Tea Party

Reason Morning Links: Tea Partiers and Occupiers Break Bread in Memphis, Clinton Reiterates That America Will Level Iran (if We Have to), Internet Almost Done Tarring, Feathering Newt

|

  • A 64-year-old Tea Partier to a 21-year-old Occupier: "It sounds to me that y'all ought to be joining us. You have a lot of the same goals we have, which is to take our country back."
  • Hillary Clinton: "It is the policy of this administration that Iran cannot be permitted to have a nuclear weapon and no option has ever been taken off the table." 
  • The Internet reminds Newt Gingrich that he was once in favor of "death panels." 
  • The Chinese Government is attempting to smother dissident artist Ai Weiwei with…back taxes.
  • The Florida Independent: "The Department of Homeland Security announced Thursday it will begin reviewing about 300,000 deportation proceedings to implement prosecutorial discretion measures laid out in a June 2011 memo issued by John Morton, director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (aka ICE)." 
  • The Tampa Police Department responded to Occupy Tampa with a tank

New at Reason.tv: "Pension Reform and Union Shenanigans in San Diego":

Advertisement

NEXT: Reason.tv: OWS LA Clashes with Cops, Promises to "F**K Grey Aliens," Illuminati, Satan

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. “It is the policy of this administration that Iran cannot be permitted to have a nuclear weapon and no option has ever been taken off the table.”

    Except for the option of permitting Iran to have a nuclear weapon. That’s off the table.

    1. How can people say “Doing nothing is not an option”? Of course it is.

    2. And another thing: Define “Iran”.

      Like, could a new regime that talked nicer to Israel be permitted a nuke?

      1. A more friendly regime would probably not feel that having nukes was worth the hassle.

        I’m not big on economic sanctions because they usually seem to strengthen the current regime’s hold on the country.

        1. If done effectively, sanctions are just the modern version of a siege. The first people to suffer in a siege are the powerless: women and children usually. And the last are the elites that you were pissed off at in the first place. Hard to get the moral high ground if you’re starving women and children to death, see Iraq.

      2. “”And another thing: Define “Iran”.””

        Another country I don’t like got a nuke so “I Ran” away from the issue.

    3. How do we get to decide that other countries have nukes, if we have one?

      1. Because we have one. Duh.

      2. Because we have lots of them?

        Does seem like a “do as we say, not as we do” thing, doesn’t it?

        1. Politicians are quite good at that.

      3. Well, we invented them.

        1. I like it. Patent court is the answer.

          1. After America has established a nuclear weapons patent. America could issue a product safety recall.

          2. Use copyright; the term’s longer.

        2. Invented, hell, we have used them.

      4. How do we get to decide that other countries have nukes, if we have one?

        The First Rule of international relations.

        Because We Can.

        1. “Because We Can” might be a splendid idea except for the fact that we actually can’t.

          In spite of our best efforts the Soviets, China, India, Pakistan, Israel, South Africa and North Korea got them.

          And Brazil came close before they gave up and could probably get one up and going in a few years with the effort.

          Given that we can’t stop anyone that wants one from getting a nuke, short of turning them into a sheet of glass, that is, I’d say another approach might be called for.

      5. 1970 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).

        It’s not so much something that “we” decide, it’s something that the world jointly decided decades ago.

        1. If by “the world”, you mean the 190 signers of the treaty, then you are correct. The non signers, including 4 countries believed to have nuclear weapons, must be on some other world.

          1. Yes, obviously countries that don’t sign a treaty aren’t legally a part of it.

            Iran DID sign the treaty however, which means that they’re not permitted to develop nuclear weapons unless they announce that they are formally withdrawing from the treaty, otherwise they are in clear violation of international law.

      6. The same way we get to decide that we’re the only ones allowed to do “pre-emptive war”.

    4. “””It is the policy of this administration that Iran cannot be permitted to have a nuclear weapon and no option has ever been taken off the table.”””

      Didn’t we say the same thing about N. Korea?

  2. Neutrinos still faster than light according to second test
    “Take that Einstein!”

    DEY TUUK ER JERRBS — South East Asia version

    Some monks here are feeling the heat of competition provided by their foreign counterparts.

    In particular, the local monks claim that foreign monks, who are mostly from China and Malaysia, are undercutting them by charging up to 50 per cent less for prayer sessions conducted at funeral wakes.

    1. The Congress should investigate the neutrinos for steroid use.

    2. I’m looking for Sarah Connor.

      1. DON’T EVEN JOKE ABOUT THAT.

      2. 60 nanoseconds faster? Photons could still tackle them if they had the angle.

        1. It’s bad coaching, no doubt.

          I’m reserving judgment on these FTL measurements. Too much room for error to get excited.

          1. “The experiment OPERA, thanks to a specially adapted CERN beam, has made an important test of consistency of its result. The positive outcome of the test makes us more confident in the result, although a final word can only be said by analogous measurements performed elsewhere in the world.

            And because they are real scientists, instead of the environmental kind, they remain skeptical.

            1. Yes, the initial finding was issued with a high degree of skepticism by the reporting scientists. I love stuff like that. Wish all scientists behaved that way.

              1. All scientists do. It’s the guys trampsing around acting as scientists who don’t.

              2. The neutrino finding is inductive, global warming is deductive.

                1. “The neutrino finding is inductive, global warming is deductive.”

                  I’m not sure of your point. Should make them less skeptical or more?

          2. Exactly. If they had found something that seemed to be going at (say) 200% the speed of light, I’d be more excited. But it’s more like 100.001%, so it seems like a measurement error to me.

            1. If a neutrino and an electron both leave Chicago at 6:30 p.m. and the neutrino is heads due east at 1.001C, and the electron heads due west at 1C, will the airline honor its free drink coupon?

              1. I feel faint.

              2. Is the airline Southwest? Then, no.

            2. Of course, if it isn’t, physics is about to get really exciting.

    3. Actually, Einstein had a theory that things could move faster the speed of the light, but the speed of light was a barrier.

      So, particles moving faster than the speed of light couldn’t move slower, and particles moving slower than the speed of light couldn’t move faster.

      The whole tachyon thing…

  3. The problem is that the Newt boom will be over before anyone has time to make the 200 awesome negative ads about him that I have in my head.

    1. It’ll be over faster than a Newt-rino.

      1. +1 exquisite

  4. From Sarah Palin’s (actually fairly good) WSJ opinion piece:

    Mark Twain famously wrote, “There is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress.” Peter Schweizer’s new book, “Throw Them All Out,” reveals this permanent political class in all its arrogant glory. (Full disclosure: Mr. Schweizer is employed by my political action committee as a foreign-policy adviser.)

    Even fuller disclosure: Mr. Schweizer probably wrote this article.

    1. All the people who say Palin is stupid have never actually listened to her speaches or read anything she has written. She is very bright and writes in a really readable and easy style. And she is also right most of the time.

      But hey, the truth is less valuable than the ability of stupid people to feel smart by making fun of her.

      1. Her nomination acceptance speech was better than any speech ever delivered by GHWB, GWB, Obama the stutterer or slick Willie.

        1. You betcha! (wink)

      2. It’s not unusual, or particularly controversial, for public figures to have other people write things in their name. I’d say Palin probably writes about as much of her own stuff as Obama does.

        1. What evidence do you have of that Zeb other than you want it to be true? Basically your position is a heads I win tails you lose position. If Palin says something dumb it must be her. If she says or writes something smart, it must have been her handlers. Show me evidence that someone else wrote that editorial or evidence she doesn’t actually believe any of it and your point is well made. But to say “well she couldn’t have wrote that” is just baseless assertion.

          And while it is fun to believe Bill Ayers wrote Obama’s books, there is no evidence it is true. They are his books. And in fact if you read them they say a lot about who Obama is, and not all of it good.

            1. I can’t get your link to come up. But I will take you word for it that she had a ghost writer on Going Rogue. So what. Lots of people have those. That is not evidence that everything she writes is not hers nor even evidence of how much the ghost writer actually contributed to the book. Some ghost writers are just that, writers. Others are more editors. Unless you are there, you really don’t know.

              So rather than trying to parse her writings trying to figure out what is really her like we are reading Plato trying to find the real Socrates, why not just judge her writing and statements on their merits and judge her from there?

              1. So what. Lots of people have those.

                That… was my point.

                why not just judge her writing and statements on their merits and judge her from there?

                Oh, I do. Whether or not she wrote the rough drafts, I’m sure she signs off on everything that is published in her name (maybe not for FB & Twitter). That means that she is answerable for it.

                1. and that means when it is good, which it was here, you have to give her credit for it and not drop the “oh she couldn’t have written that” card. This is a really good editorial. I can’t for the life of me understand why it is so hard for some people to admit that.

                  1. I can’t disagree with you on this point but what bothers me about both Palin and Obama is that when what they have to say is bad, it’s REALLY bad.

          1. I really don’t care. And I was thinking more about speeches and talking points than about books.

            I don’t have much of an opinion about Palin one way or another besides that I think that she is popular with some people mostly because she is hated by some other people. I don’t think she is stupid, but I don’t think she is interesting or worthy of the attention she gets. You would write a much better Op-Ed for the WSJ.

      3. Hey, I said it was fairly good! And she probably at least signed off on the final draft!

        1. Again, what evidence do you have of that other than “it just can’t be true”?

      4. All the people. Doesn’t leave much room for informed dissent.

        1. If you told me that every single incumbant would lose in 2012, I would take it even though that means giving the House back to the Dems. They all need to go. The place has gone mad.

          1. Huh? I was talking about the possibility that someone might reasonably disagree with your assessment of Palin’s intelligence — a possibility which your statement specifically does not admit.

            1. I misunderstood you. But, no I think anyone who looks at what she actually says fairly can reasonably conclude the woman is stupid. She is just not. You may not agree with her. But being wrong doesn’t always make you stupid. Anytime someone goes out of their way to rave about how stupid Palin is, they have just fingured themselves as not a particularly fair or serious person.

              1. Well, to begin with, I recall watching her debate Biden, and it appeared to me to be a debate among equals. She has since appeared to me to be neither capable of much profundity of thought, nor to be especially intelligent in general — and in this I would say she is just as qualified to be president as is the current holder of that office. She has a decent knack for making the right noises in pandering to the right groups. I believe I have been fair, as far as it goes, but if you can link to some statement of hers you find to be especially substantive, then I am willing to look at that.

                1. I can link to lots of statements of hers that are very substantive. But as soon as I did you would claim that it wasn’t her but someone else who wrote it. I know how the game is played.

                  Read the linked article. It is very substantive and makes very good points. What else do you want?

                  1. We apparently have different ideas of what that means. I find nothing of much interest in that article — it’s typical boilerplate, which basically reduces to: government is broken due to cronyism, opportunism, graft, and lack of transparency, and we should fix it. Those are hardly novel observations.

                    1. of course it’s typical boilerplate – what were you expecting, a dissertation on medieval poetry and how it relates to modern transhumanism?

                    2. I have read the Wall Street Journal literally every day for 25 years. That is a good editorial on a page that produces a lot of them.

                      What Lor Humungus says. It is a newspaper editorial. What do you want? Footnotes?

                      The Palin is stupid is just a religious belief with some people. They have invested so much personal and emotional energy into it, nothing will change their minds. There is a whole disertation to be written about the phenomonea. It is about classism, sexism, regionalism and every other ism in modern America. I think for some, the idea that some nobody from Alaska could be anything but stupid and inferior is just too terrifying a prospect to even contemplate.

                    3. Listen, I gave you my appraisal and invited you to provide a link to anything that might change my mind — I’m willing to read it. In response, you referred me back to the article, but when I say that does nothing for me, and why, your response is to implicitly agree, saying that I expect too much from it. Why refer me to it in the first place, then? So again, feel free to link to something she’s said or written which would help convince me she’s not just the run-of-the-mill panderer I currently consider her to be.

                    4. Define panderer. What does that even mean? She says things that people agree with? So what? Who isn’t a panderer by definition. Calling her a “run of the mill panderer” is totally meaningless. I agree witht the things said in that article. Does that means she is pandering to me?

                      Again we are back to the heads I win tails you lose logic. If she says something no one agrees with, she is a nut lunatic on the fringe. If she says something that a lot of people agree with, she is just a panderer

                      In the end there is nothing I could ever change your mind.

                    5. You seem to know a lot about me. The fact remains, though, that I’ve not yet seen any statement from her which would lead me to believe that she has more than a slogan-level understanding of the issues she purports to address. No different than someone saying “Hope!” and “Change!” to me, albeit from a different political perspective.

                      I remain open to being convinced otherwise.

                    6. Nah, some people from Alaska are corrupt and conniving. And others are bad ass. Most just want to drive around getting baked and shooting road signs, apparently. Isn’t she from Idaho or something anyway?

