lives for a cause, why are you willing to take foreign lives for it?”

                      To save more foriegn lives? Gaddaffi was slaughtering tens of thousands of his countrymen. If we can stop that without putting our own lives in much danger that’s not exactly horrible.

                      “And if you want to intervene, you shouldn’t just bomb people and then leave the country to its own devices after you wipe out its government.”

                      Sure you can, you provide help to tip the balance but at some point it becomes up to the people that live there to build their own nations. I guess it’s hard to convince a die-hard big-time nation builder like yourself of this…

                    2. “Gaddaffi was slaughtering tens of thousands of his countrymen”

                      Saddam was killing a lot more and unlike Kadafi was a real threat to his neighbors.

                      By your logic you would have been okay with the Iraq war is we had just bombed the shit out of the place until we killed Saddam and went home, right? It is worse to bomb a place into chaos and go home than it is do fix what you just broke. Yeah, it is harder to do the latter. But that is what you owe the country you just bombed.

                      Again, if you don’t like it, don’t bomb.

                    3. “By your logic you would have been okay with the Iraq war is we had just bombed the shit out of the place until we killed Saddam and went home, right?”

                      I would prefer that to what we did, but how did you not get that from this:

                      I wish we had done that approach (air support of native elements) in Afghanistan too.

                    4. “I would prefer that to what we did, but how did you not get that from this:”

                      When you consider that that would have made Iraq into a failed state and would have led to killings not seen since the Balkans or maybe world war II, you are nuts to think that.

                    5. —“Gaddaffi was slaughtering tens of thousands of his countrymen”—

                      CITATION NEEDED

              2. Re: MNG,

                If a foriegner is trying to kill you and I kill him to stop him am I a “murderer of foriegners” OM?

                Are you making a moral equivalency, MNG? Let me put the hypothetical in a way closer to what has happened with all these American wars: If I see you fighting with a person and I kill YOU believing you’re the bad guy, would I be a murderer, or the other guy’s savior?

                If you don’t see the difference, think about it when you’re dead. The fact is that the US Gov has imposed itself on conflicts it understand not at all, purportedly for “humanitarian” reasons. The fact is that US troops end up killing people the government decided were “bad,” without thinking of the consequences.

                Did you know that the Clinton admin. flew over Mujahideen fighters to Kosovo to “help” the Muslim populations against their confluict with the Christian Serbs? Did you know they wouldn’t leave afterwards and that some are al-Qaeda?

                1. “Did you know that the Clinton admin. flew over Mujahideen fighters to Kosovo…”

                  Dude, did you not read my 10:07 post?

                  Your argument is “the guys in any intervention we support could be worse.” Yes. But they could be better. In any given situation this could go either way. It’s why in the protection of life exceptions to homicide we demand a “reasonable belief” that imminent force was necessary to prevent the loss of life. My argument is that surely the administration could have had a reasonable belief that thousands of people were going to be slaughtered by Gaddaffi without intervention, and they could have had a reasonable belief that the other side was, warts and all, likely to be better.

                  1. Re: MNG,

                    Your argument is “the guys in any intervention we support could be worse.”

                    NO! That’s not my argument – I don’t make utilitarian arguments, MNG. My argument is that you cannot impose yourself on other people’s conflicts by a threat of violence because YOU DON’T KNOW SQUAT about it. You can’t know. You’re equally a murderer if you kill faction A than if you kill faction B, regardless of what you think about either faction’s moral purpose.

                    It is one thing to stop a fight between two individuals; it is something entirely different to threaten violence against either of them, choosing sides without knowing their motivations for fighting.

    6. You do realize that there are approximately 20,000 SAMs missing from Libya, right? And about ten tons of mustard gas?

      1. Suck on it.

      2. Mustard gas, oh noes, WMDS!!!!

        1. You might learn something before you mock.

          And 20,000 SAMs just might turn out to be a problem, no?

          1. I know what mustard gas is, and yes, I deride that as a WMD. Sorry.

            1. What do you mean deride that as a WMD? The stuff is missing. And it is deadly as hell. what is there to deride?

              1. John, worrying about where the chemical weapons and SAMs are is an argument against not having infantry involved. Therefore, MNG is going to ignore it and hope it goes away

      3. Plenty of military grade weaponry went missing in Iraq too. At least this was a cheap clusterfuck, in American blood and treasure.

