Science Policy

Medvedev: If We Can Put a Man in a Gulag, Why Can't We Send Him to Mars?


In Russia, space explores you!

Acting Russian President Dmitry Medvedev surveys the failure of the Phobos Grunt mission earlier this month and the loss of a Soyuz cargo craft in August, and he reaches the obvious conclusion: This kind of thing wouldn't happen if Stalin were around.

From AFP

"The recent failures are a big blow to our competitiveness. This does not mean that anything fatal happened. It just means that we have to find those responsible and punish them," Medvedev said in nationally televised remarks.

"I am not suggesting that we line people up against the wall like we did when Joseph Vissarionovich was in power," he added in reference to the firing squads that Stalin used to execute his political foes in 1930s purges.

"Nevertheless, we have to punish them seriously."

Medvedev clearly has not watched Office Space, with its insight that fear will only motivate you to work just hard enough not to get fired. More importantly, he's ignoring the actual history of Russia's space program. 

In Matthew Brzezinski's history of the Sputnik program Red Moon Rising, the elusive "Chief Designer" Sergei Korolev (who wasn't actually elusive but had his name and identity suppressed by the government) is shown to have run a very effective stovepipe operation within the dysfunctional Soviet state, and his management method did not involve punishing people seriously, or punishing them at all. Instead, Korolev kept a safe full of cash in his office, from which he dispensed bonuses to engineers who solved the problems he needed solved. 

Georgia's Man of Iron had ascended to glory by this point, but even while Stalin was alive, punishment does not appear to have been an effective method for advancing science in Russia. Korolev was denounced and sent to the gulag before the war, as were many talented Russian scientists and military officers. During his imprisonment, the brilliant engineer lost all his teeth. As World War II buffs know, it was only when the Soviet Union was on the verge of defeat that Stalin relented, released people of proven capability from his prisons and allowed them to start replacing the flunkies he had installed. 

The idea that you can motivate people by threatening them is the regulator's fallacy.

In an upcoming special issue, Reason's print edition will look at the progress of the private space industry (which so far has found a better friend in Roscosmos than in NASA). Here's talking with space entrepreneur Peter Diamandis: 


NEXT: Gary Johnson: Should He Run for the LP Nomination for President?

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

  1. This illustrates a good point. If you never hold anyone accountable, you have a situation where Wolfowitz and Cheney can miscalculate and lie the country into war and never have to answer for it. If you execute the unfortunate managers who happen to be standing closest to a mistake, then everyone simply strives to avoid notice.

    What is the optimum degree of accountability to maximize quality? That’s an excellent question.

    1. The optimum degree of accountability is to not have the government running such things, and thus have a monopoly financed by coerced theft of money that can screw up royally and yet not go out of business.

      If your department is a private concern that can and will go out of business if it fails, that ensures accountability, either by managers recognizing incipient failure and stopping it, or not recognizing failure and going broke.

      1. Call everybody we hate a Statist.

        Except that damn Non-Statist white indian who comes out against against city-Statism (civilization.)

        City-Statism we libertarians will advocate!

        If you don’t accept that, you’re not using any Reason.


        So hard to resist that kind of marketing, guys. Resist skewering it, that is.

        1. I’m sorry, I was busy pondering what rapey porn to take with me into the shitter. Honkey Injun, could your emo-suburban-white-bread-pseudo-anarchist brand of trolling wait until I finish filling my toilet with shit and cum? Or at least until I finish shitting? I still have some Pocahontas-getting-spit-roasted-by-Gaston-and-Jafar-while-the-Gummi-Bears-watch porn comics that I need to finish printing out!

          1. I just couldn’t resist apologizing for Communism once again.

            1. Officer, am I free to gambol about plain and forest?

              Libertarianism and Marxism both agree: No, the agricultural city-State must enforce gambol lockdown.

              1. …annoying, White Rectal.

              2. White Indian needs to lay off the firewater.

    2. What is the optimum degree of accountability to maximize quality? That’s an excellent question.

      The tried and true answer to that riddle is to introduce this little unknown variable called “profit”

      1. IOW: private sector should be doing it. If you think it’s a risky enterprise in the first place, gov’t prolly shouldn’t be doing it. Otherwise, you get the conundrum you’re currently in.

        1. Competition and failure are more important components than profit potential.

          Just look at the poorer performance of profitable police forces.

          1. yeah, I assumed that went without saying, but you’re absolutely right.

          2. Police forces don’t make profit by serving the people they protect. They make it by serving politicians. So it’s a bad example.

      2. And loss. Please don’t forget the loss. I think those bailouts in 2008 might have forgotten the loss side of the equation.

  2. The idea that you can motivate people by threatening them is the regulator’s fallacy.

    Apply this to pigovian taxes and see what happens.

    1. It’s also the capitalist fantasy, capitalists being big-government regulators enforcing gambol lockdown with their artificial privation property borders.

      1. artificial privation property borders

        I have seen dogs mark territory, cats too.

        Meerkats wage war over the best land.

        Is it only artificial when humans do it? or only when humans normalize it and put enough abstractions in it that we stop killing each other over it?

        Once again; Joshua Corning > Rather.

        1. Hell, Joshua Corning > White Primitard’s Original Homo Habilis Society

  3. Man, those commies are stupid!

    1. Cannot agree with you.everyone have own idea.can not make a cut for anyone.

  4. In Soviet Russia satellite launches you!

    1. In Russia, HELL goes to YOU!

    2. In Soviet Russia, laws break you!

      1. In Soviet Russia, you tie up dominatrix!


        …that doesn’t sound so bad!

  5. There really is only one way to motivate citizens of the former Eastern Bloc: Epic Sax.

    1. You sick bastard, that was painful. Here is sax palate cleanser.

        1. oom pah pah oom pah pah wash it all away with mezcal–

      1. You sick bastard, that was painful.

        Oh? I have not yet begun to fight!

            1. I don’t even know why I am even partaking in this.

              1. I will hate myself in the morning.

            2. Hardcore 80s sax.

              1. I am the worst person ever.

              2. That was a disproportionate level of Sax.
                I’ll see you at the Hague!

                1. Someone make me stop.

                  1. You are all being added to the Sax Offenders Registry

                  2. Just one final shot! 🙂

  6. Something accomplished without the loving guiding hand of government….I won’t stand for it!

    1. We ask very little of you Tony, yet you always fail to deliver.

      1. He sure loves that hand…

  7. Your syllogisms are weird.

    In Korolev’s case it certainly looks like punishment worked. He reformed himself in the gulag and became a humble servant of the people for the glory of his country.

    1. Externality!

    2. “Worked”? Impossible, no contingency, no contiguity.

      Add to that the lack of change in behavior and you must have either meant “didn’t work” or “derp, i’m a fucking idiot, derp”.

    3. Gotta be spoof.
      Mustard is an ignoramus, but not *this* stupid.

      1. Any sufficiently advanced troll is indistinguishable from a genuine kook.
        – Alan Morgan

        1. No, Sevo… mustard IS that stupid.

  8. I’m working on a project to put fart jars on Venus!


    What, wrong thread?

    1. Under Mons Veneris, I presume.

      1. hole to find the right hole. Congrats

  9. Mother Russia will be first country with winning football team on another planet.

    1. you’re talking “soccer” right, not futbol americano?


        1. It’s always so telling. At the mere mention of soccer, it’s like a dog whistle in certain parts of the interwebz – you always get someone ultra-willing to display their…insecurity? hell, I don’t know…

          If you don’t like it, good for you. You don’t have to be a dick about it.

          1. If soccer had more chances of Joe Theissman-level injuries, I’d watch it.

            1. When was the last time you saw a compound fracture in pro/college football? There are loads of tib/fib compound fractures in soccer. Just ask Steve Zakuani and Javier Morales for just this year, and in this country.

              1. Those are mostly self inflicted by bored ‘players’.

                1. No, no, they’re not.

                  The two examples above were inflicted by opponents.

              2. Flopping is not without its risks.

      2. nobody cares about soccer, give it up.

        1. Because in America, only professional wrestling, Nascar, and “Hillbilly Handfishing” count.

          1. And America is the only country that matters anyways.

        2. It is by far the most popular sport so there is nothing to give up.

          1. Only if you’re from some shithole country (read:not America.)

            1. You are sounding defensive. If America is so great, why do you have to keep reminding us?

              1. It’s not so much reminding you of how great America is as reminding you of how shitty everywhere else in the world is.

                1. Being the biggest debtor in the history of the world paints quite a picture about shitty places.

          2. AFAIK fishing is still the world’s most popular sport.

            But if you like American football, behold the team that hasn’t lost a game since I started coaching them: the Bronx Warriors’ Miller Tire Blue Devils – — who just wrapped up another Pee Wee Div. championship yesterday!

            1. AFAIK fishing is still the world’s most popular sport.


              Sorry, starving people trying to catch a meal aren’t competing in an athletic competition. They’re trying to survive.*

              *And survival isn’t a game unless you’re being hunted by Predator.

  10. Russia’s stuck in a 1000-year authoritarian rut.

    1. Although america’s authoritarian rut is only 400 years old, it is deeper.

      1. That’s not a credible statement.

        1. Credible statements are the definition of authoritarianism! DEATH TO LINCOLN 9/11 JEW ATTACKS

          1. JOOOOOOOOOOOS!

      2. Is a Russian ISP? If not, I suggest that you arrange to swap places with someone who lives in Russia. The emigres I’ve seen here tend to do everything they can to avoid going back there, so you shouldn’t have any trouble finding a volunteer. I guess they prefer pure eeevil to living in a relatively shallow rut.