                    7. I think driving around getting backed shooting at road signs sounds pretty fun.

                2. Hey, she reads “all of” the magazines and newspapers. She’s a fucking genuis.

                3. “…I recall watching her debate Biden, and it appeared to me to be a debate among equals.”

                  Yes, being compared favorably to Biden is damning with fainst praise.

              2. I think the stupid card is played too often and wrongly with politicians. None of them are stupid. Being crafty with deceit to get people to elect them requires intelligence.

                1. I think the stupid card is played too often and wrongly with politicians

                  Can an idiot succeed? I do think cash and the right puppet master is at play in American politics

            2. “Define panderer.”

              From thefreedictionary;
              Pander: To cater to the lower tastes and desires of others to expoit their weaknesses.

              “What does that even mean? She says things that people agree with?”

              No, it’s telling people what they want to hear regardless of whether it’s what she personally believes or plans to do.

              “I agree with the things said in that article. Does that means she is pandering to me?”

              Maybe. I like a lot of what she said too but most politicians say a lot of things that they don’t mean. Obama is a classic example and looking at her past history, I really don’t have a good feel for how much to believe. The resignation thing is a question mark for me as well.

              “I’ve not yet seen any statement from her which would lead me to believe that she has more than a slogan-level understanding of the issues she purports to address.”

              That’s another concern. She speaks well as long as she doesn’t stray very far from her talking points. Throw her something unexpected and she seems to freeze up. Does that more accurately reflect her intelligence or speaking ability? Either way, while she has a certain appeal, I can’t see myself voting for her. I’m sure I wouldn’t want to vote for most any politician that was on one but her thankfully short lived reality show was absolutely painful to watch.

      5. I hear ya. Choosing the right font is harder than people think.

  5. Not news: police shoot dog.

    News: police change procedures to handle dogs without shooting.

    http://www.tampabay.com/news/p…..ng/1201971

    1. The officers found Boomer, who initially seemed “social,” But when Swanson tried to look at the retriever’s tag, the dog became “vicious,”. Swanson shot the dog from about 2 feet away,

      Stopping trying to look at the tag was of course out of the question.

      This dog was a Golden Retriever. Goldens don’t know the first thing about vicious.

      1. He couldn’t outrun an arthritic dog?
        Why is “take two steps back” somehow below “shoot it in the head” on the procedure list?

      2. That is not an ordinary golden retriever. ‘Tis the most foul, cruel, and bad-tempered thing you ever set eyes on.

        1. LOOK AT THE BOOOONES!

          1. HOW’D IT GET BUUUUUUURNED!?

        2. and thet are faster than neutrinos

        3. He’s got GREAT HUGE FANGS!

        4. and he’s a great basketball/football/soccer/whatever other sport player!

      3. What do you think would have happened had a mere citizen done the same thing under the same circumstances?

        I bet someone would have been fined and possibly jailed.

        1. Any cop who murders a dog should be facing 25-life.

          1. What’s the fun in having a job that involves carrying a gun around if you never get to shoot it?

            One time a bunch of cops got drunk at this place where I was working, and one was complaining that he had never had the opportunity to kill anyone.
            The others were consoling him and assuring him that he’d get his chance.

            I have been scared to death of cops ever since.

            1. Force attracts people of low character. Period.

              Like you sarcasmic, I have no problem admitting that they scare me.

              1. When I worked in Phoenix, one of our techs came in on Monday morning with a broken nose and a black and blue face. He had been pulled over for a traffic ticket and was beaten for Driving While Mexican.

              2. Didn’t Ron Paul serve in the military?

                1. “Didn’t Ron Paul serve in the military?”

                  Yes. As a flight surgeon.

            2. The day I can’t do my job drunk is the day I hand in my badge and gun

            3. Ah, the sarcastic anecdote.

              1. In vino veritas is a Latin phrase that means “in wine there is truth”.

                When I hear drunk cops complaining about not killing anyone, and gleefully sharing stories about beating the shit out of people, I get the impression that in truth they are a bunch of sadistic sociopathic fucks.

                Somehow dunphy I suspect that, after a few beers in the company of fellow officers, you too would be gleefully sharing your favorite stories and bragging about your skills at inflicting pain.

                God I hate cops.

                1. Yea, i know you’re all butthurt because you received a fair trial and were found guilty. And it still burns. Let your hate go. It just fuels irrational though, and bigotry

                  1. Then there was the day I was watching some guys jam out in their driveway and the cops rolled up in a van.
                    I stood there in shock as they grabbed these guys and started slamming them face first into the closed door of the van until they were bloody, and proceeded to smash their instruments. The cops must have done thousands of dollars worth of damage. As I stood there slack jawed one of them came over and told me I could “move along” or get roughed up like the others.
                    I moved along.

                  2. Oh, and I will take your personal attack as confirmation that, after a few drinks, you too brag about your skills at hurting people.

                    Because that is what cops do. They hurt people.

                    1. Translation: Logic is your enemy. Ask me if i have stopped beating my wife, That’s your level of discourse

                    2. That’s like saying – that’s what doctors do. They hurt people

                    3. If I heard doctors brag about people dying in their care, then yes I might believe doctors hurt people. But they don’t.

                      When I hear police share tips on how to inflict the most pain or cause someone to lose consciousness, but not on how they help people, I conclude that hurting people is their favorite part of the job.

                    4. And you hang out with drunk doctors a lot? And of course you would smear the entire profession based on what one or two allegedly said while drunk?

                      Suuuuuurrrreeee

                    5. What’s to smear? Most people have never had the displeasure of dealing with cops, so they respect cops out of ignorance.
                      You keep going back to the one instance where a cop lied by omission on the report, resulting in my having to pay restitution, and claim I’m mad about the charges and conviction. I’m mad that I had to fix the car. That is an intentional mis-characterization of what happened on your part, and only serves to enforce my opinion that cops are dishonest.

                    6. False. Please provide evidence that MOST iow 50percent plus of people in the US have never dealt with cops.

                      That’ssimply another example of your delusions, or your willingness to say any lie that supports your bigotry

                    7. I’m a bigot because I fear dishonest people who celebrate violence.

                      I think that makes me rational, not a bigot.

                    8. sarcasmic. i am calling you out here.

                      you said MOST people . provide even a scintilla of proof.

                      imo, this is typical of the kind of cognitive dissonance seen in people like you

                      i get it. you hate cops

                      and you have been confronted with poll after poll that shows overwhelming respect and support in the public for cops

                      that’s difficult for you to reconcile

                      so, you delusionally go “yea but” and make an INCREDIBLE claim that “most people” (iow greater than 50% ) “Most people have never had the displeasure of dealing with cops, so they respect cops out of ignorance.”

                      this is what libtards do. they claim that they have special knowledge and if only conservatives and libertarians knew what they knew (iow had read chomsky, etc.) they would be liberals too

                      unless of course they were just too evul!

                      seriously, i am calling you out here

                      YOU SAID IT. PROVE IT!!!

                      50% + of people have never dealt with police. that’s your claim and your “justification” as to why police poll so high

                      i am calling BULLSHIT

                      support your statement

                    9. In my experience most people I know have never dealt with cops other than traffic tickets.
                      They haven’t seen the same bullshit I have seen from cops, so they do not fear and loathe them as I do.

                    10. ok, so now you are hedging.

                      first it was “most people have never had the displeasure of dealing with cops”

                      now , you qualify it with well… except for traffic stops

                      iow, you admit you were wrong

                      without admitting it of course. ok, thanks

                    11. I guess maybe I’ve just never met the right cops.

                      I’ve seen them beat the shit out of people and threaten to beat me too if I stayed to watch, I’ve had one whisper into my ear how he would love nothing more than to beat the shit out of me, I’ve overheard drunk cops brag about hurting people, I actually heard one cop express sadness at never having the opportunity to take a life (that still makes me shudder when I remember it), and I’ve seen police reports that are more fiction than fact.

                      From that I am to conclude that cops are honest folks who only want to help people?

                      Really?

                      Reeeaaaaaaallllyyy?

                    12. sarcasmic. i am calling you out here.

                      you said MOST people . provide even a scintilla of proof.

                      imo, this is typical of the kind of cognitive dissonance seen in people like you

                      i get it. you hate cops

                      and you have been confronted with poll after poll that shows overwhelming respect and support in the public for cops

                      that’s difficult for you to reconcile

                      so, you delusionally go “yea but” and make an INCREDIBLE claim that “most people” (iow greater than 50% ) “Most people have never had the displeasure of dealing with cops, so they respect cops out of ignorance.”

                      this is what libtards do. they claim that they have special knowledge and if only conservatives and libertarians knew what they knew (iow had read chomsky, etc.) they would be liberals too

                      unless of course they were just too evul!

                      seriously, i am calling you out here

                      YOU SAID IT. PROVE IT!!!

                      50% + of people have never dealt with police. that’s your claim and your “justification” as to why police poll so high

                      i am calling BULLSHIT

                      support your statement

                    13. In my experience most people I know have never dealt with cops other than traffic tickets.
                      They haven’t seen the same bullshit I have seen from cops, so they do not fear and loathe them as I do.
                      They assume cops are honest because they’ve never seen them lie.
                      They assume they want to help people because they’ve never witnessed them display pleasure at hurting people.
                      I have seen both, and as a result I do not share their respect for the police.

                    14. Maybe 100% of my experiences with cops were isolated incidents indicative of the few bad apples.
                      But I doubt it.
                      No, I think I’ve seen you guys’ true colors, and you don’t like it.

                    15. i’ve seen bullshit from: dr’s, lawyers (defense and prosecution), nurses, journalists, etc. etc.

                      but i don’t hate dr’s, lawyers, etc.

                      nor do i smear an entire profession because i have seen misconduct from some members of that profession

                      get over yourself. you are butthurt because the justice system WORKED in your case, but you don’t like it, and you smear an entire profession and ADMIT that you “hate cops” because of some alleged bad acts or statements from a few members thereof.

                      whatEver.

                    16. Another thing dunphy, I didn’t always hate and fear cops.

                      It took many incidents over many years in several cities in several states for you to earn my fear and hatred.

                      I fear you. Isn’t that what you want?

                      As far as I’m concerned when I’m dealing with an officer of the law I am dealing with someone who would like nothing more than to beat me senseless, and since he’s the guy I’m supposed to call for help if someone is beating me senseless, there ain’t a damn thing I can do about it.

                      So I submit.

                      I obey.

                      Because if I don’t I may end up in a pool of my own blood.

                    17. oh jesus christ. i’ll give you a drama queen award for this post.

                      seriously. get over yourself

          2. Isn’t cruelty to animals a supposed predictor of pscho-/sociopthic behavior?

            1. You could say the same thing about seeking out a job that involves carrying a club and a gun.

              1. I had to take the MMPI etc. did u?

            2. Restoras, yes, one a several predictors.

      4. A Golden? Yeah, by vicious I imagine that refers to him jumping up and viciously licking the officer.

      5. What a trigger-happy dirtbag. Two feet away means she didn’t even try to back up.

        Most dogs, if they feel threatened by somebody leaning over them and grabbing at their neck, will growl and maybe snap, but won’t pursue. So, one would expect a highly-trained New Professional to understand that, back up, and only shoot of the dog charges her.

        But, apparently, given a cover story sufficient to pass internal review, she started blazing away. I wonder how many shots it took her to actually hit the dog from two feet away.

        1. “”Most dogs, if they feel threatened by somebody leaning over them and grabbing at their neck, will growl and maybe snap, but won’t pursue.””

          Cops are becoming more lazy. That requires work.

    2. Officer “Misty”. I bet she’s a cat in a cop costume.

      1. Officer Misty…sounds like a porno character.

        “I said BEND OVER!” (Pulls out nightstick)

    3. After an internal investigation examining the Oct. 1 incident in which Officer Misty Swanson, 25, shot and killed the dog, police ruled the shooting was justified.

      Well, we can rule testosterone out as a cause.

      1. I’d wait for a picture before I rule it out.

        1. Here you go. D-yikes indeed.

          1. Should have posted a pic of Actress Kristy Swanson instead.

      2. How do you know thon isn’t transgendered, you cis-gendered bigot?

      3. There’s a very well-know custom yacht builder here in Virginia, who has been in business for decades – he just died within the past year.

        His first name was Tiffany.

      4. women have testosterone. on average, 10% serum levels that men have

    4. http://photo.mylife.com/photos…..4.115C.jpg

      Not bad, for a cop. I’d make her squeal like a pig.

  6. In July 2009, before the health care debate became a topic of angry discussion around the country, Newt Gingrich weighed in on what would be one of its flashpoints ? end-of-life care provisions to help families decide whether terminally ill patients should avoid aggressive, and costly, medical measures.