        1. Surprisingly little went missing. And that that did didn’t leave the country since it was mostly artillery shells that were hard to smuggle and best used as IEDs. The Army did a good job of collecting all of it. Gee, we actually had an army there. Amazing how that works.

  24. Rolling Stone: “The Obama campaign is soliciting unpaid labor to create a poster ‘illustrating why we support President Obama’s plan to create jobs now…

    So you guys are gonna drop this douche bag, right?

  25. The Obama campaign is soliciting unpaid labor to create a poster ‘illustrating why we support President Obama’s plan to create jobs now’

    I think Warty is submitting this.

  26. The first Mexican truck is set to carry goods into the United States this week, after years of dropping cargo off at the border. The Teamsters are not happy.

    Viva Mexico, hijos de la chingada!!!

    1. Thanks OM. I learned something new that I can use.

    2. Next thing you know, people will begin thinking of Mexicans as human beings. Can’t have it.

      1. “You’ve heard of Mexican salsa…but Mexican PRIDE??!”

        1. “A pride of Mexicans”???

          Hmmm…

          1. I thought the technical term was ‘vato’, as in ‘a vato of Mexicans’.

            1. A pride of vatos.

            2. Re: T,

              I thought the technical term was ‘vato’, as in ‘a vato of Mexicans’.

              ‘Vato’ only means ‘guy’ or ‘lad’.

              ‘Vatos’ would then mean ‘guys’ or a bunch of guys.

    3. So the strongest insult in Mexican is to call one’s mother an injun whore. This is good to know.

      1. Nope. Ask if they’re from Puerto Rico.

        That is the only time in my life I’ve actually felt threatened by someone who threatened me.

      2. Re: Warty,

        So the strongest insult in Mexican is to call one’s mother an injun whore.

        Pretty much, although “chingada” just means “raped one” in the feminine sense. “Chingado” would mean the “raped one” in masculine, but it is not used like that, mostly as an expression of suprise, kind of like the Spanish use “joder.” (i.e. fuck)

        “Ah, chingado!” would be like “Aw, fuck!”

        Don’t use those words when in polite company, though. Better to use “Ah, jijos!” [Aw hee-hos] which is a shortening of the expression “Ah, jijos de la chingada” – “jijos” meaning “hijos” [sons] with the “h” sounding like the “h” in “house.” It’s a leftover of the way the Spanish pronounce the “h” in certain words, back when the Spanish still owned Mexico.

        1. Man this is way cool. Please, OM, more dirty things to say in spanish with their entomology.

          1. Hey, leave la cucarachas out of it.

        2. Yeah, I thought that was fascinating. I guess I sort of translated “raped” into “whore”. But yeah, “you son of a raped squaw” is a nasty thing to call someone.

          1. Where do you keep getting the indian thing from? I never learned to associate those words with a particular culture.

            1. Hijo de la chingada 77 up, 5 down
              Loosely it means “son of a bitch.” But historically, it meant “son of raped woman.” The verb “chingar” comes from a Nahuatl (Aztec) word meaning “to rape.” When the Spaniards arrived in the Americas, their raping of the indigenous women was so widespread that chingar began to be used as a curse, similar to the F-word. That is why chingar and its derivatives are not used in Spain but only in Latin American countries, and especially in Mexico.
              Eres un hijo de la chingada. You’re a son of a bitch.

              OM, is this correct?

              1. Ah. That’s why. I learned Mexican Spanish. That word has always been a derogatory way of saying “fuck”, but I never followed the etymology back. This is what happens when you learn to curse from your friends.

        3. I love Reason’s “Ask an Old Mexican”

  27. A school principal is just one of many Afghans who’s not happy with the country’s new U.S.-trained police forces: “Nur-ul Haq threatened to come with tanks and take us all out of our home and kill us if we continued to complain about him.”

    There are certain people in this world that should not be given license to carry a tank.

  28. A school principal is just one of many Afghans who’s not happy with the country’s new U.S.-trained police forces: “Nur-ul Haq threatened to come with tanks and take us all out of our home and kill us if we continued to complain about him.”

    That is what an American cop would do. I would say the training went well.