    2. Egypt’s goes back at least 8,000 years.

      1. But it has never used atomic weapons.

        But it has never fire-bombed millions of human beings.

        But it has never waged genocidal war.

        But…………….AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM………………………………………………..

        1. “But it has never used atomic weapons.”
          Gee, LM, why do you continue to prove how ignorant you are?
          You could shut up and perhaps no one would know.

          1. Pretty sure that was supposed to be a joke…

            1. “Pretty sure that was supposed to be a joke…”

              Uh, are you familiar with LM?
              Maybe I’m wrong…

              1. LibertyMike is his own joke and punchline all in one.

                1. He’s wrong, though! Egypt HAS used nukes!!

          2. But it has never waged genocidal war.

            LOL at this goonfiction.

  11. I have a serious question on something that very well may happen before the end of the year:

    What happens when a couple of solvent nations pull out of the Euro and start printing their own currency again? Or is the Euro too heavily intertwined with those nations’ currencies that it just can’t happen?

    And what will the first nation to do it do? Will they change all deposits in banks to their own currency at a rate they determine? Will they back it against gold? Something else?

    Seriously, I want some of you more econ-minded people to answer these questions, because it is a mystery to me what will happen.

    1. If they get a stronger currency foreign assets held by pension funds will drop in value.

      1. That’s the damn problem. Because of the way the eu treaties are structured it is easier right now to exit the EU than it is to exit the euro. There is no existing exit mechanism for the euro!
        I would stay away from the entire mess if I were you. Depends, of course, on your appetite for risk, but the eurocrats have been throwing the rules out the window for the last two years. On top of the euro mess is Egypt – which probably doesn’t even have a week left. Those 82 million Egyptians will be making for Europe, even as Europe has to cut budgets at home. We’re in the opening stagings of WWIII, imho.

        1. Then buy military defense stocks

          1. “Then buy military defense stocks”
            Yep, I’m sure you’re a good investment adviser….

          2. Buy jars for farts.

    2. Most Germans would prefer to return to the Deutsche Mark. The Bundesbank historically has had a very successful monetary policy.

      1. You have to remember that Germany’s economy is largely based on exports to their neighbors, and that the common currency is what keeps those exports cheap enough for their neighbors to purchase.

        If you want to know what happens to Germany’s economy if it reverts to the Deutschmark, see Swiss Franc.

      2. Unfortunately, most Germans actually want to keep the Euro, which is bad because an artificially devalued currency is actually not good for an economy. Yeah, exports get a kick, bad imports become more expensive which is bad for the people and for exporters who need imported materials.

        1. Most Germans want Deutsche mark back, poll shows
          A Forsa poll conducted for Stern magazine said that 54 percent of Germans favor a return of their former currency, an identical figure to a poll taken in May 2010, said Forsa.


          1. I saw a different survey more recently with more in favor of the Euro but not by much. It probably fluctuates day by day we could both be right. FWIW, I hope you are.

            1. Problem is that the Euro elites don’t give a damn about public opinion. Democracy is broken over there.

    3. They create fiat money out of thin air, and say that that is now the official currency of the country, and print up some fancy paper-looking cloth currency, and then let the value float against those suckers still using the Euro.

      It’s not complicated, at least conceptually, albeit with some tricky details in managing the transition.

      The Euro, like all government fiat money, was created out of nothing because it is not backed by anything. The replacement to the Euro can be created in exactly the same way, anytime any government decides to do so, treaties be damned.

      1. treaties be damned.

        And then the other EU members retaliate by renouncing their debts to your country’s banks, which proceed to go belly up.

        There’s no easy way out of these things, even illegal ones.

        1. Currency competition, within the EU and within the US, is coming. The days of the nation state and groups of nation states monopolizing money are numbered.

          Get used to it.

          1. I fear that, unfortunately, much blood will be spilled before currency is freed from the “Mint”.

          2. Because warlords are so much better!

            1. Yes, Tulpa, anarchy.

              The U.S. allowed other nation’s coins as legal tender until 1857.

              You never heard of pieces of eight?

              1. HM,
                And the Thaler?
                Like dumping the Euro, competing currencies certainly would work. The change would play hob with forward contracts for some period of time, which means it’d best be instituted at a time which wasn’t an emergency (as is Europe now).

                1. The change would play hob with forward contracts for some period of time, which means it’d best be instituted at a time which wasn’t an emergency (as is Europe now).

                  That’s the main problem, in my opinion. Overcoming that inertia would be difficult, even if you could convince the populace it would be a good idea.

                  1. As an aside, the US quarter is now almost unrecognizable as a specific coin, and no one seems to care.
                    I know I have passed some foreign coin as a quarter several times recently (and I didn’t bother to look closely enough to see what it actually was at the time).

                    1. American quarters have been accepted at face value in Canada for some time, even though the value is slightly less than a Canadian quarter.

                2. “Play hob”? You’re more British than periodontal scaling and crumbly sausage.

                  1. “Play hob”?
                    You likee “on the fritz” mo betta?

              2. Epic Halfbreed, I’m only alluding to the ultimate thang that L-mike is pushing. Which is cardboard plumbing in the house of society.

                1. Epic Halfbreed, I’m only alluding to the ultimate thang that L-mike is pushing. Which is cardboard plumbing in the house of society.

                  Ah, I see.

                  It much be said though that even Somalia has a central bank.

                  1. Mogadishu had running water, plumbing, and public air venting for heat control when the Scots were still shitting in buckets kept by their straw ‘beds’.

                    1. And were shitting in buckets when the Scots had running water and plumbing. Going backwards is not something to brag about.

                    2. Comparing Scotland to Somalia is like arguing over who’s outhouse is nicer…

                    3. Why ya think I used Scotland instead of England or Continental Europe. I’d be surprised if a majority don’t still shit in buckets. Seriously though, historical Mogadishu is an interesting subject to explore. Being fucked over by commie rebels the last several decades ruined what was a pretty sweet city.

                    4. I think it has to do with the “no true Somaliman” fallacy.

                    5. Mogadishu had running water, plumbing, and public air venting for heat control when the Scots were still shitting in buckets kept by their straw ‘beds’.

                      Yeah, but I fail to see what last September has to do with the conversation.

                    6. “Had”

    4. Shit will hit the fan. When shit hits the fan, nobody knows what happens.

      1. Well, yes we do – things will stink.

    5. “Or is the Euro too heavily intertwined with those nations’ currencies that it just can’t happen?”

      Perhaps not the Euro qua Euro, but the agreements concerning the Euro probably make that something that can’t happen in less than several months.
      For instance, all the forward contracts denominated in Euros; WIH happens?

      1. Weren’t those contracts in francs and lira and douchemarks back in 1999?

        1. Yep. And this is 2011.
          You know as well as I do the intent of the Euro was to reduce the friction from those multi-currencies and also remove the tariffs to find the resultant gains.
          Reverting to those currencies in a short period of time (and doing so lacking agreements) is going to make a mess of Euro markets at least in the short term.
          And reverting to those currencies isn’t going to solve the problems caused by Euro-socialism, especially now that they are acute in so many nations.
          What I find curious is the continuing strength of the Euro; I can only presume the market figures the Dollar sucks by comparison.

          1. The capital just has nowhere else to go. The $ is actually pretty strong right now, and we’re intimately familiar with the perils there. Gold has been setting all-time highs for the past 3-4 years, which is scary. Oil and silver suck because the global economy still sucks. Real estate, don’t ask.

            A plugged toilet raises all turds.

            1. “The capital just has nowhere else to go.”

              This is prolly the current ‘control’.
              Europe, the US, Japan, certainly China all have structural problems that are of ‘uncertain’ solution right now. And every one of those structural problems are caused by government intervention in the economy.
              The collapse of communism raised millions from poverty. At the same time, it removed ‘competition’ from government activity; the US no longer had to offer a polar alternative. And no other nation has yet to take that position, which allows all governments to force a race to mediocrity (to paraphrase).

              1. Tulpa and sevo both provide an excellent and fascinating synopsis of the current situation. I think capital will ‘realize’ it has a place to go those places being many underrated 2nd world countries like Indonesia India latin America and my country Canada. When the toilet is unplugged, shit could explode. On fire.

                +1 to Tulpa if he actually thought up the toilet himself.

                1. “Indonesia India latin America and […] Canada.

                  Nope. Every one has similar or possibly worse structural problems. For the same reasons.
                  You can arbitrage between the problems, but that means success to currency traders, not any real investment.

                  1. I like where this is headed!

                2. Cytotoxic,

                  I don’t want to nitpick but I think your kinda misunderstanding the use of the term “2nd world” country. It’s Cold War era terminology…

                  First World: USA and strong democracies like NATO or Japan.

                  Second World: USSR and other commies like China or Warsaw Members.

                  Third World: Places that were considered strategically unimportant due to poor wealth or instability like South America or Africa.

                  Canada has always been considered a First World country every since the term was coined as a way for Western leaders to easily categorize a country!

                  1. Investments will run to materials of enduring value, ie gold, PM’s, real estate(!).

                3. +1 to Tulpa if he actually thought up the toilet himself.

                  Put it on the board, baby!

                  We write about what we know.

            2. Smart money is on silver long term though. It is a highly sought after metal for industrial and tech uses, and the amount we are pulling out of the ground is less than gold mine.