    When you talk as much as Gingrich, and you’ve got your dick as deep into statist central planning as Gingrich, you’re bound to have voiced advocacy for every possible kind of government scheming.

    1. end-of-life care provisions to help families decide whether terminally to terminate ill patients

      1. You know, I am completely for individual choice in such matters and the government should stay out of it. But a lot of people just need to hurry the fuck up and die. Dragging out the end of your life is a horrible thing to do to your family.

        1. Maybe they need to hurry up off the parasite / welfare train.

        2. I’m planning to hit the nitrous, crest a hill, and *BAM* right into the grill of an oil tanker.

          1. 🙁

            1. Hurry up and die. Dragging out the end of your life is a horrible thing to do to your family.

              1. You know what I mean.

          2. That actually can be pretty rough on the truck driver. I used to work with a woman whose father drove one of those big, massive construction-site dump trucks. One day a guy committed suicide by driving head-on into his truck at 60 mph.

            Her father was uninjured, but it messed him up in the head for a while – he felt terrible that this guy had used his truck to kill himself, and he kept apologizing to the guy’s family for it. He couldn’t get behind the wheel of his truck for a year or two.

            I know you were being sarcastic and all; just reminded me of that.

            1. I can believe that, BSR, considering that train operators/engineers often have the same problem of PTSD from watching people get run over. Most ways that people commit suicide, someone’s going to have to clean up the mess. It’s often rough on them.

            2. Yeah, being involved in someone’s death sucks even if you are completely not at fault. Drive off a cliff or into a wall or something.

            3. actually I was referencing the end of Road Warrior.

              btw, my brother used to be a TV news cameraman. I went out on a traffic fatality shoot with him once – it was horrific. A Chevy cavalier made a badly-timed turn in front of a fully loaded semi. The car was totally demolished, and the truck ended off the road, tipped on it’s side.

              So I’m walking around with my brother, carrying the camera tripod, pretending I’m part of the ‘news team’. There is a towel on the ground, some 30-40 feet away from the car, covering an object. The local deputy says to me “Go ahead and take a look”. I shake my head and walk away.

              It turns out the car driver’s head got removed by the impact. The dick cop just wanted to freak me out…

              1. Gallows humor. We haz it

      2. There’s a big difference between euthanasia, and stopping heroic measures and just doing palliative care. The latter is a common conversation to have with the patient or next-of-kin when the physicians believe further care would be futile.

        Of course, it’s a decision that should be left to the patient or their decision maker, and I don’t see any role for the government in that discussion at all.

        1. Why are you hate bureaucrats?

          1. They have no souls. Like gingers.

    2. Gingrich “praised Gundersen Lutheran Health System for its successful efforts to persuade most patients to have ‘advance directives'” and that makes him an advocate of ‘death panels’ and an advocate of “government scheming”? Bullshit. It makes him an advocate of reasonable and prudent planning for end of life – something that is extremely important to the patient and those who tend to his medical issues. Until you’ve been in the position of having to make very difficult decisions about continuing/ending medical care for someone, you will, I guess, have no difficultly glibly describing what Gingrich did thusly.

      1. We propose creating a private-sector led best-practice initiative that educates the industry on documented practices that work. This initiative should support the development and diffusion of knowledge for the purposes of expanding care, improving outcomes, and lowering costs — with the explicit prohibition that government cannot use the data to ration care. Government health programs should reward organizations that adopt these best practices through higher reimbursements.

        “Private-sector led” bureacracy that doles out federal funds based on compliance? Yuck. Although this mythical provision that prevents rationing does interest me. I begrudgingly give Gingrich props for making his government initiatives sound benignly private sector.

  7. America has a long and honorable history of calling thier elected executives the Anti-christ.

    http://www.slate.com/articles/…..rist_.html

    1. Maybe they’re all right. Like, it’s the title that corrupts the holder, like an esoteric One Ring sort of thing.

      1. That is a great point. I think being a Supreme Court or life time appointment judge does the same thing only faster.

        1. Life-time anything.

      2. The only option, of course, is to Occupy Mordor!

  8. “A 64-year-old Tea Partier to a 21-year-old Occupier: ‘It sounds to me that y’all ought to be joining us. You have a lot of the same goals we have, which is to take our country back.'”

    This guy is obviously a plant from one of the parties to keep the movements small and separate.

    1. He lost him at “y’all”.

    2. Eyyy tuk rrr cnnntrrrrryyy! Bak!

    3. The thing is that both groups have identified the same problems (largely) but have radically different “solutions”.

      If crony capitalism is the problem, the answer is to get rid of the crony, not the capitalism.

  9. Tebow gambols to victory over the NYJ, drives stake through the heart of “Tebow <” meme.

    1. As noted elsewhere, Tebow > J-E-T-S, Jets, Jets, Jets

    2. That’s unfortunate, I love that meme. But the Jets lost because of a lame scheduling gimmick, another shoddy game plan from their OC, another Mark Sanchez brain fart, the worst right tackle in the NFL, and a bad kicking game in the easiest stadium to kick in the league, not the antics of God’s gift to the spread option.

      This cult of the QB stuff is disgusting sometimes. Tebow getting stroked because Von Miller is a beast is absolutely ludicrous. Denver was outgained by 90 yards while dominating the line of scrimmage on defense, why on earth is the narrative, “Tebow’s awesome!” ? He’s not; he still sucks; he’s the world’s greatest fullback masquerading as a QB (though credit to John Fox for realizing this and not actually treating him like an NFL QB).

      With everyone else in the AFC holding the tiebreakers, the Jets are finished. Just End The Season is back!

      1. As a Broncos fan, let me state my agreement. There have been plenty of running QBs, and the reasons why the option isn’t run in the NFL extend beyond conservatism among coaches. Tebow may well be able to defeat mediocre defenses and teams that beat themselves. I will happily bet $20 that he never wins so much as a playoff game until he can consistently pass for > 150 yards a game.

        1. Broncos over the last two years

          With Tebow starting – 6-4
          Without Tebow starting – 4-14

          That is pretty stark. The big thing is Tebow doesn’t turn the ball over and keeps the team in the game. And he seems to have the charisma to keep the team believing until the end. And he for some reason, maybe Jesus does love him more than the rest of us, seems to make plays at the end of games he doesn’t make any other time.

          It is getting to point where this has happened too many times for you to be able to say he got lucky or anyone could do it. And I say this as a person who hates the Broncos so much I stopped rooting for the Houston Texans, my adopted team while I lived there, because they hired a former Bronco and by implication scumbag for a coach.

          I hate the Broncos more than I hate the Occutards. But Tebow winning and driving his coach and all the NFL experts mad is making me root for them.

          1. driving his coach and all the NFL experts mad

            The best part is he is driving both the anti-Tebow and pro-Tebow experts mad.

            The antis by winning, the pros by doing it with sucky numbers.

            As a strong supporter of finding a cure for NFLAids, it makes me very happy.

          2. We’ll see how much Jesus loves him when the Pats roll into town in December.

            1. Considering the Pats have one of the worst defenses in the league and cant’ stop the run, probably more than he does now.

              1. They also don’t have a QB that can’t find his ass with both hands. The Pats D line is about the only thing any good about their defense. It’s their secondary that’s truly horrible right now.

              2. c’mon man. They can stop the run. They can’t stop the pass. They’ll eat Denver alive.

            2. Ah, ummm, he’s a two time national champine and a member of the Heisman club and he’s an NFL qb. He’s got an intact family structure and he’s not a bad looking guy-

              Don’t you think that Jesus has shown him some love?

              1. Those whom the gods would destroy they first make great. Don’t assume the Jesus love quite yet. Could just be setting Tebow up for a fall.

          3. Broncos over the last two years

            With Tebow starting – 6-4
            Without Tebow starting – 4-14

            As a Texans fan, I got to listen to this same argument for the last several years, only it involved Vince Young. It was trite and irritating then, mainly because the announcers would not shut up about how “Vince just wins games!” No, you fucking idiot, Vince did not win the game. His top-5 defense won the game and Mr Wonderlic managed to not give the game back to the other team. And Young is a QB god compared to Tebow. Even though Tebow has elite quickness, (Really. Go look at his shuttle times from the combine.), how do you let him drive 94 yards on you to win? When all he can do is run? Ridiculous choke job by the Jets. I wonder if the QB tackling rules are helping guys like him, and other mobile QBs like Rodgers to some extent? (Vick, the obvious guy to include, doesn’t count as it seems the refs won’t call roughing him unless it involves decapitation. And good. Fuck that guy.)

            All that said, great win. The Broncos defense is just tearing teams a new one right now. Of course, each win just means a worse draft pick for a team that, IMHO, needs them more than getting a win away from the playoffs. Still, the AFC West is so bad, they may make the playoffs anyways, on their defense’s back alone. And on that note, when for the love of God, are the Chargers going to fire Norv Turner already?

            1. I know the whole “he wins games’ agrument can be bullshit. But not when it is the same team. The defense was good when they were starting Kyle Orton. But they lost because Orton turned the ball over all of the time. Denver has no offensive talent to speak of and no recievers of note. Perhaps they are better off running a run based option offense that at least doesn’t turn the ball over and dominates time of possession than they are running a conventional passing offense that will turn the ball over and puts pressure on their defense?

              And Vince Young was a whinny loser in the pros. Tebow seems to have actually won over the team somthing Young never did.

        2. 2011 AFL championship game. Pittsburgh wins 24-19.

          Roethlisberger? 10-19 for 133 yards.

          I figured I would have to go back at least thru a few years to find an example. Nope, one year. AFL Championship game even.

          1. C’mon, robc. I wrote “consistently” for a reason.

            John – I don’t think he’s the worst player ever (as much as I enjoyed the “> Tebow” meme). I’m very confident that he lacks the talent to make any NFL team a legit playoff contender. If I am wrong, I’ll be happy to eat crow.

            1. Tebow meme > Tebow

            2. Winning a single playoff game doesnt require doing anything “consistently”. And in the AFC west 8-8 might get them in the playoffs and then anything can happen once.

              1. I know you’re not a gambler, but if you want to put a 6-pack of your favorite commercial beer on that, let me know.

                1. Sure, 6 pack of Bell’s 2 hearted.

                  1 playoff win in career as QB for Tebow.

                  You realize this might be 10 years before any payoff would occur?

                  1. It will be shorter than that – if he’s as good as you think, he’ll almost certainly win a playoff game within 10 years. If he’s as ineffectual as I think, he won’t, and will have a short career.

                    Mine is Strongbow.

                    1. Strongbow isnt beer, but a fair bet anyway. I think technically you are giving me odds.

                2. Remember that a 7-9 team won a playoff game last year.

          2. You mean AFC championship game. The last AFL championship game was January 4, 1970 when the Kansas City “Offense of the 70s” Chiefs bested rookie head coach John Madden’s Raiders, 17-7.

            1. heh, Im old school that way. Yeah, I dont know what I was thinking. Oh wait, yes I do, I typed ACC at first.

              1. Sorry to sound pedantic.

          3. Winning games in any team sport comes down to scoring more points than you give up (Madden alert). If you can’t score consistently, which it’s clear the Broncos and Tebow won’t be able to do, then your defense has to be much better as a result. It’s not hard to find any examples of that playing out on a weekly basis, but would you really rather stick with a bad quarterback and lean heavily on your defense because “He Just Wins Football Games!”? That’s not a great way to maximize winning and it does end up biting you in the ass (trust me, I’m a Jet fan, we have a He Just Wins Football Games guy and it sucks).

            1. The 2008 Steelers are the closest modern example of that. Although, even they needed some late game heroics from Roethlisberger to win the SB.

            2. The Ravens have been doing that for the past couple years.

            3. …trust me, I’m a Jet fan, we have a He Just Wins Football Games guy and it sucks.

              Seriously. How the hell do you draft a guy with so-so to poor arm strength (for an NFL QB) to play in a place as windy as the Meadowlands? With having road games in balmy places like Foxboro and Orchard Park? A dome team, I can see it, but New Jersey? Not that arm strength is the be-all, end-all of NFL QB’ing—cough, Rex Grossman, cough—but jeez, take your home field into account when drafting, why don’t you?

              1. I didn’t like Sanchez as a pro prospect in college (I remember when USC was beating Ohio State all I could say was, “man, this guy is gonna suck in the pros”) so I was just a bit unhappy when they traded half their draft to get him. Should have stuck to where they were and picked Freeman. Hell, they may have even gotten Sanchez there.

                1. If Sanchez keeps this up, the Jets might beg Ken O’Brien to come out of retirement.

      2. Pretty much. It was a battle of two turds last night. Just because one floated up faster than the other doesn’t make either one good.

        1. ^^THIS^^

      3. he’s the world’s greatest fullback masquerading as a QB

        In other words, a quarterback.