    1. Sounds like we need to send Arpeio over there…not to train, just to live.

    2. No, too specific. American cops are brought up in a culture of litigiousness. They make vague threats that aren’t legally actionable. You know: “Don’t make me come back here”, “Don’t mess with me if you know what’s good for you.”, etc.

  29. If you win? You get: A framed copy of your own poster, signed by the president (‘approximate retail value $195’).”

    “Why I support Obama’s Job Bill – because if I don’t, I won’t even get a measly $195.00 worth of a worthless poster with his signature on it!”

    Do I win?

    1. You can sell it and spend the money, think of hte multiplier effect!

  30. Stopping ‘Mitt the inevitable’
    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/o…..O2CReXvGlO

    Is the GOP destined to head into the 2012 race with the one-term governor of Massachusetts as its “electable” standard-bearer against the battle-tested Democrats?

    Maybe not: Mitt’s record of dramatic flip-flops on social issues leaves conservatives mistrustful, and his continued defense of RomneyCare is maddening to the entire GOP base.

    Which is why his poll numbers are persistently stuck in the mid-20s as the anybody-but-Romney forces desperately seek a champion.

  31. Rebels without a clue
    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/o…..BkH58rYdsL

    Democrats, led by President Obama, aren’t interested in more jobs for all Americans. They just want more government jobs.

    “It’s very clear that private-sector jobs have been doing just fine,” the Nevada Democrat said on the Senate floor in support of a $35 billion bill aimed at shoring up jobs for teachers and first-responders.

    This will come as a surprise to those wondering about that persistent 9-plus percent unemployment rate.

    1. Iirc there is some truth in the claim that a good chunk of job losses lately have been government jobs. But what is that supposed to make one conclude? Times are bad, tax revenue is down, debt should be unconcsiounable (those who hold the debt are often wealthy and many regular taxpayers will be on the hook for it), belts have to be tightened, government included.

      1. Re: MNG,

        Iirc there is some truth in the claim that a good chunk of job losses lately have been government jobs. But what is that supposed to make one conclude?

        That there haven’t been ENOUGH government jobs cut.

        A government job is an oxymoron – jobs are supposed to be productive, i.e. add value. A tomato picker adds more value to an economy than a Unionized leech of a teacher who can barely articulate her own language.

        1. Yes, a teacher, like the one who taught Steve Jobs or Bill Gates, how could they possibly be productive?

          1. And the policeman who prevents the entrepenuer’s warehouse from being looted, I mean, who could think that guy playes a role in productivity? Or the guy who lays down the road (yes, ROADZ!!!) those goods are trucked through, how can one imagine he plays a role? And the courts that enforce the contracts the entrepenuer makes concerning those goods, what good are they?

            Etc.

            1. Re: MNG,

              And the policeman who prevents the entrepenuer’s warehouse from being looted, I mean[…]

              You mean what? Police are not there to prevent crime, don’t be dishonest. They are there to become amateur paleontologists after the fact, almost always. What protects a warehouse is locks, alarm systems, dogs, fences – those things that make you wonder what the FUCK the police is for.

              1. Yup – I know some cops, and they are the first to admit they are basically the clean-up squad, since they get there after the crime has already ocurred.

          2. Bill Gates went to a private school.

            1. “Gates attended public elementary school before moving on to the private Lakeside School in North Seattle.”
              http://www.thocp.net/biographies/gates_bill.htm

          3. Re: MNG,

            Yes, a teacher, like the one who taught Steve Jobs or Bill Gates, how could they possibly be productive?

            If they were Unionized leeches who could barely articulate their own language, I seriously doubt they came close to teaching anything to Bill Gates or Steve Jobs, MNG.

            1. No, the education system clearly failed Bill Gates. It taught him the mistaken idea that, as he constantly says, his success is largely the product of the luck of being born in his particular society. If he had been properly educated he’d know that he was an entrepreneurial superman who doesn’t owe anything to anyone and wouldn’t be giving the bulk of his wealth to philanthropic causes.

        2. What are teachers good for when you already know everything?

          1. Indeed. Take economics for example. Instead of being a wonderfully complex field of study engaging one in honest intellectual curiosity did you know all the answers can be found in One Lesson?