              1. Long term silver is indeed where it’s at. If things recover, then inflation is going to whiplash all the fiat currencies, but industry is still going to need Ag.

                If everything goes to shit and we’re wearing assless chaps running away from cars fueled by hog manure, silver offers a lot of benefits over gold as a medium of exchange.

                1. assless chaps

                  All chaps are assless.

                  1. All chaps are assless.

                    These have a pretty nice ass.

                2. Remember what happened to silver when the Hunts tried to corner the market: when the price gets high enough, lots of folks dig out the formal silverware etc. and cash in on it. There’s an awful lot of silver out there.

                  1. “There’s an awful lot of silver out there.”

                    Enough to ruin the Hunts’ efforts. And a whole lot more.

    6. The one and only WW3 in 10-15 years (that is, a world war where all world wars traditionally start: europe).

  12. What’s all this, then?

    Mind yourselves, I’m watching you!
    Carry on.

    1. *Chive* on, mate, *Chive* on!

  13. Meanwhile, America shows them how it’s done…

    Also, ran across this this morning. Interesting mission architecture.

    1. It’s a great idea, but when are we building that space dock? I’m writing a paper right now about ISRU, and my arguement is that we might as well go back to the moon, since there is still so much we need to learn about long-term habitation away from Earth. There is also the major problem of infrastructure. It is so expensive to launch materials from Earth that I think we’re going to need to start pulling building materials and rocket fuels from outside Earth’s gravity well, assemble things like rockets in space, and then we can fly off to Mars. Of course, that presents its own set of challenges, because we have no idea how to build precision machines in micro-G environments, for starters, let alone how to mine materials from asteroids and the moon.

      1. Necessity is the mother of invention

    1. While I think there are plenty of stupid degrees that don’t produce hirealbe* graduates, I don’ think that there shouldn’t be the option to waste 2-4 years of your life. My solution would be to make a free market in education (and everything else), not something anti-liberal like changing the state-run colleges.

      *Is there even a right way to spell that?

      1. “Hire-able”?

        1. relevant, useful, worthwhile….?

      2. My high school counselor told me that it didn’t matter what I majored in, as long as you got a degree, because employers just want to see that you can carry through with something for 4 years.

        Luckily, I didn’t listen.

        Back to your point, the biggest contributor to the bullshit majors’ predominance is the disconnect between subsidizing student loans and employment prospects.

        1. “Back to your point, the biggest contributor to the bullshit majors’ predominance is the disconnect between subsidizing student loans and employment prospects.”

          Which subsidies also inflate the cost of a degree, leading to those with degrees of any value carrying a load of debt.

          1. Well according to the U.S. Census data linked from the article, what we need are actuaries, pharmacists, school administrators, school counselors, geologists, and astronomers. All of these majors reports a 0 percent unemployment rate. So if we were to follow China’s methodology, the much vaunted on this site, engineers (hovering around 4% unemployment) would get the axe before teachers (~3%), agribusiness/farming (~3%), and nurses (2%). Biologists and Computer Scientists rank in at 5.6%, only slightly above Economists (6.3%).

            Of course, with degrees in Humanities (8.4%) and Linguistics (10.2%), me and my peeps are doomed, because, fuck researching how languages work and shit. 🙂

            1. “researching how languages work and shit. :)”

              Jeeze, I’d find that fascinating! But how do you make a living?

              1. Jeeze, I’d find that fascinating! But how do you make a living?

                Well, by understanding how languages work, i.e. theoretical linguistics, I use that information to test theories on how to teach someone a new language more effectively (applied linguistics). I currently teach English for Academic Purposes to international students enrolled in the Intensive English Program at a certain university. When not teaching, I research the ethno-language pedagogy of various Tai cultures, which include Thais, Laotians, Dai fron Yunnan, etc.

                1. Which is *EXACTLY* the reason I find that fascinating!
                  Do you have an afternoon to waste telling me about your work? I’d (seriously) love to hear about it!

                  1. Well, it’s close to midnight here, but I’d be more than happy to take you up on that offer some other time. But to paint in broad strokes, different cultures have different ideas about what teaching exactly is and how to do it. For example, Western Europe was heavily influenced by the Socratic method, and then, Scholasticism. This has led to a cultural conception of “a good student asks questions”. Compare this to many East Asian cultures, where Confucianism advocates that “a good student just listens to the teacher and tries to copy him or her exactly”. Now what I investigate is what happens when that Asian student comes to, say, America to learn English. The American teacher has been raised with certain cultural expectations as to the role of a teacher and a student, as has the Asian student. So when the American teacher asks, “Are there any questions?” he or she is expecting the student to respond honestly, using any questions as a springboard into further instruction. Whereas, the Asian student is baffled by this question, for in his or her worldview, to answer that question in the affirmative would be an insult of the highest order.

                    Now as more and more foreign students are enrolling in American universities, learning how to deal with these issues is becoming more important. In particular, research by Jim Cummins, has shown that while it takes only about 1 to 2 years of study to gain basic communication skills in a language, it takes at least 5 to 7 years to be good enough in a language to be able to use it academically (i.e. ‘learn in it’).

                    So one of the things I do is research how other cultures teach their children their language, and then compare it to how we do things to find commonalities and differences. I then hope to eventually use this information to construct pedagogical models that will help the foreign student of English learn Anglo-American classroom conventions, norms, and expectations more quickly. I believe by getting the educational ‘culture shock’ out of the way quicker, the students will have more time and energy to spend on acquiring the language.

                    1. Ok, bedtime for me.

                      Night all.

                    2. I’m an overqualified English teacher, still dependent on govt gifts, adding nothing to humanity’s wealth.

                    3. still dependent on govt gifts

                      Actually, I work for a private, for-profit university.

                      Nice run-on sentence, by the way.

                    4. HM,
                      See question ‘way down-thread.

                2. Hey, Mr. Mulatto. We should talk some time–I do the same thing.

                  1. Well, I got questions for you too! ‘Way down-thread.

      3. Certainly not “hirealbe”. :-p

        FWIW, the North American Scrabble word list has both HIRABLE and HIREABLE as valid words.

        1. It also says “HM” is a valid word, so I think the scrabble word list is safe to ignore.

          1. I would say “Hm,” is a word. It’s a psychomime, which is a word that describes a psychological state. Indeed, the word “hm” in English is phatic, which means we use it to fulfill a social expectation as opposed to conveying information. I would argue that “hm” basically has the pragmatic meaning of “What you just said is worthy of further thought, and I will acknowledge this.”

      4. Hirable-able to be hired; fit for hiring.

    2. Oooo ooo! Let me guess.

      Hmmm, what could it be?

      Okay I got it!

      The bad news for Womyn’s Studies major is that your sister left town, your sheep died, and you got a fresh bottle of chloroform in the mail today.

      What do I win, shithead?

    3. From the comments:

      People may not like it, but redirecting funding to better build the economy is pretty much the government’s number one job.


      1. “People may not like it, but redirecting funding to better build the economy is pretty much the government’s number one job.”

        As if a government *could* do so.

        1. People may not like it, but redirecting funding to better build the economy is pretty much the government’s number one job.

          AKA pissing away the taxpayers’ money. What’s the “number two” job?

          1. “AKA pissing away the taxpayers’ money. What’s the “number two” job?”

            Well, that is the “number two” job. Staying in power is #1.

          2. I’d say the Stimulus was a whole lotta “Number Two” …

      2. Well, if people don’t like it, then don’t they lack the much needed consent of the government?

      3. “People may not like it, but redirecting funding to better build the economy is pretty much the government’s number one job.”

        The “job” of government, as can be applied to governments irrespective of time, geography or culture can be boiled down to single enterprise: killing.

        Governments generally are formed to kill two kinds of people: lawbreakers and foreigners. The first we call law enforcement and the second, war. Doesn’t matter if the government is run by a chief, tribal council, senate, oligarchs, high priests, popular vote, or monarch, at some point, they’re going to decide to kill something.

        The rest of government, taxation, public works, infrastructure, dispute resolution, are off-season activities.

  14. If I can comment on the article:
    “The idea that you can motivate people by threatening them is the regulator’s fallacy.”

    This isn’t true in the short term.
    Stalin used nothing other than domestic terrorism to squeeze the munitions production out of the available workforce in ’42-’43.
    None other than a fool believes the USSR produced X+ tons of tanks from X tons of steel, but the USSR did get just >X tons of tanks from X tons of steel by threatening death to the workers.
    Lend-lease and the end of the war allowed that to work.

  15. This thread was a lot funnier when I was drunk.

    1. it’s cosmic.

  16. Now, Michael Caine impersonates Michael Caine

  17. The current Euro Debt Crisis explained

    1. Not really.
      “End of the world” is hyperbole, although the Greek and Portuguese populations may think so.
      How about ‘serious financial problems’?

  18. If the title game is Alabama v LSU (especially if LSU is one loss) how long until we finally get D-1 to do a playoff like a real sport?

      1. Okay, Will… you and that mincing pedophile head over in THAT direction, behind those rocks and trees, and don’t come back for several hours.

        1. Such fond memories… *sigh*

  19. Im shocked they never shot this guy…..039331474X

  20. This “gulag” thing… can you show me some blueprints?

    1. I have a set of those in my purse, Eric. We should do lunch and I’ll tell you about what we had planned back in the 90s.