        Im not a big Tebow fan, but the NFLAids idea that 11 on 11 football cant work is insane. 10 on 11 is pretty much, by default, losing football.

        1. What’s an NFLAids? Never seen that term before.

          With the way the rules are set up and the speed and talent level of defenses, your can’t win consistently with a QB that can’t throw unless your D pitches shutouts every game. A pass-competent offense is not 10 on 11 football, that would be handing off the ball every play.

          1. Google it.

            I picked it up from edsbs.com, which is probably where it originated. Fans of college football hate the NFL-style infection that coaches from the NFL bring with them to the college game.

            Symptoms of NFL Aids (not complete):

            Punting from the opponents 35
            Kicking a FG on 4th and goal from the 1 in the 1st quarter
            Charlie Weis
            Chan Gailey

            1. You forgot Bill Callahan, whom that meme was made for. Nebraska never should have abandoned their option attack, which had worked for three decades.

          2. If the defense doesnt have to put a spy on the QB, then a drop back passer is playing 10 on 11.

            At least some semi-mobile QBs make it 10.5 on 11.

            1. Oh, I see what the problem is now. You think that stuff that works in college where their is a vast talent gap between teams will also work in the NFL.

              1. I think he’s saying he’d like to see it work. Which I can’t really argue against, the NFL is far less entertaining now than it was even a decade ago.

                1. Well, it’s not like a running QB hasn’t been tried in the NFL before. Cunningham, Kordell, McNabb,Vick, etc. They haven’t won much. I don’t think it’s any coincidence that when the Steelers finally got a good passer at QB they started winning SBs again instead of losing in the playoffs.

                  1. I guess you missed Vick in the super bowl or the Eagles in about 57000 NFC championship games?

                    1. I guess you missed Vick in the super bowl

                      Yes, I did. When was that?

                    2. I was thinking of the year Chandler led the Falcons to the super bowl apparently. How far did Vick go with the Falcons, NFC championship game?

                  2. And actually, a running QB hasnt been tried in the NFL.

                    Even Fox refuses to commit to it. How much spread option did Denver run last night (from what I can tell, not much — Note, I was watching the real game at the same time VT v UNC, so Im relying on highlights)? Looks like lots of straight handoffs to McGahee, which wasnt working.

                    Last drive, Fox says “fuck it” and does it right and what do you know, TD.

                2. It would be more entertaining if they cut the number of player running on the field, player running off the field, and coaching barking into a headset shots in half and replaced them with cheerleader shots. I’d watch moar.

              2. The talent difference between teams isnt why it works in college.

                The triple option often beats teams with BETTER talent, for example.

                Anything that works in college will work in the NFL, if well executed. ANYTHING.

                1. Actually, I hope no one in the NFL ever figures it out. Because I think my college’s coach would only leave for the NFL, and I would rather keep him until he retires.

                  After 6 years of Chan Gailey, Paul Johnson is a blessing (plus Ive always loved watching triple option football, so to get to see MY school run it well is just superplusgood).

                  1. Robc,

                    The tripple option is the most beautiful offense in football when well run. I would love to see it work in the NFL. It would make the NFL so much better to have some variety. As it is every team seems to run the same “west coast” execution based offense regardless of whether they have the talent to suited to run it.

                2. Anything that works in college will work in the NFL, if well executed. ANYTHING.

                  That could be Elway’s plan: get a bunch of guys off thescrap heap that only thrive in a spread-option offense and play them with the world’s greatest S/O QB. If it works out then you’ve just Moneyballed the league and made up for the last half decade of terrible drafting.

                  1. Ive been suggesting this for years. People say you cant use a running QB because you cant afford to pay for 3 QBs. But come on, how much would it take to get Nesbitt off the Bills roster (he just moved up from practice squad, he is their 5th Safety)? Running QBs are a dime a dozen in the NFL. Buy a dozen every off season.

                    1. Treat QBs like interchangeable cogs, like Denver always has with running backs.

                    2. Rob,

                      You could sign four running quarterbacks for half the price of the average starting passing quarterback.

                      And also, since they are real athletes rather than just throwers, they could play special teams and other positions like running back and wide reciever in a pinch.

                    3. Like I said, Moneyball the league. You have Tebow, Pat White’s surely available, Troy Smith’s out there, Vince Young will be as well. Fuck it, Spread Option it up and see what happens. I’m on board. Get a couple of Slaton types to play running back, a good blocking fullback, and big receivers to block. If you suck, like the Broncos have for a while, then why not?

                    4. Broncos already have Bay Bay Thomas. He has experience as a blocking WR. And is damn good at it.

                    5. The only problem is that you can’t Moneyball with Tebow at his salary. All those other guys work, however.

                      And yes, the triple option is fun as shit to watch. I always watch GT if it’s on.

        2. What’s odd to me is how low his completion percentage is. He wasn’t anywhere near that bad of a passer in college. In fact, I think he had a pretty good rating. I wonder if the attempt to get him to change his throwing style has screwed him up?

          One of the NFL’s biggest flaws is orthodoxy. They’ve destroyed and ignored great talent over and over and over again. And act surprised when someone pooh-poohed succeeds. I remember when the Bucs drafted Derrick Brooks, who was “too small.”

          1. I think his percentage is lower because it is a lot harder to complete passes in the NFL. The thing is that to run that kind of offense, you need a coach with balls who is willing to run it on third and long. You can’t just throw on third and long because the other team is expecting it. Run and run and run an then when they least expect it on first or second down throw big.

            And yeah, I wonder sometimes if NFL scouts even watch the college games. Derrick Brooks was one of the most productive players in college his senior year. Anyone who watched him play knew he was going to be a good NFL player. But the scouts never seem to watch the games and just judge by the results of the junior Olympics they hold every year at the combine never worrying if the guy can actually play football. It is absurd. Year after year players like Brooks or Zach Thomas who played for the Dolphins for years or Wes Welker or this years huge pass over DeMarco Murray at Dallas.

            1. I once posted a diatribe at Urkobold about the NFL and its weird “conventional wisdom.” I used the Bucs as an example of what a team could do once it started mostly ignoring hype and combine scores and focusing on on-field production. The year they started doing that, they drafted Brooks and Sapp, both players who were foolishly discounted by NFL logic.

              1. They do the same thing in college. My alma matter, Oklahoma State is number 2 in the BCS. They have now beaten Texas two striaght years. Texas recuits conventionally taking all of the four and five star recruits it can handle. There was an interview with the OSU head coach and he says he pays no attention to the ratings but instead makes sure every player he recruits was a productive player in high school. Production, not physical attributes is in his view the best way to evaluate talent. For example, their all American wide reciever, Justin Blackman, was a skinny kid in high school and a three star recruit who was only offered by OSU and a couple of non BCS colleges. But he put he put up enormous recieving numbers in high school. OSU currently has a single player out of an 85 man roster who was offered a scholarship by Texas.

                The ability to actually play the game apparently matters when evaluating talent at any level. Who would have thought such a thing?

                1. Every single scholarship QB on GT’s current roster was listed as an “athlete” as his position on ESPN’s recruiting site. They range from really highly rated 4-star “athletes” to 2-star “athletes”. Not a single one was rated by the scouting services as a QB.

                  For some reason, even the HS rating services rate based on the NFL. Despite tons of teams running spread option type systems that require more of an athlete than a drop back passer.

                  Its also the reason they end up at GT. When school X is offering you a chance to play QB and school Y is offering you as a safety, advantage to school X.

                  Oh, and our starting B-back was the 3rd string QB last year, he was also an “athlete” coming out of HS.

            2. I agree with the point, but I don’t think Brooks is a good example. Space linebackers rarely go high anyway, and he was the 2nd player taken at his position (behind another Pro Bowler in Mark Fields) in the time before the 4-3 and Cover-2 got big. That’s more of a problem of priority than scouting, I think.

              1. The 4-3 was pretty widely used then, but not the Cover 2. That only got in vogue when Monte Kiffin showed the world how to use it.

          2. Well, I also have to wonder about the people around him at Florida. For example, Percy Harvin was very, very good.

            1. Sure. I don’t like the spread much myself, but with the possible exception of Tommy Frazier, perhaps the best possible QB to run it is in place. For it to work, the defense has to be really worried about the QB running the ball, and, eventually, the QB has got to do damage via play-action.

              I do think Tebow has the skills, work ethic, and intelligence to adapt to a more traditional role, but that’s going to take time. Meanwhile, this strange journey continues.

      4. I think Tebow’s success is more a factor of, “Why the hell didn’t NFL teams bust out the single wing sooner?”

        I think the problem is that with a guy like Tebow, if he gets injured, he has a huge contract and a big cap hit. But I don’t see why an NFL team couldn’t pay 3 QBs 3-4 mil to run the option all the time.

        1. But I don’t see why an NFL team couldn’t pay 3 QBs 3-4 mil to run the option all the time.

          With a guy like Tebow, who’s built like a linebacker, it’s possible. Your average 200 pound spread-option college QB wouldn’t be able to get away with it for long in the NFL. He’d get beaten to a pulp eventually.

          Honestly, given his reciever corps, if I was in charge of the Donks I’d just bring in another bopper at RB, a couple of extra FB or TE-types that will block their ass off all day long, and run single wing sweeps, wedges, and counters with the occasional screen, inside slant, or post pass to keep the defense honest. Tebow’s not a traditional QB, so why run the offense as if he is?

        2. Without a Tebow or maybe a Cam Newton, the speed and power of many NFL defenses makes the option totally untenable. You can get away with it these days, with the NFL being a little down, defense-wise, but it won’t get you past good defenses or through the playoffs.

          It’s just possible that it might work with the right personnel, though. I’ve actually wondered whether a team built almost totally on the run could work (not the option–I would retain a pocket QB for play-action purposes). Defenses aren’t really built to handle that, so it’s a possible angle. Running teams have to be really good at execution, though, as penalties kill when you’re getting the lower average yards per play.

          1. I think run-heavy teams have a hard time sustaining drives. The RB getting stuffed on 2nd & 6 leaves you needing 6-7 yards on 3d down.

            Now, I think a coach committing to an option, building a team with players to execute it, and then forgoing the usualy 3 downs and punt mentality could really exploit some inefficiences in the NFL.

            But holy crap it would require a team-level commitment.

      5. But the Jets lost because of a lame scheduling gimmick, another shoddy game plan from their OC, another Mark Sanchez brain fart, the worst right tackle in the NFL, and a bad kicking game in the easiest stadium to kick in the league, not the antics of God’s gift to the spread option.

        And my reaction to that would be, “So what?”

        Honestly, the best part of watching Denver win right now is that it’s not only completely contrarian to what everyone has taken for granted is necessary to win in the league, ever since Sid Luckman lined up under center. It’s that it’s driving these same people absolutely insane with outrage.

        “HOW DARE THIS XTIAN GOODY TWO-SHOES LEAD HIS TEAM TO WINS AND NOT THROW FOR 300 YARDS A GAME A BLOO BLOO BLOO!”

        There’s really no way Tebow deserves either the hatred, nor worship, thrown his way. Honestly, I don’t give a shit if he’s nothing more than a single-wing tailback and an NFL coach would have to do nothing but run all damn day with him. Pair that kind of offense with a viscious defense (which for Denver, keeps getting better every week), pound the other team into submission, get the win, and go home.

        But because most people want to see football be like their Madden vidya games, there’s all this consternation because Tebow can’t hit the broad side of a barn with his passes (and in fairness, his receiving corps is nothing special, as they seem to drop some very catchable balls. But all QBs have to deal with that from time to time). The whole point is that if he CAN’T pass all that well, why the hell wouldn’t you run a single-wing type offense? Because everyone else says it can’t work? Fuck that noise. The best time to take a contrarian approach is when everyone else is avoiding it like the plague.

        I still maintain my position from earlier this week that the Bears and Patriots are going to beat Denver–they’re simply more talented in all aspects of the game. But the rest of them are very winnable, and if they continue to execute, this is going to be the type of team no one wants to play in the latter part of the season.

        1. And my reaction to that would be, “So what?”

          Honestly, the best part of watching Denver win right now is that it’s not only completely contrarian to what everyone has taken for granted is necessary to win in the league, ever since Sid Luckman lined up under center. It’s that it’s driving these same people absolutely insane with outrage.

          I agree with you, actually (see further up the thread). I just hate Tebow, or any QB in that situation, getting credit when he doesn’t deserve it. Mine was more of a rage against the QB-cult nature of things than Tebow himself (though they did just beat my team so I admit there was a fair bit of that as well). The D looks good and they hold onto the football. So long as they can keep doing that they can win.

          1. The Ravens won a Super Bowl with a shitty QB in place, so it’s not like the Donks’ medicore offense/great defense approach has never been tried before. Whether Denver can do it over the long run remains to be seen, though, which I freely admit.