            1. Re: MNG,

              Indeed. Take economics for example. Instead of being a wonderfully complex field of study engaging one in honest intellectual curiosity did you know all the answers can be found in One Lesson?

              Are they, indeed? Has ANYBODY argued such here?

              Don’t get to the sockpuppet’s level of stoopidity, MNG. I don’t agree with you in many things, but I believe you’re a serious and honest debater. The sockpuppet is not.

                1. Have you actually read Hazlitt, or do you just like to use him as a rhetorical club?

                  1. My problem with most Austrians is they assume as axiomatic most of what I think is interesting and deserving of analysis, then they engage in post-hoc explanations and rationalizations while eschewing any testable hypotheses on the grounds that, unlike every other science of observable phenomena, the study of the economic activity of human beings in the world is a “deductive science.” I was just having a bit of fun with the title, but yes I think a lot of that applies to Hazlitt and his simplistic little book.

                    1. Re: MNG,

                      I was just having a bit of fun with the title, but yes I think a lot of that applies to Hazlitt and his simplistic little book.

                      Did you read it, at least?

                      Hazlitt wrote an introductory book to economics, focusing it on contemporary issues like the war and the New Deal and especially the new Keynesian economics. Using it as an example of an “axiomatic” mindset by Austrians only shows your lack of integrity. Austrian economics and the deductive epistemology its based on is the result of nearly 250 years of economic thinking, MNG. It is certainly not contained all in one popular book.

                      Also, it is not true there are no testable hypothesizing in Austrian economics – of course there are, the ABCT being one of them which has explained boom and busts perfectly until now. What Austrian economics does not do is derive conclusions from mathematical models, as humans are not particles with unchanging physical relationships which can be represented by equations. Particles do not act with purpose, whereas humans do. This is the reason Austrian Economics does not rely on empiricism as an epistemological methodology whereas the physical sciences do.

                      Even the physical sciences are based on axioms derived from deduction, MNG – for isntance, that the Universe works on the same laws and relationships everywhere. That is what gives the sciences the foundation it requires. Why isn’t this cause for your derision is a question I leave to you.

  32. http://www.chron.com/default/a…..227430.php

    This story was on the front page of the Chronicle and was supposedly a news story and not an opinion piece. Apparently community colleges are wasting tens of millions of dollars in Texas on people who don’t graduate. Apparently less than a third of them graduate within six years and by comparison 50% at “regular” four year colleges. You would think that the immediate reaction would be that maybe many of those people at both types shouldn’t be going to college. Instead there is a lot of hand wringing over how they can’t figure out what to do and suggest such trivial measures as a GPA threshold for club sports and free remedial classes during the summer. Of course the answer is very simple and staring them in the face: stop subsidizing them!

    1. As the son of a CC president, I’ve had this talk over the dinner table about, oh, 10000 times. What CCs traditionally don’t have is a way of forcing students to have and review a graduation plan. So they sign up for classes to please Mama or Granpa or whoever is paying their bills, but they never sit down and figure out exactly what they have to do to get somewhere. (Sure some won’t care even then, but let’s focus on the cohort who could succeed.)

      So, one of the things at the old man’s CC they’ve done is put every student on a plan that projects a scheduled graduation date. And you have to review the plan to drop a class. And you have to review the plan to change it. So at least there is some way of showing people the consequences of dropping classes.

      The old man is also trying to sell the idea of only letting people take as many classes in the next semester as they passed in the last semester (or 1) if they fail to pass 75% of a semester. Then if you pass 100% after that you can add classes. It will save them a ton of money if they can get the drop rate down. (And, you know, keep people who don’t intend to pass a full-time load for registering for a full time load for the student loan eligibility.)

      So yeah, something of a problem, but as a CC grad and the kid of a CC administrator, well, all CC education is heavily subsidized. Saying “stop subsidizing them” is the same as saying “end community college”.

      1. To make up for four pre-med years of all science electives (what a waste) I frequently take credit classes in humanities at the local CC. There are smart, interested kids in the classes of course but the number of toadstools who just sit there and say, “Huh?” when the prof calls on them to discuss their homework or otherwise engage in the class is stunning. I discussed this with my German prof a couple years ago. She wistfully explained that CC’s are to a great extent just 1) high school remedial facilities and 2) repositories for kids who don’t know what to do next.