      1. I am liking where this is driving. May I join you for a cocktails?

        1. That’s the problem with the world Vladmir, too many people trying to think for themselves. Better off if they let dictators like myself think for them and be grateful for it. I learned that from some great leaders of the past, like…

          1. Room for one more?

          2. Just kidding. I can’t wait ’til they promote me up to that the sweet life of book touring. You have no idea how exhausting it can be to dodge responsibility. It’s why I put the old battleaxe up in the State Dept. She wants that shit more than anything. Not me. i hate making decisions. You ask me ‘would you prefer . . .’ I say, ‘you know what? Surprise me.’

    2. Talk to Obumah, he can get you the set for our test run in Gitmo, but hurry, cause he’s gonna close that down.

  21. Banks are for sheep, it’s all imaginary money. If people had any sense they’d keep cash at home under the bed wouldn’t they. I wouldn’t trust those bankers with a lollipop, never mind my life savings. A fool and his money…

    1. We here at the People for an American Gulag, are working for the future of this once-great nation through the power of retraining the minds of wrong-thinkers.

      Won’t you help us re-educate the kinds of people who refuse to join Occupy movements, or even vote Democrat?

      With your generous donation, you can help us set up “empathy centers” in the Arizona desert and populate them with Republicans, Libertarians, and moderates who support Mitt Romney for president.

      Just staple a package of mustard to a brown paper bag full of hundred-dollar bills, and we will send our White Indian Representative to collect your generous, under-the-table donation. It’s that easy!

      American Gulags: The time has come.

      1. How can I help, other than donating hundreds of dollars?

        1. Do I get paid for collecting these bags?

          1. I don’t understand why I have to have bags stapled to me…

  22. Bloody tax authorities, I’m not going to pay my hard earned cash so they can resurface a few roads down the arse end of Lancashire. What do I get out of it. Paying taxes is for people with no imagination really.

    1. Move to America… we can help relieve your wallet of that bulky cash.

      1. Bloody courts, judges don’t understand business. Thankfully neither do the poor Joe Soaps who invest. A few quid went missing, not a big deal really.

        1. We should hang out, Bernie.

          1. Room for us?

          2. *crickets*

          3. It seemed like a good idea at the time.

        2. At least the ?bercronies got the memo before it all went down.

          The little capitalists are pissed. Here, Cathy, put a little ice on that.

  23. I just threw him a few quid. All the bloody idiots had to do was keep their gob closed and we were sorted. You’d think they’d have better things to be doing than investigating an old pensioner like myself.

    1. If it weren’t for all the filthy old knickers the cats drag out of yer bins, we’d would have never caught you, you dirty old peeping Tom.

  24. If you ask me why I’m a libertarian, I’ll tell you. Traditions blow.

    1. and the Austim, the fact you couldn’t get laid in high school….

        1. How fucking dare you.

  25. Medvedev ought to stick to dancing.

  26. Russia’s sinking back into the shitter. It’s a shame — the self-proclaimed successor to the Byzantine Empire shouldn’t suck quite so many scrota.

    1. A friend of mine who lives there says people are finally starting to get sick of Putin.

      1. Wow, anecdotal evidence! Do ya anything on Global Warming?

      2. I’ve still got a large extended family there — and they all hate his fucking guts, and his Teddy Bear friend (Medvedev, since ‘medved” is “bear” in Russian), and their crappy faux-conservative party. Unfortunately, half the rest just couldn’t give less a shit. The truth is, my old-world brethren just don’t care nearly enough.

        You’d honestly be surprised by the extent of Russian authoritarianism. Except for the comparative ease of owning and carrying handguns in some of the larger cities(concealed, considering the circumstances), because it’s easy to pay off any and every cop and they won’t care whether you’ve got one or not (unless you don’t pay — in which case you’re screwed), there’s a hundred different documents, permits, and requirements for authorization for pretty much everything you could ever want or have to do as a human being. Our precious District of Columbia, or New York, or Chicago, or any of the other places in this country that are utter statist shitholes by our standards are shards of Eternal Paradise in comparison.

        Here’s an example: the majority of the Russian people I know, mostly acquaintances, can generally be categorized as a) unwitting quasi-socialists, or b) unwitting fascists. If they’re getting sick of Putin, it isn’t because he’s totalitarian — he just isn’t doing what they think he should be doing.

        This isn’t a country of libertarians we’re talking about. These people are stuck in a different sociopolitical universe, and unsurprisingly so; its past was absolute monarchy followed by a series of dictators in a communism-defined century.

        If some suit that artificially lowered the price of oil, or got on national TV constaly and said things like, “NNGNNGNNNGN IMPERIALISTS NNGNNGNN FUCK OFF AMERICANGNNGNGNGN NATO BLOWS”, or gave them a genuine single-payer health care system, most Russians would probably be satisfied with that.

        As sad as it is, this a nation of people that would, if you could somehow manage to eradicate the back-stabbing corruption of their country’s political system, vote themselves into a deep, European-style welfare/police state.

        1. That probably has something to do with why Russia loses about 100,000 people a year, or something like that. I actually hope that country dies.

          1. I hope it performs an implode-and-rebuild-to-greatness, maybe even 1776-style.

            And yeah, its population is decreasing — not that severely, but it’s got about 15-20 years to being a clear reversal of that trend if it wants to have a significant population by 2050.

            1. *to begin a clear reversal

            2. Sounds like they need a wall.

          2. It is dying and the leaders know it. Their recent actions in Georgia, all their actions since the end of the cold war really; is to trying and establish a zone of influence and control while they are still able. The time is coming where Russia will not be able too, and in fact their nation might collapse back into the Muscovy region.

        2. These people are stuck in a different sociopolitical universe, and unsurprisingly so; its past was absolute monarchy followed by a series of dictators in a communism-defined century.

          It goes back further than that.

          When western europe was entering the renaissance Russia was being conquered by Mongols and ruled by terrorism (literally) for a couple of centuries. The absolute monarchs were actually an improvement.

        3. Upper Volta with missiles.

      3. For research purposes, if you’re ever interested, start with Russian banking regulations and drug laws. You’d shit bricks.

          1. I watch Russian TV sometimes, but I lost the will to give a shit about the newspapers a long time ago.

            Rus’ svetaya, rodina moya!

            1. I spent a week in Kaliningrad, and know an American and Swedish ex-pat there. The American guy knows a lot of people who are hardcore commie worshipers, bring back Stalin and all that, they are the definite minority though.

              1. We have a few of those here, too, PS. One of them has a show on MSNBC.

                  1. Well, true, Tulpa, but I was being kind.

      4. His party is expected to do not so well come the elections. Unfortunately the commy party may pick up some of what United Russia loses.

        1. That’s another thing, Cyto: people just don’t seem to realize how WELL commies are doing in Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus (the three prime republics, if you will). Those red sons of bitches are gaining ground with each election.

          I just hope to God all the rest of my family gets out in the next decade or two. I don’t want them there when the shit hits the fan.

          1. There will probably be a second cold war of sorts with Russia, though not quite as tense as the first. The end result will be the same though. I know some people in Russia and I worry about their futures.

          2. I think once these commies get into power, they will become ‘communists’. Like in Moldova, where the ruling party sis communist, but the actual economy is mixed. Belarus is in economic collapse by the way its leader is selling the country to Russia for some short-term funds. His government is so bad that selling out to Russia will probably make Belarus freer. And I thought Ukraine had just elected a non-communist dirty-but-effective leader?

        2. That’s because Russian libertarians are going to vote third party instead of supporting the lesser of two evils.

  27. Officer, am I free to gambol about plain and forest?

    Marx: No!
    Mises: No!

    Both are aggressive city-Statists enforcing big-government regulation on the land that restricts the free movement of free people to live a Non-State society lifeway.

    1. discover and exploit Mother Nature?

      State Eco-Officer: NO — you may not make a living. Prosperity is not allowed.

      Good try.

    2. Listen:
      Starvation is not good for living things
      Hunting and Gathering is a lot like Oil E&P
      Rocks are not Pillows
      Rand is not equal to Marx
      Marx not equal to Mises
      Hitler not equal to Bush or to Obama
      Obama pretty much equal to Bush
      Stalin a lot like Hitler but not equal
      Mao and Stalin alike but not equal

      1. Rocks have been my pillow.

        1. When will the White Indian bullshit end?

          1. When he’s dropped off alone, naked, in the center of Denali National Park in the middle of winter. Then he can gambol all he likes. Until he’s eaten by wolves.

            1. I’d pay $3.50 to see that!

              1. T’ree-fiddy?

            2. I’d buy that for a dollar!

  28. The GOP finally find a candidate-of-the-month who’s even worse than Romney.

    Gingrich may be the worst available Republican in the entire nation.

    A Gingrich Presidency would mean the embrace by the GOP of the worst features of Obamacare, as well as either a carbon tax or a carbon rationing or permitting scheme.

    As long as the GOP is in opposition, they can be relied upon to oppose these things. As soon as they have to support a GOP President who wants these things (which is what Gingrich would be) they will cave in to “get behind the President” and join with Democrats to get these things passed.

    If Gingrich is the nominee, it would become imperative for Paul to run independent precisely to deliver Obama a win Nader-style.

    1. A Gingrich Presidency would mean the embrace by the GOP of the worst features of Obamacare, as well as either a carbon tax or a carbon rationing or permitting scheme.

      If that is true, then you are right. But, I think Gingrich might do the right thing for the wrong reasons. Those things would be DOA in any Republican Congress. And it would be virtually impossible for Gingrich to veto a repeal or major reform of Obamacare without losing his entire base and being primaried in 2016.