            1. They’ve a ways to go before they should be in the same paragraph as that Ravens’ defense. Not giving up 45 to Detroit would be a start. They are playing very well right now though, and Von Miller is just killing it (10 sacks, 3 forced fumbles, 3 passes defensed). Now that Dumervil seems to have remembered his pass-rushing chops too (3.5 sacks in the last 4 games), they’re a challenging unit for opposing offenses. The New England game should be fun.

  10. Alleged woman Amanda Marcotte hates pr0n, and hte pr0n women actually like is despised by men.

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_…..able_.html

    1. For someone who hates porn, she sure can’t stop talking about it.

      1. I had a nun in high school who kept telling us about writing about “s-e-x” as she called it. (We weren’t supposed to do it in English class). As far as I could tell, she was more obsessed with sex than I was back then. Sr. Irene Marie, I wonder what happened to her.

        1. So this nun had a sex habit?

          1. I see what you did there…

        2. I wonder what happened to her.

          All depends on whether or not she was able to find a straight priest.

          1. How heteronormative of you. She could have found a Sister of Sapphic sympathies.

    2. Just further confirming that she is completely clueless about men.

      1. They probably should’ve interviewed James Deen for that piece.

        1. Nevermind. I’m reading the piece linked in the piece linked to.

          1. what they really want is something a little less overwrought. One of Hess’ subjects described her attraction to Deen thusly: “He was almost like a guy that you would just hang out with at Hebrew school.”

            Hmm, I was pretty sure that I had read somewhere that women like them uncut.

    3. So the reason I don’t want to watch a porn focusing on some sensitive, handsome dude instead of focusing on hot chicks getting stuffed is because I’m homophobic? Makes perfect sense! Thanks Amanda.

    4. Btw, the way that’s Amanda Hess not Amanda Marcotte. Not that they aren’t interchangeably batshit.

    5. Wait. There is porn that women like?

      1. Yeah, it’s called ‘QVC’ and “the shopping channel’.

      2. Yes, I forgot what the figures were, but a significant amount of porn is purchased by women.

      3. Well, I can’t speak for any other wimmenz except myself, but I like reading it. Watching it doesn’t do much for me though.

        1. the ‘self-published’ ebook industry is rife with erotica for women. Someone’s making money at it – or else there are a lot of horny writers.

          1. the ‘self-published’ ebook industry is rife with erotica for women. Someone’s making money at it – or else there are a lot of horny writers.

            Look at the harlequin romance novels–seems like most of them are just glorified BDSM/rape fantasies.

        2. I like reading it or watching it. If I watch it, I am first having to make fun of it for a while, then it’s OK.

    6. That article is so hilariously clueless.

    7. My diagnosis: The best way to stop obsessing about sex is to get finally get laid.

      1. A lot of husbands would agree with this.

    1. Who are you and why are you linking to rectal?

      1. I am a person who never posts under fake handles.

        1. A rather imprudent policy. But, rock on.

          1. Despite the conpracies comes in three meme,  Natalie Wood, and JFK is enough for this week

  11. Beacon Power Follows Solyndra into Bankruptcy
    http://news.heartland.org/news…..bankruptcy

    Massachusetts-based company that won praise from renewable power activists and loan guarantees from the federal government, has filed for bankruptcy, potentially leaving taxpayers on the hook for $43 million.

    1. Holy crap, I read that fast and saw “Bacon Power”. Bacon power will never falter.

      1. That’s funny. I saw that headline on hot air and did the same thing. You can’ t really see or hear the word bacon without then wanting bacon.

        1. Darnitall, baconpower.com is already taken. I was so going to register that.

    2. Jesus, leave the venture capital to the venture capitalists and the rich people that fund them. American taxpayers/Chinese workers shouldn’t be eating these losses.

  12. My question: What about a movement to occupy unions? aren’t they corrupt and controlling parts of American politics?

    1. Doesn’t fit the meme.

      1. right, but no less worthy of protesting against. Just not gonna get coverage on it. And coverage is everything. If it doesn’t get covered, it didn’t happen.

  13. Occupy San Diego Protester Asks For Moment Of Silence For White House Shooter
    http://www.wtam.com/cc-common/…..z1e1oPOUsU

    At the tail end of a rally at San Diego Police headquarters, a protester stepped up to the microphone (an actual microphone, not a human one) to ask for a moment of “silence and solidarity” for the White House, which was the victim of a shooting over the weekend, and the troubled alleged shooter, Oscar Ramiro Ortega.

    1. A moment of silence for a building?!

      1. Too soon, Quetzalcoatl, too soon.

      2. Fucking synecdoches, how do they work?

        1. So they were symbolically having the moment of silence for all of the buildings on Pennsylvania Ave?

          1. Stop resisting!

            1. Don’t tase me, bro!

              1. THAT’S NOT FUNNY!!!

        2. Syna-Douche? What flavor is that?

      3. Better have a moment of solidarity for the Washington Monument.

        1. The woman’s facial expression and body language while the guy was talking was excellent.

        2. PATRIARCHY!

      4. a moment of “silence and solidarity” for the White House, which was the victim of a shooting over the weekend

        These people just get more infantile every day.

    2. Oh, that makes more sense. Yesterday someone was going on about this as if they were expressing support for the shooting.

      1. Sounds fairly conventional to me. Almost like those churches which presume to pray for sinners. (and a moment of silence is a potential mask for prayer, according to the Supreme Court)

  14. Not for the faint of heart: Volcano-boarding in Nicaragua
    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/201…..lcano.html

    Peering down from atop the Cerro Negro volcano, it’s easy to see how a daredevil on a bicycle earned a land speed record gliding down its cinder cone slope.

    The drop is a stomach-churning 41-degree angle, for nearly 2,000 feet.

    Tourists do it for fun.

    The instructor laid out the drill. He would give each of our simple sleds a push, and we would hurtle down the slope as fast as we could, a weird bobsled run through hell.

    1. At first I thought this was a form of torture involving pouring lava on someone’s face.

      1. It simulates having lava poured on your face.

        1. Sooooo… they put a McDonalds Apple Pie on your face?

          1. They drip the molten contents onto your forehead one. drip. at. a. time.

          2. Yes, and not the wimpy new kind either–the old ones that were covered in blisters like the roof of your mouth after you ate one.

            1. Those were AWESOME!

              1. Hours after the fact I have to post that yes, those were fucking awesome.

      2. that’s what I thought, too.

  15. When you talk as much as Gingrich, and you’ve got your dick as deep into statist central planning as Gingrich, you’re bound to have voiced advocacy for every possible kind of government scheming.

    Shit Flopney is Newcular Titties?! And they have been seen in the same room at the same time! Perhaps there is something to this hub-bub over the speed of neutrinos and perhaps matter is able to occupy multiple places simultaneously.

  16. Outback steakhouse waitress’ Tea Party bracelet becomes the reason she joins the 99%.

    http://www.nwherald.com/2011/1…..=Northwest Herald | Woman says she was fired over ‘tea party’ bracelet&md=0&inst=1&jsl=8353&lng=en-us&ogt;=&pc=men&pub=xa-4bcf0a36744ebf33&ssl=0&sid=4ec65ff0117f2b56&srd=1&srf=0.02&srp=0.2&srl=0&srx=0.5&ver=250&xck=0&og;=&rev=106117&ct=1&xld=1&xd=1

    1. $10 says she thinks that her First Amendment rights were violated.

      1. $1,000.00 says that there are people on this blog who think that they have a right to police protection and a nationalized, socialized defense.

  17. Has Occupy Wall Street clarified its message?
    http://www.prdaily.com/Main/Articles/10086.aspx

    The movement’s PR efforts drew derision from Fraser P. Seitel, managing partner of Emerald Partners and author of The Practice of Public Relations. OWS, he says, has “botched an opportunity to capture public opinion and achieve something. Americans, by every measure, distrust the politicians who run Washington and lead major institutions. So public opinion was ripe for the plucking.”

    However, the movement blew it by having no overriding purpose, stated goals, or visible leadership, he says, and it is increasingly perceived as a bunch of publicity-hungry complainers intent on disrupting others who are making a living.

    “Occupy Wall Street is right about one thing,” he says. “The whole world is watching. And it’s generally repulsed by what it’s seen.”

  18. The Office of Principal Legal Advisor at ICE in charge of the review has been directed to review “incoming cases and cases pending in immigration court.”

    So, someone with a Latino-sounding name takes a pot shot at the White House, and all of the sudden the Administration is looking into immigration cases?

    Dots have been connected.

    1. Huh? Hasn’t this administration been setting records for deportations for some time already?

  19. and I promise, the last OWS post

    Elizabeth Warren won’t sign off on Occupy Harvard
    http://www.bostonherald.com/ne…..id=1381558

    U.S. Senate hopeful and Harvard Law prof Elizabeth Warren, who has claimed she laid the “intellectual foundation” for the Occupy Wall Street movement, is jilting the anti-corporate proteges in her own Ivy League yard, refusing to sign a petition in support of Occupy Harvard.

    Warren, who declined to speak to the Herald, is focused on her campaign, said spokesman Kyle Sullivan.

    1. Intellectual foundation?

      1. Someone has to read books / go on teh Internets to get the Marx, Che, and Zinn quotes.

      2. She algored the OWS movement.

    2. you buried the lede: there’s an intellecutal foundation for OWS? who knew? I thought it was hippies all the way down.

      1. *Snort*! Good one.

    3. Why, doesn’t she have tenure?

      1. No, she wants to win the election. Already quite the polished pol.

        1. You know who else was a polished pol/professor?

          1. Newkular Titties?

    4. Some pigs are more equal than others.

  20. I was watching the Broncos-Jets game at a local bar, and I guy sat down next to me and ordered a Pabst Blue Ribbon. He was pretty quiet for a while, but halfway through his second PBR, he started to get really loud. He sounded exactly like the “I’m white trash and I’m in trouble” guys in the
    latest South Park episode
    .

    What the hell do they put in that stuff?

    1. What the hell do they put in that stuff?

      White trash.

    2. it’s a special blend of hops, corn, tires, roadkill, and old dog piss – all lovingly mixed together using a 1958 Chevy Pickup gamboling down dirt roads.

      1. I don’t get why it’s so hip now either.

        1. I think it’s only hip if you drink it ironically.

      2. I actually like it for cheap, watery beer. Sometimes on a hot day you want to drink some beer, but still have stuff to do and some watery, low-alcohol, low malt content beer is just the thing. PBR is pretty good for that. The flavor is not interesting, but not offensive. Schaeffer is better, but less common where I live.

        1. yeah, I’ve drunk plenty of PBR. It is better than Budweiser – at least to my palate. I also like Schlitz.

          Of course if I really want to drink beer, I stick with some of the local breweries. Short’s Bellaire Brown is very good.

          1. Get your hands on some Natty Boh if you’re ever in metro Baltimore. You’ll probably love it.

            1. They sell it in DC too. And it is much better than PBR.

        2. My favorite American watery beer is Natty Bo. I never knew about it until I moved to Maryland. The shit is drinkable.

          1. Narragansett is pretty good too. Better than PBR, but I can’t get it locally. Would have to drive to MA.

            1. Wow, Gansett!

  21. “The Tampa Police Department responded to Occupy Tampa with a tank.”

    I’d like a better source for that.

    1. twitpic is the foundation of modern journalism.

    2. I didn’t even know that we had tanks.

      1. It doesn’t look like a tank at all.

        1. It’s probably the closest thing to a tank their DHS grant could buy.

      2. It’s tanks all the way down.

    3. Okay, that isn’t a tank, that’s a M113 Armored Personnel Carrier, one of the variants, I believe, used for air defense, hence the higher hull in back.

      1. Got a source for the pic?

        1. Whoops, not air defense, it’s a M577 mobile command post.

          http://www.flickr.com/photos/sarge_schultz/page49/

      2. OK, perhaps it’s not a “tank”, but it’s definitely an “armored fighting vehicle”. And to my way of thinking, if the police and media would call it a tank if someone used it against them (and you know they would), we should call it a tank when the police use it against us…

        1. When it runs you over, you probably can’t tell the difference.

        2. If I can’t be free to be (slightly) pedantic about armored fighting vehicles, I weep for the future.

      3. Air defense? Is the city worried about an attack from Macdill?

      4. “Oh, what’s this, gentlemen? The police have themselves an RV.”

        1. Leon County Sheriffs have exactly the brand of armored vehicle from Die Hard. Every time I see it (usually in a parade, since we have zero incidents that require an armored vehicle) I think of that line.

  22. A moment of silence for a building?!

    It’s better than ten fucking years of quibbling.

  23. U.S. Senate hopeful and Harvard Law prof Elizabeth Warren, who has claimed she laid the “intellectual foundation” for the Occupy Wall Street movement

    Seriously?

    WHAT “intellectual foundation”?