        1. Probably depends on where you go and what you take. I went to one that transfers about 1500 people a year to the local state U. I had a nuclear physicist with a PhD teach me physics. A semi-pro opera singer teach humanities. (Don’t get me started on the concept of teaching “humanities” instead of the underlying arts. Apparently being one credit short of a philosophy minor didn’t give me enough breadth, but reading a summarization of Western arts did. That said, I did learn to appreciate a little bit of opera.)

          But yes, there is definitely a 13th and 14th grade aspect, especially in the liberal arts and social sciences. Get yourself to calculus or calc based sciences and all that evaporates pretty quick. Which is not unlike my experience in lower division classes at state universities.

      2. Isn’t that basically admitting that the education provided has little or no value outside of that little slip of the paper you get at the end?

        If the education per se is valuable and market priced, then why would it matter so much if people don’t graduate?

      3. Isn’t that basically admitting that the education provided has little or no value outside of that little slip of the paper you get at the end?

        If the education per se is valuable and market priced, then why would it matter so much if people don’t graduate?

        1. Pretty much this. You could, and probably should, separate the accreditation of students from the teaching that prepares those students from accreditation.

          At a minimum, it would reduce moral hazard regarding grade inflation, and it would probably allow a number of the best and brightest to get out and apply their talents earlier, in their prime creative years, rather than going through the motions to fill the pockets of the secular state religion.

        2. No. You miss the point. It costs money to schedule seats that will be empty by the third week of school. If they stay for the whole semester, that’s fine from a cost point. But if you have to have 1000 English I seats on day 1 and only 700 English I seats on day 11, you can see the problem. Figure that adjuncts at CCs carry 100 students each, that’s 3 adjuncts and 3 class rooms and 300 people’s time wasted.

          Also, don’t forget that this all applies to the vocational classes that CCs teach by the ton. Nursing, vet assistant, dental assistant, drafting, etc. Its not just about a “piece of paper” to prove their book learning. Getting a nursing or drafting certification can take people out of the $8-$10/hr to the $15-$25/hr. That’s a big deal when you’re poor. It isn’t all stoned 19 year olds.

      4. And? Of course they could also charge a tuition rate that at least breaks even. Either way, stop subsidizing.

    2. But that will never work because RIGHTOTANEDUCATION!

  33. SEARCH! Hammertime!

    MC Hammer, when will you learn?

    1. If she had only said, “Will bury for food,” she might have pulled this off.

    2. From the article:
      Chasity Doll, 20, of Cherry Valley

      Okay, if that’s not a porn setup I don’t know what is.

      And as requested:

      Why is unloading a truckload of dead babies easier than unloading a truck full of bowling balls?

      You can use a pitchfork with the dead babies.

      1. Dead babies can be compacted?

        Dead babies can be shredded into more managable pile?

        1. Also valid answers.

    3. What do you call a dead baby with no arms and no legs laying in a ditch?

      Phil.

    1. Stacy London and Quintin Kelly just had massive strokes.

    2. Shirley you can get one of these little caskets for 1/2 price at Wal-Mart.

    3. Jesus Christ!

      That is so fucking tasteless! Who puts fucking ICP stickers on a coffin?!?

      1. The same people who put memoriums on their car windows? We love Papa so much we’ll remember him ’til the sticker peels.

      2. No one, but they did put them on a beer cooler (look closer).

  34. Gaddafi killed as Libya’s revolt claims hometown

    Not only did the dude die, he failed Nasty Dictator In Trouble 101 – he was slithering around Libya instead of lounging in some nice crib in Harare.

  35. So… what the fuck is Maddow’s appeal? I don’t get Hannity’s appeal either (the angry conservatives who feel liberals control everything?) but Maddow is just inexplicable to me.

    I mean is “lesbians into butch women” even a big demographic?

    1. She tells liberals what they want to hear. It is therapeutic for them.

      1. I can hardly think of anyone more smarmy than Maddow.

    2. Before assuming she has much appeal, I would check her ratings.

      1. maddow’s audience streams content which ratings dont capture

  36. God damned, mother fucking squirrels.

    “Your post (#2581249) has been marked as spam by a third-party spam filter. If this is a mistake, please email webmaster@reason.com.”