      If what you are saying actually happened, Gingrich would end up being a rogue President hated by his own party and embraced by the media and Democrats only long enough to knife him in the back. He would literally leave Washington friendless in four years.

      I am not saying he isn’t really that crazy and stupid. But I am not sure. I think he might be driven by political reality to be something he doesn’t plan to be.

      1. He was actually pretty conservative as Speaker, the house republicans started going to shit after his ouster. And he seems to have complete contempt for the DC hive-mind generally and the press in particular.

  29. Isolated incident? Preacher cuffed and unconscious at Wal-Mart in Arpaio-land.

    FTA: “The department will conduct an investigation to assess whether the actions of the police officer involved in the arrest were “within reason,” based on “our policy and also the law.” He said that probe would happen soon, adding it was “days away.”

    “We may have an independent agency conduct the inquiry, just to show transparency,” Hall said.

    How nice of them to “show” transparency and to also use the law. Of course, this is “Sheriff Joe-land.” The guy will probably be lucky if he’s not put against a wall.

    1. Some of the comments are truly nauseating. He was shoplifting. He got what was coming to him. People are animals.

      1. Arpaio’s a fucking thug, and I use that word sparingly — a God-awful thug.

        Why the shit would anybody elect him to anything, let alone the position of chief law enforcer?

        1. Why the shit would anybody elect him to anything, let alone the position of chief law enforcer?

          As long as he’s tough on Mexicans, we’re cool.

        2. Dare I say it?

          Arpaio’s a cunt.

          1. – Hey! The sheriff’s a cu…

            – What did he say?

            – He said the sheriff’s a comin’.

            – No, gone blame it dang blammit! The sheriff is a CUNT!

            1. That you, Gabby?

          2. I thought we liked cunts here.

            1. What you gon’ do with all that spunk?
              All that spunk inside your cunt?
              I’ma get, get, get, get, you drunk,
              Get you love drunk off my cunt.
              My cunt, my cunt, my cunt, my cunt, my cunt,
              My cunt, my cunt, my cunt, my lovely little cunt.

              1. Wait, what?

              2. Banjos|11.27.11 @ 2:16PM|

                I came buckets.

            2. No Tulpa we just tolerate you.

        3. I heard he’s not so popular nowadays. That Arizonan asshole who sponsored the terrible Xenophobe bill got recalled so there’s hope even in a place like Arizona.

          1. Enforcing immigration laws in US territory: xenophobia

            Killing innocent civilians in other countries: freedom fighting

            Pointing out creepy blind spots in other commenters’ thinking: priceless

            1. Tulpa’s inability to make rational arguments regarding immigration or FP: worthless.

      2. Some of the comments are truly nauseating. He was shoplifting. He got what was coming to him.

        He had not left, nor attempted to leave the store, so how the fuck was it shoplifting?

        1. Most states have changed the law to make it shoplifting as soon as you conceal an item on your person or in a container you brought into the store.

    2. Obviously it’s excessive force if it happened as described. However,

      The suspect’s grandson, Nicholas Nava, told CNN affiliate KNXV that Newman had grabbed one video game and put it under his shirt so that others jostling for the game didn’t take it from him.

      doesn’t pass the smell test.

      1. David Chadd, a CNN iReporter from Las Vegas, was among the crowd shopping for video games set up in the Walmart’s grocery section. He said Newman “was not resisting” arrest as he was led away from the crowd by a police officer.
        That officer, Chadd said, then suddenly hooked the suspect around the leg, grabbed him and “slammed him face first into the ground.”
        “It was like a bowling ball hitting the ground, that’s how bad it was,” he said.

        Note to police: when you decide to break the law (and somebody’s noggin), don’t do it in front of an off-the-clock CNN reporter with a cellphone-camera.

    3. based on “our policy and also the law.”

      I think the point is that there are things that are not illegal that are nonetheless contrary to police dept policy. So they have to consider both.

      1. Haha. Only because they’ve got politicians shit-scared to make “use of excessive force” illegal in many circumstances.

        If a WalMart security guard had used the same level of force to detain him, it would have been criminal.

        Two sets of rules, man. Two sets of rules.

        1. Excessive force is generally illegal, the problem is that the laws often aren’t enforced. Prosecutorial discretion and all that.

  30. More of that police professionalism Scalia is always talking about.…..?hpt=hp_t3


    This is some priceless stupidity. All of the attacks pointing out that Elizabeth Warren is a socialist nut are sexist. My favorite part

    After showing chaotic scenes of angry young mobs and what looks like a street explosion, and noting that protestors “support radical redistribution of wealth and violence,” the ad cuts to a clip of Warren’s “class warfare” speech, with the volume turned way down, so that the viewer cannot hear the warmth in her voice or the substance of her argument.

    She said all of the crazy shit with “warmth” so I guess that makes it okay. Wow.

  32. Normally I don’t condone such action, but if Obama wants to send the CIA in to clip both of these assholes (Medvedev and Putin), I won’t bitch about this one.

    1. Clip them? Then how would he know what to do on the campaign trail for the next 48 weeks?

    2. I’d rather see Russia lose a major war (their belligerence makes it likely) possibly against Georgia and then Putin would lose all the macho-cred he uses to be popular. It would be all downhill for him. Like a cliff.

      1. They’re not losing a war to Georgia unless the Georgians get US or NATO help. Which is its own set of brambles.

        1. Russia could barely take them on last time and that was because Georgia did nothing but retreat (“turtling”) to the capital. The Russian airforce did pretty bad. Georgia’s military is now bigger than ever and Russia’s is still a POS that can’t even fully control Chechnya and its neighbours.

    3. I’d send the entire United States Navy to a stand-off with the Black Sea Fleet and tell the Russians to remember their FUCKING place.

      Of course, this isn’t a Tom Clancy book. And that sucks.

      Although a CoD: Black Ops-type assassination missions against those two might be some fun.

      1. Hey I didn’t say America should be the one to fight the Russians. Those Eastern Europeans need to man up.

        1. You’re thinking of France.

          The US had little to do with the freeing of eastern Europe in 1989 beyond tricking the USSR into doing stupid things during the decade prior. They bought their own freedom already, so zip it.

          1. And now they need to guarantee their freedom with substantial militaries. And yes, Reagan did hasten the USSR downfail. It was multifactorial.

          2. Tens of thousands of troops , tanks, air force, missiles, and several carrier groups on duty for decades. And then Star Wars. Right, we didn’t do much to free Easyern Europe. Right.

            Tulpa, you may not remember since you were in diapers, but we were there.

            1. We didn’t actually “do” Star Wars, and none of that military might directly affected anything that went on in eastern Europe.

              Like I said, we probably caused the USSR to do stupid things that hastened their demise. But eastern Europeans grabbed that ball and ran with it.

    4. Oh, brilliant idea. Assassinating the leaders of a country that has ICBMs.

      How about the Russki’s can deal with their own so we don’t have to deal with the (literal) fallout?

      1. Well, they are Russian ICBMs. If their ICBMs are anything like their cars, there’s really nothing to worry about.

        1. Yup nothing to worry about

          1. While much of the car’s parts are expected to be sourced from established companies, approximately 35% of the content will be Russian.

            And approximately 90% of the profits will be skimmed off by the Russkaya Mafiya.

            1. Also want to point out that it’s supposed to be a supercar and has less horsepower than a Camaro with a top speed about that of a Ford Crown Vic.

              1. Is have spoiler!


                Screw off your Toyotas and other high-income toys of pleasure!

                1. Only ninety percent??

                  1. Profits are evil.

                    1. You’re a pussy, Lawrence. Say what you REALLY believe.

                    2. Yeah, white boy. Own up to your proud hatred of all things capitalist.

                    3. Van? Marty here. I booked you another gig on Ed Schultz. They can’t pay you what we’re asking, but the check from George should be here any day now.

                    4. Van? Morty here. Your Swiss account looks pretty healthy, but I’d unload those alternative-energy stocks if I were you.

                    5. Van? Manny here. The tab for your custom suit is about three grand, and I’ll need cash.

                    6. Van? Morty here. Your Swiss account looks pretty healthy, but I’d unload those alternative-energy stocks if I were you.

                      Nice job assuming he’s Jooish. RAAAAAAACIST!!!!!

                    7. Can we get a ruling on this one, judges?

          2. Sheeet, they can’t even make car doors that open straight!

            1. In Soviet Russia, car doors open YOU!

        2. Suck this, capitalist stooges!


          Is can go over snow! Phooey on your four-wheel drive hogmobiles!

            1. My God, that thing’s uglier than the Zimmer Quicksilver:


                1. Ooooh! I got it!


                    1. Manchurian Candidate? You tell me.

                    2. Pontiac Azteks don’t count. Homely =/= ugly.

                    3. This is kinda cool, like the Toronado station wagon earlier:


                    4. Aussies can make ugly cars, too!


                    5. The Polacks make their foray into the industry.

                    6. Is failure to post a link Joez or RC’s Law?

                    7. link fail, btw. And either way, I think that was the standard length 1973 Cadillac Sedan de Ville.

                    8. Shitcakes.

                    9. Rear-end shot of Studebaker-based 1958 Packard:


                      Trust me… you don’t need to see the front.

                    10. Back to the Wops…


                    11. The Indians (dot, not woo-woo) can sure fuck up a car design, too:


                    12. The Swiss are good at it, too:


                    13. Ew. Ewwwww eeeewwwwwwwwwww.

                    14. More wheels better!


                    15. The Chinese Edsel. Cool.

                    16. Americans can do it, too!


                    17. Sad corollary to the link above:


                      Government commissions safety cars, which meet and/or exceed expectations… then destroys them.