    1. A Marxist and an egomaniac! How can they not vote for her?

    2. Let’s ask her about the income inequity gulf between staff and faculty at Harvard. I’m sure she split her salary straight down the middle with her TAs. I’m sure they needed it some much more than her, after all.

    3. That’s actually a better point than mine. Claiming the intellectual foundation for a movement that seems almost completely defined by its lack of an intellectual foundation is, well, stupid.

      1. If she wants to take the blame for this mess, let her.

        1. Probably will work in Masslahoma. What’s wrong with people?

          1. You bet your ass it will work up here. Her ads with the sad puppy eyes and the new “Scott Brown is for Big Oil” attack ads just about guarantee it.

            1. They are just mindless up there. The Deacon who officiated my marriage is always posting on face book about how wonderful Warren is. Now this guy is not stupid. He has masters in electrical engineering, reads Latin and knows more about the history of the Church than anyone I have ever met.

              But he is just brain dead when it comes to politics or economics. For him “the Democrats are for the little guy and the Republicans are for the big evil corporations” is like some kind of rosary.

              My mother in law is the same way. If you talk to them and take away the labels, their views are often reasonable and quite libertarian or conservative. But put the labels on and they are fanatical Democrats. Seriously, how the hell can someone who claims to be a devout Catholic and that abortion is the most pressing moral issue of our time, vote Democrat in every election from dog catcher on up?

              The Democratic Party is a cult up there.

              1. Yeah, Mass is weird. But it is important to remember that the Dems aren’t necessarily the liberal/progressive party in Mass. They are the ruling party. Plenty of anti-abortion and otherwise fairly conservative (thought still government oving) Democrats there.

                1. That is true Zeb. But you would think they would split their tickets on the state wide tickets. Warren is a radical pro choice feminist. And putting her in the Senate will let her vote on confirming judges.

                  Take the merits of the issue aside. If abortion is the most important moral issue of our time and you are pro life, it is totally irrational to support Warren.

                  1. Many people don’t look at the name on the ticket, they just look for the D. The non-progressives are spread out enough that they exist in districts that are completely overrun with progressives so the vote doesn’t count for much.

          2. Dude, MA has been voting Democrat for time immemorial. I mean, at one point the intelligent classes voted Republican, but the white ethnic class has always been Dems.

    4. I don’t know that that is something you should brag about.

    5. Elizabeth Warren chaired the oversight panel for TARP. So she was indeed instrumental in raising public disgust for the special treatment and taxpayer money given to the financial sector, just not quite in the way she’s insinuating now.

  24. So, just yesterday, I say I might want a tank if hordes descended on my neighborhood. Then Tampa uses a tank. What can this mean?

    1. It means you’re a police plant. First you predict it — you preemptively establish grounds that you don’t know what’s going on. And now this question, to complete the farce. We. Are. On. To. You.

      1. Even if I were, they send tanks because I make some off-the-cuff comment in an obscure libertarian blog?

        1. Your game is deep. But riddle me this: if you didn’t know, then how did you know?

          1. I don’t know!

              1. I can’t even prove that I exist!

                1. So you consider your existence a negative. Just more evidence that you’re a cop, in my book.

                  Guess I’ll to have to start shopping for a tank of my own…

        2. “”Even if I were, they send tanks because I make some off-the-cuff comment in an obscure libertarian blog?””

          They got it, they’ll find excuses to use it.

          I’m half kidding. The taser was meant to be a device for self defense, now it’s commonly used as a compliance tool.

  25. Frothing Degenerate Mob would be a great name for a punk band. Band name for a political movement.

    http://theothermccain.com/2011…..rock-band/

  26. At first I thought this was a form of torture involving pouring lava on someone’s face.

    You have heard of facial wax and chemical peels, no?

  27. What can this mean?

    You are the Anti-Christ.

    My advice: invest in bullet proof windows, ASAP.

    1. Why? We’ve got tanks.

    2. I’m too nice to be the Anti-Christ, and I don’t dress sharply enough.

      1. The two most obvious signs there are…

  28. LOL, when will they realize that Tea Parties are for little girls with invisible friends lol.

    http://www.real-anon-tools.tk

  29. So, just yesterday, I say I might want a tank if hordes descended on my neighborhood. Then Tampa uses a tank. What can this mean?

    That the spice melange really does work? I hope your son knows what’s in store for him later on, Pro’L Dib…

    Oh, and I hear your sister is very “friendly” and fond of cutlery. Is she seeing anyone right now?

    1. You dare to mock the Kwittheshitz Hadenough, even after the demonstration of his power?

      Besides, I don’t have a sister, unless my mother is pregnant.

  30. Let’s ask her about the income inequity gulf between staff and faculty at Harvard.

    Stop muddying the waters. We’re only concerned with undeserved income inequality.

  31. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/…..Right.html

    Perhaps we’ll get that sarcasm font soon.

    1. So my daughter is highly creative and my wife is on track for brain disease. Sounds about right.

    2. An inability to understand sarcasm may be an early warning sign of brain disease.

      I always thought liberals were drain bramaged.

  32. Let’s ask her about the income inequity gulf between staff and faculty at Harvard. I’m sure she split her salary straight down the middle with her TAs. I’m sure they needed it some much more than her, after all.

    Piffle. Those minor trifles are for the little people. Ideological consistency for the sake of ideological purity is not one of Ms. Warren’s strong suits.

    1. 1997 Crimson Article

      Third was Gottlieb Professor of Law Elizabeth Warren, whose salary of $181,300 was higher than that of any other professor outside the administration.

      Warren was also compensated for moving expenses, her mortgage was subsidized and she received an allowance in lieu of benefits contributions. Her total compensation, excluding a meager $253 for her benefit plan, was $291,876.

      1. That was in 1997. In today’s money that has to be clost to a half a million dollars. And I am sure she has gotten several raises since then.

      2. But did she consult the actuarial tables?

      3. Funny how most of the jackals demanding that the state take even more of our money can buy and sell any of us many times over, with just their take home pay. At least their families could, for those camping out in city parks.

        Well, not really funny, unless funny means rage-induced migraine.

        The rest are either rent-sought parasites whose profit hasn’t been bloodied enough with public money as it is, or so poor that they have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

        I’m sure the middle class will tire of this quickly and elect someone who isn’t from the Parasite Class, so as to defend their hard earned, yet relatively meager, wealth.

        Yeah, I laughed too. Maybe it is funny after all.

        1. Only certain rich people are bad.

          You see, if someone attained their wealth through political means, then obviously they are quite popular and deserving of their wealth.
          If some rich person is cozy with popular political cronies, then they too may keep their wealth.

          However is some dick gets rich providing goods and services to willing customers, then obviously they don’t deserve it because they are unpopular. They must be exploiting workers and customers alike, and deserve to be forcibly relieved of their wealth (and life).

          Principles don’t matter because they don’t take important things like popularity into account.

          Principals on the other hand, they mean everything.

  33. http://online.wsj.com/article/…..TopOpinion

    James Torranto on the occutards. Best part, a real headline “They paused to scream at the walls of a Citibank branch.”

    1. He was in rare form yesterday. I particularly liked his observation about Obama:

      He didn’t have to learn how to think, since he was thinking all the “right” thoughts anyway.

      Very insightful.

      1. It is. And these kids at the OWS can’t think. They have gone through life being told there is only one way to think and the way to get ahead is think that way and repeat it. That would be okay if what they were being told to think was true. But it is not. It is nonsense at worst. And at best it is a dated and intellectually bankrupt ideology that cannot explain what is happening. So they are left with no critical thinking skills and no known framework to interpret what is going on. Combine that with an ego stroked by a childhood being told you are special and a good amount of fear and loathing of the future, and you wind up screaming at walls.

        1. you wind up screaming at walls

          When everyone knows it is more useful to scream at pixels.

          1. YOU WOULD SAY THAT, YOU BASTARD!

        2. Schopenhauer wrote that while most people can learn philosophy, few people can philosophize. Still, I do not think it would be OK if what they were taught to think is true. They should be taught the conclusions of each side of each question. How can one defend something without understanding the opposing view?

          1. I agree with CainDroid.

          2. Apes don’t read philosophy.

            1. yes they do. They just don’t understand it. And the London Underground is not a political movement.

    2. What we’re now witnessing all around the world is the incoherent, unfocused pure rage of those whose entire world view is being destroyed by reality.

      1. I say the time is ripe for marketing a fully immersive VR experience that involves living in a socialist utopia.

        1. How would you monetize it?

  34. Warren was also compensated for moving expenses, her mortgage was subsidized and she received an allowance in lieu of benefits contributions. Her total compensation, excluding a meager $253 for her benefit plan, was $291,876

    So, is she one of the 1% or the 99%? Scale is very important here as a determinant.

    1. I think she needs another $10,000 to be in the 1%.

    2. Yes, the rich telling us to hate the rich. Is the word “hypocrisy” withheld from the K-12 teaching of English?

  35. Ex-Packer gets 6 years for codeine possession:
    http://www.chron.com/news/hous…..275273.php

    And before some ass says it was for violating probation, that too was for codeine.

    1. That’s just sad.

      1. What should the fate be of the sentencing judge?

        1. Something involving a codeine-soaked tampon?

    2. Typical, the WOD doing more harm than the drugs themselves.

  36. Yes, and not the wimpy new kind either–the old ones that were covered in blisters like the roof of your mouth after you ate one.

    They are nothing compared to the damage a fully cooked turkey pot pie can inflict. Ever try to fully nuke one of those things?

    1. McDonalds apple turnovers used to do the same thing. Maybe they still do, I haven’t been to one in 10 years probably.

      1. I miss the fried pies.

        1. My great aunt used to make fried pies. Awesome.

        2. They don’t fry them anymore? What’s the point?

          1. They’ve been baking them since the early 90s. Where have you been?

            1. Not eating pies at McDonalds, apparently.

  37. Probably will work in Masslahoma.

    Careful now.

    1. You’re right, that was offensive. I take it back.

      Massifornia.

      1. No kidding. Oklahoma is kind of a happening place these days. I gaurentee you it is a better place to run a business or find a job than Boston. And oh yeah, it has been at least a couple of decades since a major state elected figure has gone to federal prison. The Mass statehouse has one of those signs where they count the number of days since the last work related injury, only theirs is the number of days since the last federal indictment.

        1. That does not mean that there has been an absence of corruption in Okieville.

          As for Mass, three former speakers of the Massachusetts House have records, at least two of whom are convicted felons.

          However, one of them, Tom Finneran, at least stood up to Robert Kraft of the Patriots and told him that the state was not going to finance the construction of Gillete Stadium.

          Anybody who stands up to Bob Kraft deserves some props.

          1. Sure there is corruption in Okahoma. It is just one party Democratic oligopolies like Mass bring corruption to a new level.

            It always used to kill me when Joe Boyle would try to talk about how progressive and enlightened Mass is. What a joke. That place is in large part made of the worst sort of backward white trash you can imagine. West Virginia is Plato’s Republic compared to places like Fall River or South Boston. And their political culture shows that.

            1. It’s amazingly racist up there, too.

              1. My wife lived her whole life, sans 4 years in Washington DC at college, in Boston. She moved to Atlanta after she married me. She couldn’t believe how much more enlightened and integrated Atlanta was compared to Boston.

              2. It’s amazingly racist up there, too.

                I remember the riots when the government housing authority decided to end racial segregation of public housing in the 1980’s.

              3. I’ve said it on H&R before, but I’ll say it again.

                I grew up in Texas, and went to college in a small Texas town. I’ve spent most of my life living in the South. I’ve known plenty of southerners who were some stripe of racist.

                Without question or qualification South Boston was filled with the most hateful, racist people I ever had the intense displeasure to meet. They were proud of their racism and relished in it. Nigger, chink, spic, gook (I spent many evenings of my youth hanging out with my dad and his Vietnam veteran friends, the first time I heard the word “gook” used by an actual person and not on TV was by a guy in a bar in Southie), etc. It wouldn’t shock me in the least in the next time a black person is lynched in this country it will be because he slept with some Southie guy’s daughter.

                Ever since that assignment every claim I hear about how more enlightened the Northeast is about anything I know is a complete and total fabrication.

            2. It’s because all of the intellectuals congregate in the People’s Republic of Cambridge. Between the people from New York using the Berkshires as their private playground and the people on the east coast thinking they’re the only ones that matter, those of us towards the middle are pretty much surrounded by assholes.

            3. I think this is, paradoxically, related to why MA is so reliably Democratic (the question you guys were musing on above).

              MA is still the land of the white unionized blue collar worker, and the white small contractor.

              Those guys are ALL OVER THE PLACE in MA and you never see them anywhere else any more.

              And they are both reliable Democrats and frothing racists.