    Hey webmaster, it was a fucking mistake!!!

    1. That’s what they all say.

    2. I once spent an hour making an awesome graphic with text characters and they marked it as spam. All my hard work for nothing.

  37. I want in on the poster thingy.

    I’m thinking this, with the caption changed to: “The Only Good Jobs Is A Dead Jobs!”

    Or something to that effect.


  38. Rand Paul: Time to Repeal No Child Left Behind

    This could be interesting. Paul is making some solid comparisons to the way Obamacare was passed, and may actually have more success stopping the re-authorization of this law than he did fighting the Patriot Act a few months ago.

    1. It will weird me out to see Rand Paul and the NEA working together on something.

    1. Japanese schoolgirls looking to take over the world are welcome to start with me.

      1. 48 may be too many to handle without a plan.

        1. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is spongy and bruised.

    2. Please girls. Stop. Stop! OMG Stop it some more. Oh. Ah…. YES!

    3. I applaud their efforts, but think it’s ultimately doomed to failure in the West. I like traditional geek culture aspects of Japan as much as the next guy, but most female vocalised J-Pop is like nails on a chalkboard.

      1. In an electronics store in suburban Osaka I had walked an hour to get to, I had my human rights violated by the 30 second J-Pop jingle repeating over and over and over and over and over and over…

  39. I think I may have found my calling: Troll Jezebel and Feministing et al.

    But do it the right way. For example: Yesterday was apparently NOW’s love your body day. Feminsting had a post about how loving your body is a revolutionary political act (which means that sassy fat black chicks are on the same level as Malcom X). They also had a question about “What can your body do that makes you love it?”

    My instant thought on how to create a shit storm was to make some big point about trangenderism, and how they don’t love their bodies that the evil patriarchy assigned them at birth, and their bodies do things that disgust them, and how evil it is that you didn’t include them, and I thought that this was a feminist web site! etc.

    It would take too much effort, but it would probably be amusing

    1. Would it have taken more effort than posting that missive here?

      Just asking.

    2. group trolling more economical and provides cheap larfs for our hive-like mind.

  40. and why we’ll re-elect him to continue fighting for jobs for the next four years

    Because he’s proven to be so damn good at it.

  41. Apparently less than a third of them graduate within six years and by comparison 50% at “regular” four year colleges. You would think that the immediate reaction would be that maybe many of those people at both types shouldn’t be going to college.

    What if these are people who actually know what they want to take, and really don’t give a shit about a piece of paper?

    It could happen.

  42. Re: MNG,

    I was just having a bit of fun with the title, but yes I think a lot of that applies to Hazlitt and his simplistic little book.

    Did you read it, at least?

    Hazlitt wrote an introductory book to economics, focusing it on contemporary issues like the war and the New Deal and especially the new Keynesian economics. Using it as an example of an “axiomatic” mindset by Austrians only shows your lack of integrity. Austrian economics and the deductive epistemology its based on is the result of nearly 250 years of economic thinking, MNG. It is certainly not contained all in one popular book.

    Also, it is not true there are no testable hypothesis in Austrian economics – of course there are, the ABCT being one of them which has explained boom and busts perfectly until now. What Austrian economics does not do is derive conclusions from mathematical models, as humans are not particles with unchanging physical relationships which can be represented by equations. Particles do not act with purpose, whereas humans do. This is the reason Austrian Economics does not rely on empiricism as an epistemological methodology whereas the physical sciences do.

    Even the physical sciences are based on axioms derived from deduction, MNG – for isntance, that the Universe works on the same laws and relationships everywhere. That is what gives the sciences the foundation it requires. Why isn’t this cause for your derision is a question I leave to you.

  43. Fuck you Obama, pay me!!!

    Yeah I like the sound of that.

  44. This entire thread reeks of semen.

  45. Hazlitt wrote an introductory book to economics, focusing it on contemporary issues like the war and the New Deal and especially the new Keynesian economics. Using it as an example of an “axiomatic” mindset by Austrians only shows your lack of integrity. Austrian economics and the deductive epistemology its based on is the result of nearly 250 years of economic thinking, MNG. It is certainly not contained all in one popular book.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.