                      Fuckin’ government… how does it work?

                    18. No! More wheels bad. Less wheels Number 1!!!

                    19. Three wheels… four doors??


                    20. Knew a guy who had one of these:


                      He never could buy enough groceries without multiple trips to the store.

                    21. EIGHT wheels. Suck it!


                    22. ONE wheel. Suck it!


                    23. So do ze Germans, who build a smart car worth buying.

                    24. Wacky Iranian auto design… another reason to bomb them now:


                    25. Best “smart” car idea:


                    26. ^^Midsize^^

                    27. Wayne’s World! Wayne’s World!


                    28. No… words… can… describe…


                    29. One reason Czechoslovakia ceased to exist:


                    30. German? Shocking.

                    31. Shit, I step away from the computer for a couple of hours, and now I want to gouge my eyes out.

                      Thanks, sloop! You always pull through.

                    32. Hey, wait a second, Mr FIFY, The Tatra 603 is a classic! We’ve taken several roadtrips in my friends restored ?estset troiku. It’s got a rear-mounted air-cooled (admittedly not very powerful) V8 and the trunk space in the front is massive.

  33. i got videotaped yesterday by a multiple convicted felon (mostly burglaries) who has “Fuck Pigs” tattooed on his forearm.

    nobody got arrested, beaten, etc.

    another day on the mean streets. and another story that won’t make

    i told him “can you film from the left. it’s my best side. the camera loves me”

    he did not lol

    1. Videotaped? Was it VHS or Beta?

      1. 8 mm

        1. At first, I read that as “multiple felon,” and I assumed it was your partner taping you. Then I re-read it and saw the “convicted” part.

          1. lol. no troll-o-meter. because i lol’d

    2. …who has “Fuck Pigs” tattooed on his forearm.

      Maybe he just likes to make Wilbur squeal.

      1. this is the kind of idiocy we deal with. he has an identitical twin. they have a great defense when they are witnessed committing crime, because w/o fingerprints or DNA witness identification is useless because one can’t prove beyond a reasonable doubt WHICH twin it was. (unless one is in jail, etc. which is not uncommon).

        they end up getting the SAME tat, except the letters offset differently, so now it’s easy to tell them apart. just check the tattoo.


        1. Not so fast

          Fingerprints and physical appearance in general are part of an individual’s phenotype, which arises from the interaction of the individual’s genes and the developmental environment in the uterus. In the case of fingerprints, the genes determine the general characteristics of the patterns that are used for fingerprint classification. As the skin on the fingertip differentiates, it expresses these general characteristics. However, as a surface tissue, it is also in contact with the amniotic fluid in the uterus. The fingertips are also in contact with other parts of the fetus and the uterus, and their position in relation to uterus and the fetal body changes as the fetus moves on its own and in response to positional changes of the mother. Thus the microenvironment of the growing cells on the fingertip is in flux, and is always slightly different from hand to hand and finger to finger. It is this microenvironment that determines the fine detail of the fingerprint structure. While the differences in the microenvironment between fingers are small and subtle, their effect is amplified by the differentiating cells and produces the macroscopic differences that enable the fingerprints of twins to be differentiated.

          1. right. this is why identical twins don’t have the same fingerprints.

            although, i guess DNA would be the same.

            not sure, but i would guess yes

            1. although, i guess DNA would be the same.

              not sure, but i would guess yes

              That’s OK. We know cops aren’t experts in forensics either.

              1. they aren’t. that’s why we have forensic experts (unfortunately, as balko points out.. some aint as expert as they claim to be) do the forensic expertizin’ not (most) cops.

                i just collect the DNA. i don’t test it or interpret it

                1. Pro Tip: I keep DNA from known felons on me so I can easily deposit it at any crime scene.

                  1. I always suspected dunphy of supporting santorum.

          2. Epigenetics is a pretty fascinating subject.

            Identical twins can show marked differences in disease resistance.

            It has been proposed that epigenetic changes during ontogenic development are determined by the environment or are stochastic (34,35,51). In fact, the changes probably result from a combination of the two processes. There is much direct and indirect experimental evidence supporting the environmental cause. For instance, it has been demonstrated that specific care of young rats by their mothers can cause epigenetic changes in the glucocorticoid receptor (33). Similarly, diets deficient in nutrients important for the epigenetic metabolism like folate, choline, and methionine are associated with genome-wide hypomethylation (52,53), and with the development of cancer (54), Parkinson’s (55) and Alzheimer’s (56) diseases. The close association between the percentage of the lifetime shared by MZ twins and their epigenetic concordance (16) also suggests a strong effect of environmental factors on the epigenetic modifications. However, there are several epigenetic changes during ontogenic development that cannot be explained by environmental effects alone (57). These epigenetic variations have been postulated as being stochastic (57)

            So we see cases of just one id. twin contracting Parkinson’s. Why? Interesting indeed.

            1. Interesting because of nature VS. nurture. Can disease be related to early childhood emotional care?

    3. Don’t GIS “fuck pigs”


    4. Thanks for the unverifiable story, dunphy. Sounds like you had a better day than this fellow.

      1. as i have said a metric assload of times , tasing more than three times is presumptively unreasonable imo. that would be 15 seconds max.

        72 seconds? not sure how you can tase somebody for 72 seconds straight, but i don’t expect accuracy from the lay media. but assuming a 5 second tase, that is 13 tasings.

        1. 72 seconds? not sure how you can tase somebody for 72 seconds straight, but i don’t expect accuracy from the lay media. but assuming a 5 second tase, that is 13 tasings.

          Why don’t you call the Richmond, CA PD. They’ll tell you how they did it. Or are departments in the habit of admitting things and settling wrongful death suits when they did nothing wrong?

          1. you really have NO idea how to read for content do you.

            the cops didn’t say they did it for 72 seconds.

            the article claims the ATTORNEY said it: “they administered a Taser shock for 72 seconds straight, followed by several additional jolts, Dach’s attorneys said.”

            try reading for content. assuming the article is correct, they are saying that the ATTORNEY said that happened. the cops didn’t, at least per the article … admit it.

            also, fwiw, as i have explained many times, dept’s (and of course it’s not the dept. it’s the city that settles) MAY settle even when they think they did nothing wrong (or not enough wrong to justify that amount) because the cost of litigation and/or negative press is seen to outweigh the cost of the settlement

            private people, and corporations often do the same thing. in the US, unlike england, we don’t have “loser pays”. so, the reality is that entities WILL settle oftentimes because assuming an X% chance of winning, it will still cost a lot to win, and likely more to lose.

            regardless, in this case, it SOUNDS presumptively UNreasonable.

            but again, you demonstrate that you don’t read for content. you see what you want to see

            1. private people, and corporations often do the same thing. in the US, unlike england, we don’t have “loser pays”. so, the reality is that entities WILL settle oftentimes because assuming an X% chance of winning, it will still cost a lot to win, and likely more to lose.

              Whatever, dude. They settled for $1.5M, not exactly chump chance. And that whole “cost to defend” argument is total bullshit. Last I checked, they had their attorneys already on the payroll.

              Sorry, but a settlement of $1.5M says a lot about how they thought the case would end if litigated.

              1. again sloopy you are ignorant of the law. attorneys on the payroll is entirely different than the cost to go trial

                are you really this ignorant of reality? talk to ANY person who has ever been sued and.or faced criminal charges

                just as people plea guilty even when they think they are innocent sometimes due to costs and risks, so corporations and govt bodies WILL and do settle even if they think they are not responsible

                i am not saying they are not responsible here. GENERALLY SPEAKING, assuming it’s true that they tased for 72 seconds that IS prima facie unreasonable

                but you aren’t interested in the details. to you, the fact that they settled PROVES they were culpable. i live in a different world. reality.

                imo, based on the fact pattern as presented (iow assuming the media reports/lawyer allegations are reasonably accurate, a big assumption but assuming arguendo) i think most likely it WAS unreasonable and they would lose

                you seem to want to argue persistently from a position of ignorance

                1. again sloopy you are ignorant of the law. attorneys on the payroll is entirely different than the cost to go trial

                  are you really this ignorant of reality? talk to ANY person who has ever been sued and.or faced criminal charges

                  OK, then explain to me what other costs there are to go to trial.

                  The other examples you cite are individuals that do not have an entire legal apparatus already on their payroll.

                  Apples and oranges, man.

                  1. serious sloopy. i spend at least half of my posts explaining the law to you and you still never concede anything. now, you want me to explain to you why TRIALS cost more than having attorney on payroll.

                    in brief, there are immense HOURLY costs. dept’s do not use corp counsel for these trials. corp counsel (the attorneys they have on staff) almost NEVER do trial law.

                    they have to hire expensive law firms and the average trial of this type results in HUNDREDS of billable hours.

                    that’s in addition, to immense amounts of press (which is usually viewed as cost), immense overtime hours (i get 4 hrs minimum for every court appearance at just under $70/hr), etc.

                    these aren’t disputable facts. research the average cost to go trial for a civil lawsuit involving excessive force.

                    lemme give you one example

                    it’s an extreme example, but the OJ trial (a criminal trial) cost the city of LA an estimated 9 million dollars


                    again, … *i* think the force most likely was unreasonable and most likely they would lose, however that’s based on the fact pattern presented in the newspapper, and largely based on claims of the plaintiffs attorney

                    you don’t accept claims made by PD’s at face value, do you?

                    well, i don’t either. NOR do i accept claims made by plaintiff’s attoney’s at face value

                    recall the attorney for the “pregnant pepper spray” victim’s claims

                    here’s a hint. she apparently WASN’T EVEN PREGNANT

                    you see what you want to see, and on the issue of double standards you give plaintiff’s attorneys massive credibility and cops- none. that[‘s your double standard

                    regardles, *i* think this case most likely WAS unreasonable force hth

                    1. I gave credence to the combination of the plaintiff’s attorney’s claims coupled with the city agreeing to a massive settlement amount. and them not issuing a statement that said they are not accepting responsibility for the man’s death at the hands of the four cops, but are settling due to the risks of going to trial.