              But it’s also why they occasionally will elect a guy like Scott Brown. “That Brown, he’s a regular guy, with his pickup truck and his barn jacket!” That shit actually works with your average blue collar Masshole.

              1. As a former MA resident (mass hole). Remember, MA will elect repub governors, though. Weld, Romney, etc.

                1. Yes, but that’s a MA Republican which should not be confused with an actual Republican.

            4. And yet, I’d still much rather live here than Oklahoma or West Virginia.

  38. What does your husband really think about your wobbly bits?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/fem…..aring.html

    1. GAH! My eyes! You dick!

    2. There is a reason that man invented clothing.

    3. The British media, you’ve got to love them.

    4. We are not our physical bodies. We are simply spiritual beings having a physical experience. The soul uses the body to learn about the physical universe and when it’s finished with it it tosses it aside with about as much emotion as we might have for a worn out suit of clothes or a worn out pair of tennis shoes. The soul feels no more attachment for the body than a butterfly does for the cocoon it just came out of. We are only here for a little while.

      – Art, Murfreesboro, TN USA, 18/11/2011 14:49

      That comment was beautiful *sniff*. I LOVE YOU MAN!

    5. I could have lived without that.

      That’s actually worse than anything than Sug has ever posted.

      1. Now that is a comment I’ll wear as a badge of honor!

  39. Besides, I don’t have a sister, unless my mother is pregnant.

    Funny you should mention that… You’d think you saw that one coming.

    1. If she’d seen it coming she wouldn’t be pregnant.

  40. STEVE SMITH?

    Sheriff: Men were lured to Ohio to be killed
    http://www.dispatch.com/conten…..oting.html

    He lay in the woods for seven hours, with an elbow shattered by an assailant’s bullet.

    Lost, covered in his own blood and unsure if the men who hunted him were still nearby, a man from South Carolina hid in the forested hills outside Caldwell until after dark on Nov. 6. Deciding it was safe, he then made a painful 2-mile journey to the nearest farmhouse to call for help.

    Investigators say he was the lucky one.

    1. Sounds like a job for Drew Carey and Nick Gillespie.

    2. I read that and thought what kind of monster lures people who need work across the country to kill and rob them? According to the article a 52 year ild and a 16 year old have been arrested in connection with the case.

      1. Pure evil. I doubt getting their mitts on other people’s stuff was their sole motivation; there are other, easier, more lucrative forms of crime.

        I would be very unsurprised if these guys liked killing strangers whom they tricked into coming to them like lambs to the slaughter.

  41. To retain my title, I submit to you all a brief review of Skyrim:

    The first thing that you notice about Skyrim is its depth. Not in the extensive crafting system, which includes alchemy, cooking, enchanting, and smith; rather, in the truly three dimensional sense of height. Emerging from the opening dungeon after an opening sequence that is both literally and figuratively explosive, you spy a nearby cliff and summit. Staring down, you can see a vast valley below, cut from the rock by a river. Staring across, in all directions, you see the vast mountains, all of which you can summit. The sheer vastness is overwhelming. Welcome to Skyrim.

    Of course, if you aren’t a fan of wandering around in a big sandbox with no real, forced direction or narrative, you will not like Skyrim. However, if you have the weird combination of ADD and OCD that makes games like this work, you can spend hours doing even the most mundane tasks. If you had told me a month ago that I would be most excited to sit around, fishing, so that I can grill salmon, I would have called you nuts. Or that I would spend an hour arranging books in my in game house. Skyrim allows you to do all this and more. It is possibly the greatest time sink in video game history.

    This is not to say that the quests are bad. While the Radiant Systems randomly generated quests are a bit dull (“Go to X, kill Z opponent” seem to be a large extent of it) the written quests are incredibly awesome. Sent to retrieve a minor item that has been stolen by a thief, you may get roped in to solving the riddle of an ancient Nord tomb. The addition of more puzzle based dungeons is a nice change from pure killing dungeons of previous games. Also, the guilds have been overhauled: Yes, Virginia, they have found a way to make The Fighters Guild interesting (They’re called The Companions now). Still, the best written guild quests still belong to the Thieves Guild and The Dark Brotherhood, as in prior games.

    What little focus the game does have is provided by the dragons. I’ve fought two so far, including one who randomly showed up in town to fuck up my day. Neither fight has been difficult per se, but this is not because dragons are weak or underpowered. Rather, it is because every creature in the world, friend or foe, will drop everything to help you defeat the larger, world ending evil that is a dragon. Also, it is important to note… apparently, Skyrim lacks carrion creatues, because corpses kind of just stick around. For dragons, it makes sense, but it is a bit creepy to revisit an old dungeon and find the perfectly preserved corpse of a bandit that you killed months ago.

    Systematically, the game has some flaws. The new compass system is useful for figuring out exactly where the fuck you are going to go, but the map can look a little wonky at times. The item and magic menu are not the easiest, as if the favorite menu. I think that this may be an attempt to make the game more console friendly, but on the PC I have yet to find a way to equip a new weapon and magic at the same time. The skills menu is done well, although now you don’t level up so much as you accumulate perks (one such example is that silent running is now a perk). The combat, with its two hand system, is less clunky than previous games (you no longer have to be moving to get the proper kind of strike) but still not ideal. The one thing that probably makes up for this is the environmental factors that the game uses- lighting an oil slick and watching your enemies catch fire never gets old. Also, the switch from individual weapons skills to “One Handed” and “Two Handed” gives you a lot more flexibility to decide your weapons.

    Bethesda is known for its bugs, but I have only seen one so far, when one NPC was launched cannon-like and slowly descended to earth in a parabola. Still, I am sure more exist, so you may want to let Bethesda work out the kinks first.

    Overall, Skyrim takes some of the best elements from Morrowind (the desire to explore the world, unique cities, even the desire for character moments) with the writing of Oblivion. It’s a time disposal, but not a waste of your time.

    (Also, just some advice: You will quickly want to kill bards who sing Roddrick the Red. You can not longer fight underwater. And if you rob people blind, they may send hired thugs to kill you).

    1. However, if you have the weird combination of ADD and OCD that makes games like this work,

      Well, I’m off to GameSpot.

      1. Get it on Steam.

          1. Gross.

            1. You think that’s bad? My home computer is an Apple.

              1. Well at least now I understand why you need a console for gaming.

                1. Apart from the fact that skyrim suffers from consoleport-itis, it’s fucking awesome . First video game in years that I would call immersive.

    2. I haven’t played one of those games since the old Thone of Bahl games. But your review makes me want to waste a weekend and risk divorce with my wife. Do they make it for Windows PC?

      1. Yes, yes they do. In fact, that’s what I am playing it on now. You will need a decently high end system, though, so check before you buy.

        Man, I miss Baulder’s Gate. Especially Minsc.

        1. Balder’s Gate was a great game. Highly playable. that is how I got hooked. I don’t have the patience to read a 100 page manuel or spend days getting good at a game. What I liked about it was that it was turn based so you could think things through rather than just play an arcade game.

          And I have a more than good enough system. I might have to buy it.

        2. That’s the major criticism of skyrim (for us PC players)… It suffers from console port syndrome. Some upcoming mods should be able to help fix that. It’s still great though

        3. Minsc kinda of reminds me of STEVE SMITH, now that I think about it.

      2. John, If you don’t have a PC that meets the requirement, check out Oblivion (ESIV) if you haven’t played it yet. The second best game I’ve ever played.

        I don’t have Skyrim yet, but will soon.

    3. I’m enjoying it quite a bit so far. I haven’t done a whole lot of main questing–mostly building up goofing off.

    4. Which house is worth buying? I don’t want to get the Whiterun one if I can just save a little for something better.

      1. I think the next level up is 12K (?) and there is one for 25K in Solitude. I got the Whiterun one anyway, as I wanted a spot close to a blacksmith. The WR house is the cheapest also.

      2. I just needed somewhere to dump the mass amount of books I had, so I went with the Whiterun one. I figure it’s a starter house.

      3. Whiterun is right in the middle of the world, so it’s pretty boss (says the guy that has been storing his shit in the blacksmith’s barrels).

        Does anyone have some advice for effectively getting a thief-type to level? I’ve been blowing through the game on my Orc Tank, but I can’t seem to level sneaking & pickpocketing at all on my other character. Just kill stuff, pay for training, and let the perks take effect?

        1. Go into a room where someone is sleeping. Go into a corner. Sneak. Hit “c”. Stand up from your computer and walk away for a bit.

    5. For my first playthrough, I’m playing a cat named Garfield who specializes in one-hand, bow, light armor, and smithing.

      For my second, I think it would be fun to do a character who uses bound weapons and armor spells. Except it might get boring to use the same weapon.

    6. Well said, sir. I have had a great time playing so far, although sleep deprivation is beginning to kick in. >_> And I also have been VERY pleasantly surprised by the overall lack of bugginess.

      Have you tried battling a giant yet?

      1. I’ve tried.
        It went okay

    7. A Skyrim fan and a Zelda fan compare and contrast notes.

      Damn E.U. bastards, they get Skyward Sword today and I have to wait two more days, grrrr.

    8. I wish they had included single button fast switching between preset weapons and items as opposed to opening up that dumb favorites menu and doing it manually.

      Having a blast so far. Playing as a nord, sword and shield. Vanilla but I find melee more satisfying.

      1. You can hit 1 – 8 while the favorites menu is up to set hotkeys. Unfortunately, you can’t pick hands or do sets that way. I think weapons always go in the right hands, shields and spells in the left hand (and hitting a spell hotkey twice dual wields it).

    9. Once they fix the “exponentially growing save file” bug on the PS3 version I was told about, I’ll probably delete my current character from the rental and start afresh when I buy the game. I’m still too used to linear RPGs as opposed to sandbox games, although I really can’t see myself spending hours trying to come up with good cooking recipes. I could never understand people who did nothing but grind all day on what seemed to me to be menial tasks.

  42. To retain my title, I submit to you all a brief review of Skyrim:

    The first thing that you notice about Skyrim is its depth. Not in the extensive crafting system, which includes alchemy, cooking, enchanting, and smith; rather, in the truly three dimensional sense of height. Emerging from the opening dungeon after an opening sequence that is both literally and figuratively explosive, you spy a nearby cliff and summit. Staring down, you can see a vast valley below, cut from the rock by a river. Staring across, in all directions, you see the vast mountains, all of which you can summit. The sheer vastness is overwhelming. Welcome to Skyrim.

    Of course, if you aren’t a fan of wandering around in a big sandbox with no real, forced direction or narrative, you will not like Skyrim. However, if you have the weird combination of ADD and OCD that makes games like this work, you can spend hours doing even the most mundane tasks. If you had told me a month ago that I would be most excited to sit around, fishing, so that I can grill salmon, I would have called you nuts. Or that I would spend an hour arranging books in my in game house. Skyrim allows you to do all this and more. It is possibly the greatest time sink in video game history.

    This is not to say that the quests are bad. While the Radiant Systems randomly generated quests are a bit dull (“Go to X, kill Z opponent” seem to be a large extent of it) the written quests are incredibly awesome. Sent to retrieve a minor item that has been stolen by a thief, you may get roped in to solving the riddle of an ancient Nord tomb. The addition of more puzzle based dungeons is a nice change from pure killing dungeons of previous games. Also, the guilds have been overhauled: Yes, Virginia, they have found a way to make The Fighters Guild interesting (They’re called The Companions now). Still, the best written guild quests still belong to the Thieves Guild and The Dark Brotherhood, as in prior games.

    What little focus the game does have is provided by the dragons. I’ve fought two so far, including one who randomly showed up in town to fuck up my day. Neither fight has been difficult per se, but this is not because dragons are weak or underpowered. Rather, it is because every creature in the world, friend or foe, will drop everything to help you defeat the larger, world ending evil that is a dragon. Also, it is important to note… apparently, Skyrim lacks carrion creatues, because corpses kind of just stick around. For dragons, it makes sense, but it is a bit creepy to revisit an old dungeon and find the perfectly preserved corpse of a bandit that you killed months ago.

    Systematically, the game has some flaws. The new compass system is useful for figuring out exactly where the fuck you are going to go, but the map can look a little wonky at times. The item and magic menu are not the easiest, as if the favorite menu. I think that this may be an attempt to make the game more console friendly, but on the PC I have yet to find a way to equip a new weapon and magic at the same time. The skills menu is done well, although now you don’t level up so much as you accumulate perks (one such example is that silent running is now a perk). The combat, with its two hand system, is less clunky than previous games (you no longer have to be moving to get the proper kind of strike) but still not ideal. The one thing that probably makes up for this is the environmental factors that the game uses- lighting an oil slick and watching your enemies catch fire never gets old. Also, the switch from individual weapons skills to “One Handed” and “Two Handed” gives you a lot more flexibility to decide your weapons.

    Bethesda is known for its bugs, but I have only seen one so far, when one NPC was launched cannon-like and slowly descended to earth in a parabola. Still, I am sure more exist, so you may want to let Bethesda work out the kinks first.

    Overall, Skyrim takes some of the best elements from Morrowind (the desire to explore the world, unique cities, even the desire for character moments) with the writing of Oblivion. It’s a time disposal, but not a waste of your time.

    (Also, just some advice: You will quickly want to kill bards who sing Roddrick the Red. You can not longer fight underwater. And if you rob people blind, they may send hired thugs to kill you).

    1. Sorry for the fucking double post.

  43. Also, one other thing: I am starting to have a serious, “But no one I know voted for Nixon!” thing regarding CBS. It’s the country’s most popular network. But their are only two shows that people I know watch: The Big Bang Theory (which I see the appeal of, but it always seems that the show is laughing AT, as opposed to WITH, its nerdy characters) and How I Met Your Mother (good show, but they have dragged the central concept a bit too long). For example, 2 and a 1/2 Men is the nation’s highest rated scripted show. I know of no one who watches it- hell, most I know actively despise it. Same for Mike and Molly.

    Am I taking crazy pills or something here? I just do not get the popularity of CBS, or how it gets these kinds of ratings.

    1. I met someone who likes 2.5 Men. Although she warned me that it was sometimes raunchy.

      That should say it all.

      1. My dad LOVES that show, and I am not sure why. It is kind of raunchy, but the humor, such as it is, is not all that amusing (to me at least).

    2. I don’t know about the crazy pills but if you think any of those shows mentioned are actually funny, you’re definitely taking laughing gas.

    3. 2.5 men – my mother-in-law loves it, nuff said

    4. For me, I cannot stand anything with a laugh track. I find it offensive. The only TV comedies I can watch are those without the crappy guffaw recordings, Arrested Development, Scrubs, etc….

      1. The exception, for me, is Monty Python

      2. Every time I watch a show with a laugh track, and I laugh at the same time as the audience, I feel terrible about myself.

        1. Most of the shows on CBS seem geared toward people older than you.

          No matter how old you are.

          1. I was a little creeped out until I got to the second sentence.

            Then I lawled.

      3. I do make an exception for 80s and 90s shows. Cheers, Friends, Seinfeld, and The Cosby Show all have laughing (although I think that was studio audience and not laugh track). But in the past decade, a laughing audience has generally become a code for laziness (See Whitney on NBC, which is the worst example of this).

      4. Even the Flintstones used a laugh track.

    5. When I channel surf, I begin where the broadcast networks end.

    6. I love Big Bang theory; The characters are a concentrated form of a bunch of people I knew when I was a physics geek.

      Then again, I also love Doc Martin, Community, Outer Space Astronauts & Archer, so I have very weird tastes.

      1. I watch Big Bang theory sometimes. It is pretty funny. Of course I doubt your physics geek friends has women friends that were that hot. Oh my God the Indian chick and the dumb blond are just goddesses. I would imagine their girlfriends looked more like the old Blossom chick.

        1. Big Bang theory…is pretty funny

          Obviously gay leading man pretending to be straight for 22 minutes while swishing around his nerd-pad is funny?

          1. Who ever said the homos were not funny?

          2. This reveals that you’ve never watched the show.

            Sheldon is clearly asexual.

            1. Sheldon is my favorite character on TV in a long, long time.

        2. Actually, the dumb blonde isn’t dumb.

          Penny is the Virgil who guides the guys through the hell of the non-academic world.

          The episode where she teaches the guys how they recover stolen property in Nebraska, for instance…

          1. Good point. I think she has the best rack on TV. Just the right size, not too big not too small and always perky.

      2. Doc Martin is great.

        I did have a Computer Science major roommate who liked Big Bang Theory. I guess I just don’t like some of the character flaws. The whole “Raj has to be drunk to talk to women” thing kind of bugs me. Dude has a sister and has known Penny for 5 years now.

        Also, I did catch a little bit of the most recent episode during commercial breaks… Sheldon makes his girlfriend sign a contract to be his mother? Um, Chuck Lorre… not every nerd has oedipal issues.

        I guess that is the shit that bothers me about the show. But I do get liking it, and the nerd jokes, just something about it bugs the shit out of me. I don’t know.

        1. First of all, Sheldon is not every Nerd (although as I typed this I realized that every one of the nerds save Kruthapali have really fucked up mothers).

          Sheldon is a reductio ad absurdum of solipsism.

          1. I saw the episode where the old sister from the Rosanne show played Sheldon’s hillbilly mother and everyone but him loved her. It was pretty funny.

            1. Sheldon’s feud with the evil and cunning Will Wheaton is comedy gold.

            2. The first couple episodes where she visited him were hilarious. She was written as a good, simple woman who did her best to raise an alien being.

              The most recent one where she visited was pretty terrible. She was written as a dumb, ignorant, racist bigot. Not sure what happened there…

              1. The most recent one where she visited was pretty terrible. She was written as a dumb, ignorant, racist bigot. Not sure what happened there…

                Lorre’s got the same issue that a lot of Jewish men do–they were raised by by extremely strict mothers who took out a lot of their frustrations in life on their sons, and this is reflected in his work.

                And Lorre’s not exactly shy about showing religious people in a bad light, even though, oddly enough, those characters seem to have their shit together in life a lot more than the more socially enlightened protagonists.

                Personally, I think Sheldon’s mom is awesome, simply because she doesn’t allow that vicious little aspie to bully her like he does with everyone else.

          2. Sheldon also makes me giggle because he is a reductio of the ‘everything is just applied physics’ types.

        2. It’s better than HIMYM pretending it’s characters are geeks because they like Star Wars.

          1. The HIMYM characters are geeks because they obsess over pointless, superficial shit, not just the Star Wars stuff.

    7. How I Met Your Mother (good show, but they have dragged the central concept a bit too long).

      A well-executed version HIMYM would have been a PERFECT five-act type of series, with each season serving as an act. They could have built up in season five to Ted meeting the “mother” during a three-to-four episode arc in the fifth season during sweeps.

      But they’re treating the series conventionally, and as a result, they’re just self-indulgently spinning their wheels trying to come up with the latest Goofy Hijink of the Week, until the ratings start to dip and they introduce the mother out of desperation.

      Even though they couldn’t get the audience to ultimately bring the storyline concept to fruition, the makers of Carnivale had the right idea, IMO–instead of dragging out a series until people get sick of it, treat it as a deliberate story with a defined beginning and ending.

  44. My alma matter [sic], Oklahoma State

    John, you’re a Pistol Pete packin’, ‘Pokes alum as well? I never knew that.

    We have something in common.

    1. So you have links not only to the Kochtopus but the T. Boone Pickensclops…

      1. The Pickensclops is to ESPN college football comentators what the Kochtopus is to liberal political comentators. There will be a national day of mourning on ESPN if OSU wins the title. They hate the idea that a team from Stillwater could actually beat out beloved teams like Stanford and Alabama.

        1. Heh dude, I feel your pain. Try being a Houston alum. ESPN freaking HAAAATES us. It will be a blast watching them feign civility this weekend while on our campus.

          We’re like the Ron Paul of College Football right now.

          1. Looks like they are going to get a shot at Alabama in the Sugar Bowl. I would give anything to see Houston put up 60 points on them. The looks of horror of the SEC worshipers on the network would be priceless.

            1. Having watched UH play, all I can say is, “Not going to happen.” I still think UH trips up in Tulsa two weeks from now, if the weather gets sufficiently nasty.

              It’s been fun having the Cougars do well, and I’m laughing at the thought of GameDay in the 3rd Ward, (though if they ever broadcasted from USC, I’m sure they’re used to it.), but the Cougars don’t play defense, and their signature win is 4-points against UCLA at home. They were down by 27 to Louisiana Tech, for cryin’ out loud. UH/’Bama in the Sugar Bowl would be a no-foolin’ 50 point beatdown if Saban wanted it to be. It’d be a repeat of the 2008 Sugar Bowl, where Georgia beat the crap out of Hawaii, 41-10.

              Still, it’s a lot of fun, and it certainly will be a lot of BCS $$$ for C-USA if UH gets in. (And none if UH loses any of the three.) Which I’m sure won’t affect the officiating at all in any of UH’s next three games…

              1. They are another Hawaii. And Tulsa is pretty good. I would not be shocked at all if Tulsa beat them.

    2. 1992 BA/BS. There are few of us out there. I never thought I would see the day when they actually had an elite football team. Basketball maybe. But never football.

      It is funny having gone there in the late 1980s. Stillwater is like the town that time forgot. It was totally immune from the PC wars and nonsense that destroyed college campuses in the 1980s. Going there was like being a monk on the west coast of Ireland during the Dark Ages. I feel like I got a great education there.

      1. You realize I, being a proud UTexas alum, am going to laugh myself silly if Oklahoma pulls together enough to beat you guys, right?

        1. You get my sympathy. It sucks being irrelevent having to root for other teams to lose as your only form of pleasure.

          And I seriously doubt that will happen. Oklahoma has won all of these years because they have had a better team. With the exception of 2001 when OSU pulled the upset and 1988 when OU beat the Sanders team, the better team has won every year in that rivalry.

          Since it is such a big game both teams have played well every year and the better team has almost always won. This year for the first time since 2002, OSU has the better team. There is just something about this team and especially the quarterback. They are going to play well against OU and that will be enough to win even though OU is a tough matchup for them.

          Ironically, OU used to build their teams to beat Texas and Nebraska. Now they are building their teams to beat OSU. That has really got to hurt as a Texas fan.

          1. My other team (by marriage) is the Houston Cougars, so I’m doing okay this season. Texas is sucking this year, but we’ll come back. We always do.

            I actually don’t have any heartburn over OSU getting good, especially if we stay in the Big 12 10 N. I’m a firm believer that you play to the level of your competition. It’s why the SEC is what it is. If the competition gets tougher in the conference, it benefits us as well.

            At least it will if we quit scheduling the Little Sisters of the Poor and Boy Scout Troop 112 for our non-conference games.

            1. I think what happened to Texas was Mack Brown’s arrogance. I think he stopped scouting players and figured the best and esiest way to build a team was to recruit all the big time recruits he could find and not worry about it. I think that fostered an arrogant attude throughout the program where players thought “I got recruited by Texas I must be great” and just were not as hungry.

              The rot in that program was starting to be evident in 07 and 08. I don’t think people appreciate how good of a college quarterback Colt McCoy was. I think he was better than Vince Young. The teams he played for all had lousy running games and totally depended on him making big plays. He covered up a lot of flaws in those teams (lousy offensive lines and under achieving running backs) as evidenced by how the fell off a cliff after he and Jordan Shipley graduated.

              1. McCoy was Major Applewhite with just enough size to get a pro look. The day Simms’ kid got the start over the better quarterback was the day rot set in.

          2. Never underestimate the power of the rivalry game. If any team can be your season spoiler, it’s your half retarded, semi-suck, having a bad record this year rival.

  45. “You have a lot of the same goals we have, which is to take our country back.”

    Why is it racist when Tea Partiers say that, but patriotic when OWSers mouth it?

    1. It’s funny because I thought right-wing populism was jingoistic and racist and left-wing populism was seditious and socialist.

      1. Yeah, but you know in politics, everything is anything, whether from the outside looking in, or vice versa, just so long as it suits your purpose.

  46. Anyone else feel like Newt Gingrich is what the pigs from Animal Farm look like at the end of the novel?

  47. I say the time is ripe for marketing a fully immersive VR experience that involves living in a socialist utopia.

    Even I could probably write the code for a “game” which consists of standing in line for fourteen hours. The hard part would be the little old lady in the babushka who comes and shuts the door in your face and hangs up the “All Sold” sign.

    1. No, no, not a real socialist utopia. Nobody wants that. Pretend socialism with unicorns for everyone! Kind of like Song of the South, with bluebirds singing with you on your shoulder. It’s the truth, it’s factual, everything is satisfactual.

  48. Sings:

    I cain’t get no-oh

    satisfactual

    I cain’t get no-oh

    satisfactual

    But I tried

    and I tried

    and I tried

    and I tried

    I CAIN’T GIIIT NO

    NONONO!

    1. A Song of the South reboot?

  49. That tank did not respond to the Occupy Tampa protest, it simply drove past them on its way down Ashley Dr. enroute to the Tampa Police downtown HQ (the photo linked was taken on Franklin St. right in front of the TPD HQ, notice the parked cruiser behind it). On top of that, within 45mins of seeing the post on Occupy Tampa’s facebook page, I went through downtown looking for this vehicle and did not see it.

  50. Occupiers and Tea Partiers to join forces and End America’s Wars

    http://sovereignthink.wordpres…..icas-wars/

    -sovereignthink

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.