                      And you bring up OJ. WTF does that have to do with the price of tea in China? LA was paying thousands of dollars a day for the wardrobes of their prosecutors, which should have been a criminal waste of taxpayer funds. And I understand they had to pay quite a few of their experts for their testimony, a luxury not afforded the defense unless they want to face prosecution.

            2. We’ve rigged our tasers for 3 minute bursts.
              Want me to send you the specs?

      2. Or this chap. But fair is fair. The cop got 2 weeks off without pay for assaulting and pepper-spraying detained prisoners.

        But your story is a cool anecdote and measures up well with the reported and verifiable stories of police abuse I posted.

        1. FTA: “He was suspended without pay for two weeks, assigned to 5? months of desk duty and put on six months’ probation. In June 2008, the State Attorney’s Office charged him with misdemeanor battery, but he entered a pretrial diversion program and wasn’t convicted after completing six months of anger-management classes.”

          Yeah, we ought to send cops to anger management who beat and pepperspray cuffed and stuffed prisoners.

          1. And before you defend his criminal behavior, dunphy, a federal judge seemed to think it was excessive.

            Also FTA: “In July, U.S. District Judge John Steele denied Mariani’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit, ruling a jury could find his actions excessive.

            “The amount and type of force utilized ? would clearly support a finding that the force was unreasonable,” Steele wrote.”

            But somehow he avoided the criminal prosecution. Hmmmm, double-standard perhaps?

            1. not a double standard. again, you don’t understand the law.

              a judge ruling that the evidence would support (iow, it’s not clear that it was unreasonable, but the evidence would support it… iow, there is a prima facie case) a finding of unreasonable force =/= (necessarily) a criminal assault

              it’s not a double standard

              you are aware of course that many people are sued for torts (assault and battery etc) where either no charges were pressed, or they were pressed and they were found not guilty and/or hung jury

              your fallacy is the belief that all unreasonable force (or potentially unreasonable force) = sufficient evidence and the requsite elements (mens rea etc.) for a CRIMINAL charge, let alone one to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt

              you are ignorant of the law, and you are too arrogant to concede that, and look for understanding

              you want to believe that unreasoanble force = A CRIME

              that is not true

              it is not true for “civilians” OR for cops.

              as one example, i explained i have responded to two cases where people shot other people’s dogs. neitehr was criminal, and we didn’t arrest or charge either

              it does NOT follow that there may not be a civil tort and /or the person(s) may not be found CIVILLY responsible

              those are entirely different things

              1. and the requsite elements (mens rea etc.) for a CRIMINAL charge,

                Oh, so mens rea matters again? You should send out a memo to cops around the country.

                1. sloopy, way to evade the issue. you will simply never concede anything. it’s like a disease with you. and 12 yr olds

                  again, the reality is that excessive force =/= assault and battery. in SOME cases it does, in many it doesn’t

                  there are proof issues, element issues, mens rea, etc.

                  you simply don’t accept that, because you don’t want to. it gets old.

                  if you want to discuss the actual reality, get back to me.

                  i have no problem with normative arguments, but you need to hedge them as such, for clarity and intellectual honesty.


                  ” i think that if it’s excessive force, it should always be tried as a criminal assault (or A&B depending on jurisdiction) and i think the law should reflect that” or something

                  i would disagree, but that would at least be intellectually honest

                  trying to claim that there is some sort of “corruption” or “double standard” when not all cases of excessive force are tried as A&B is dismissive of rule of law and legal reality

                  just like not acknowledging de minimus offenses. in 20 yrs of police work, i have never seen, for example, a mere shove actually prosecuted as an assault

                  but if a cop got suspended for shoving somebody (as one of my coworkers did) and was not criminally charged, you would think it ‘evidence’ of a double standard.

                  again, dismissive of reality

              2. note also the begging of the question e.g. “before you defend his criminal behavior”

                note also , i don’t defend criminal behavior. i condemn it. whether from cops or anybody else, generally speaking (exceptions being drug offenses etc. that i don’t think should be criminal in the first place)

        2. it matches well with the issue of selection bias. iow, cop gets filmed and DOESN’t do jackshit happens far far far far far far far more often than the stories of abuse (or alleged abuse. in many jurisdictions, cops ARE acting according to law when they do this shit)… it’s just that you are not going to read an article when cop gets filmed and nothing happens.

          but even a cursory check of youtube would show literally scores of thousands of examples of cops knowingly being filmed and doing nothing.

          1. Thousands of good examples? OK, fine.

            That still doesn’t excuse the hundereds of bad examples that pop up daily. Let alone the fact that this cop wasn’t punished beyond two weeks w/o pay for A&B of detained prisoners.

            1. again,

              1) we both agree that cops arresting people for filming them (unless the person is obstructing, which is rare) is wrong
              2) in some jurisdictions, it IS illegal for said filming. that’s a fault of the legislature, not the cops.
              3) yes, police abuses happen, whether excessive force, murder, assault, excessive force, etc. i’ve never denied it, and i am at least as much a critic of it as you.

              1. 2) in some jurisdictions, it IS illegal for said filming. that’s a fault of the legislature, not the cops.

                The cops are “just following orders. Yeah, I get it. You know who else…blah, blah, blah.

                3) yes, police abuses happen, whether excessive force, murder, assault, excessive force, etc. i’ve never denied it, and i am at least as much a critic of it as you.

                Somehow, and based on what I’ve seen here, I seriously doubt it.

                1. you seriously doubt it because you are dismissive of reality.

                  like the UC berkeley baton shoving, that i said imo based on the video was CRIMINAL ASSAULT

                  or the paul schene case


                  you see what you want to see. reality is irrelevant to you

                2. sloopy, hitler referenes are beneath even you.

                  just because “i was following orders’ is not an excuse doesn’t mean everytime a cop (or a doctor or…) follows orders contrary to what we believe the law SHOULD be =/= a naziesque human rights violation

                  get over yourself.

                  rule of law matters. i disagree with tons of laws. it doesn’t make me, or the pharmacist, doctor, or anybody else who acts within those laws, NAZIS

                  get over yourself

                  1. FYI, Hitler wasn’t “just following orders.” He was giving them.

                    And to equate a doctor not following orders (?) to a cop who arrests people for breaking an immoral law. Seriously?

                    1. my point that you refuse to address is that doctors often, and as part of their DEA license etc. are “forced to” get people arrested for immoral laws too!

                      heck, about 50% of the drug cases i investigate are initiated by doctors and pharmacists reporting prescription issues etc.

                      are they horrible people for getting poor druggies arrested for FELONIES!!?!?!

                      because they do.

                      like i said, about half of my drug cases (this year, the MAJORITY of drug cases i have had (and note less than 1% of my total cases) are because doctors made the report and pressed charges


                      evil hitlerite doctorzz!!!! oh noes!!!!

                    2. are they horrible people for getting poor druggies arrested for FELONIES!!?!?!

                      Yes, they are.

                      See, that’s where you can’t get me, dunphy. I’ve quit jobs and been fired before for taking a principled stand. And every time I’ve done it, I knew I ultimately did the right thing. It’s why in an industry full of cheats and frauds, people entrust me with their entire fortunes without thinking twice. I have built a reputation for always doing what is just, regardless of the consequences to me personally, and I don’t know of a single person who would refute that.

                    3. You were shopping your kicker in the commissioner’s notes in FF, which is fundamentally unjust. BTW, he has like 30 points today.

                    4. Yeah, and he’s sitting on my bench. Fuck!

                    5. Bwa, Bwa, Bwa. I’ve been made a fool of (again) by a MERE cop. I’ll brag about my righteousness and spotless (at least in my own eyes) reputation. Makes me feel better.

                    6. I’ll sleep well tonight not worrying about you.

                      Have a nice day.

                    7. Oh, and +1 sloopy.

                      I’m on the board!

                    8. Yeah, and he’s sitting on my bench. Fuck!

                      I’m with ya. Don’t know what possessed me to sit Beanie this week.

                    9. Wow, why did you do that? You’re gonna have to hope for a big day from Sproles to get back on the winning track. Ballard will be of no use.

                    10. Beanie’s been stinking up the joint for weeks now. Plus I had to get Andre Johnson in the lineup to justify the Cam Newton trade.

  34. Caleb Hanie is horrible.

    1. Would you rather have Carson Palmer on your side of the ball?

    2. Proving that Jay Cutler is an all star

  35. 90 Minutes to KICKOFF

    1. Let me know when your team crosses the 55 yard line.

      1. You have to give credit to any league that can pull off having two different teams with the same name at the same time, eh?

        1. The Ottawa Rough Riders folded in 1996.
          The Saskatchewan Roughriders are still banjo picking hillbillies.

          But carry on.

          1. But they still pulled it off, if only for a while. I was always hoping for a third team to enter the league called the Rough-Riders. Or maybe the Roughrid Ers.

            1. Les Cavaliers Rugueuse?

      1. The comeback effort was valiant.

        1. To the victor go the spoils.

          The rarely seen inscription on the Grey Cup.

          1. Contrary to popular demand, the winning QB does not get a year’s supply of Kraft Dinner.

            1. If they get a year’s supply of this, it would be pretty cool.

              1. What about an East Coast represent?

                1. Never had it.

                  Good stuff?

                  1. It is very good stuff. The India Pale Ale is their flagship brew.

  36. Well there are threats and then there are threats. Threaten to assign them to a global-warming research team. Their job will be to prove the data and methods employed by Dr. James Hansen. You’ll see some changed attitudes real fast.

  37. Start spreading the news.
    I’d be leaving today.
    I wouldn’t want to be a part of it.
    New Jack City, New York.

  38. News from Epi’s neck of the woods.

    1. in brief, if a govt. agency is compelling a statement, it can’t be, and shouldn’t be , used against you in a CRIMINAL TRIAL.

      which is the garrity rationale.

      (before anybody brings up breathalyzers, those are direct, not testimonial evidence, and ample case law as well as common sense, notes the 5th amendment refers to TESTIMONY)…

      iow, garrity FTW

      note that , as i have said many times, agencies will often NOT compel a statement when they think crim prosecution likely for just this reason. it can poison the investigation, and even with a chinese wall, it’s suboptimal.

      1. If you are compelled by the duties of your job to file official statements and you put in one of those statements that your negligence caused a death, then you CANNOT BE PROSECUTED?

        Because that’s what blanket protection means, not that it cannot be put into evidence.

        Nice try.

        1. and as usual., the article is misleading and you rely on it. for example, it says that the charges against the kicking officer were dropped due ot previous statements implying that because the officer made statements he couldn’t be charged….

          howeever, accoridng to THIS article, it’s not that simple…

          “The decision regarding Officer James J. Lee came after an outside expert, who earlier had found the last of three kicks to be unwarranted, changed his opinion. The expert recently reviewed a previously unavailable statement Lee gave just after the incident and watched video of the confrontation played at a slower speed.

          Holmes’ spokeswoman Kimberly Mills and Lee’s attorney, Peter Offenbecher, said the additional evidence led to the dismissal. But neither would elaborate on specific factors that prompted the expert to reverse his finding.”

          so, it wasn’t the fact that he GAVE that statement, it was that the exculpatory statements in the statement as well as another review of the video based on those statements caused the expert to CHANGE HIS MIND about the justification.

          this is yet another example of how things are not as they often appear

          in that case, they DID charge the guy, even after he gave a statement ex post garrity.

          so, something is not kosher in denmark, because that directly contradicts the claim that they don’t charge people who make garrity statements

          completely mutually inconsistent nu?


          again, read for content. do some investigation.


          The expert, Robert Bragg of the Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission, originally concluded that the third kick, delivered to the suspect’s head, wasn’t reasonable and necessary.

          But Bragg was not provided a standard use-of-force statement Lee was compelled to write after the incident.

          **********Lee’s statement was made under the so-called “Garrity rule,” named after a U.S. Supreme Court decision that prohibits prosecutors from using incriminating statements that officers are required to provide as part of their job.

          Statements made after invoking Garrity may be used for internal police purposes, including discipline, but not for a criminal prosecution.

          Offenbecher recently agreed to supply city attorneys the use-of-force statement as part of additional information on the case.

          In a Nov. 21 opinion, Bragg found the third kick was a reasonable tactic to control the suspect and within teachings of the Training Commission.

          Bragg, however, added that the kick was “not the best tactic available.”

          Offenbecher, who praised Holmes and his prosecutors for Wednesday’s announcement, said Lee is relieved.

          The Justice Department, in a separate action Wednesday, sent a letter to Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn expressing concerns about the overuse of the Garrity rule by the Police Department.

          Mills said the timing of her office’s action and the Justice Department letter was a “complete coincidence.”

          The misdemeanor charge brought against Lee stemmed from an Oct. 18, 2010, incident inside Joe’s Mart, where surveillance video showed Lee kicking a 17-year-old African-American teen suspected of trying to rob an undercover narcotics officer.

          The teen, D’Vontaveous Hoston, was later exonerated when he was acquitted of first-degree attempted robbery.

          City attorneys charged Lee after an investigation by the State Patrol, which was brought in at the request of Seattle Police Chief John Diaz.

          Under the gross misdemeanor, Lee faced up to a year in jail and a $5,000 fine.

          At the time, Holmes said officers have a dangerous job but must be held accountable when they use unreasonable force.

          Sgt. Rich O’Neill, president of the Seattle police union, has defended Lee, saying he was following accepted training practices, and the union previously said the charge sent a “terrible message.” O’Neill couldn’t be reached Wednesday.

          The encounter between Lee and Hoston, who has since turned 18, happened shortly after police were attacked during a narcotics buy-bust operation.

          Lee, who had watched the operation from a short distance away, chased people who ran after an undercover officer was hit.

          On the video, Hoston can be seen inside the store with his hands in the air as Lee approaches him and kicks at the teen’s groin area. After Hoston falls to the floor, Lee kicks him in the torso then the head.

          Lee, who joined the Police Department in 1999, was placed on paid leave about a month after the incident when the department learned a television station planned to air the video. He was reassigned to a different position 30 days later.

          In April, Hoston filed a federal lawsuit over the incident.

          Hoston was charged in July with unlawful possession of a firearm during an incident in downtown Seattle in which his cousin was said by police to have yelled to Hoston that he was endangering the lawsuit

          *** lol on the last sentence ****

          and again, he WAS charged after giving a garrity statement, right?

          1. I was reading the letter from the DOJ, not the article about the Lee case.

            And why should Lee’s statement after the incident be allowed to prejudice the analysis of the evidence? IMO, the guy should weigh what he sees on it’s own merits.

            1. first of all,

              1) it’s demonstrably false that (this was your question) ” If you are compelled by the duties of your job to file official statements and you put in one of those statements that your negligence caused a death, then you CANNOT BE PROSECUTED?”. i’ve already shown that the claims that you can’t prosecute ex-post garrity (with SPD) are false. i knew it had to be, because it’s patently ridiculous. turns out i was right.

              2) his statement doesn’t “prejudice the analysis”. ANY statement you, or anybody else accused of a crime gives to the police can be considered by prosecutors and expert witnesses in the decision to charge. as i have explained, contra to the meme ” never talk to the police”, what people say in interrogations FREQUENTLY exculpates them such that they are released, not charged etc. i have given dozens of examples. if you are INNOCENT, it very often benefits you to talk to police/give a statement. heck, even if you are guilty, it can (recall gary ridway the serial killer managed to escape prosecution for decades partially based on his throwing the police off considering him a suspect based on what he told them. he was a good liar)

              if you dont’ give your side of the story, often all the prosecutors and their expertds have to go on is ONE side of the story.

              he volunteered his statement, since he thought it would exculpate him, and guess what? it helped to do so.

              that is very frequently the case. due to selection bias, you don’t see it as often, because when people exculpate themselves, it necesasrily almost never gets TO trial, so when looking at criminal trials, you see the cases more likely where it was inculpatory, NOT the cases where it prevented him from even being charged.

              see: selection bias.

              regardless, again…you evidence your bias (how typical) by saying it “prejudiced” the analysis. it was A factor, and it proved enough to push the exerpt over to the side of justified, when he previous had ruled the opposite.

              but please address the prior point. the point that prosecutors allgedly CAN’T PROSECUTE (see: blanket protection claim) ex-post garrity

              again, deomnstrably false

      2. iow, garrity FTW

        Abuse of Garrity has led the USDOJ to send a letter to Seattle’s city government. You should be proud.


          and read my above article, it is PROVABLY false that they never charge people if they give a garrity statement. i just cited one case where they did. and note that his garrity statement ended up helping to “prove” that he wasn’t in fact criminally culpable. which is ironic. regardless,it disproves the statement that they don’t charge ex-post garrity, since i show an example where they did

          facts. they are what’s for dinner.

          1. The DOJ just sent them a letter voicing their concern for the abuse of Garrity. I was just pointing that out. I don’t understand how the Lee case, where a witness changed his testimony after reading what the defendant said afterward (WTF?), was brought into it.

            1. it was brought into it because you asked ” If you are compelled by the duties of your job to file official statements and you put in one of those statements that your negligence caused a death, then you CANNOT BE PROSECUTED?”.

              that is false. you can and they do that. as i just demonstrated.

              as for DOJ voicing “concern”. groovy. i’ve already posted studies that show that SPD has about a 1/3 the rate of officer UOF as compared to the average, and that includes officer homicides.

              iow, if there is some sort of force problem in SPD, the fact that they use force much more rarely than the average PD, to include deadly force, casts doubt on that.

              unless seattle is SUCH a law abiding city, that even though SPD officers use force about 1/3 as often as the national average, they are still using it way too much. that’s a pretty hard burden to overcome, nu?

              sure, there have been unjustified and criminal force incidents by SPD, just like any decent size agency. that’s inevitable

              but it’s proven false that they offer blanket protection ex-post garrity, and it’s also proven they use much less force than the average agency


              that the DOJ is concerned, is nice. however, the data i have presented, makes me think their concern is not compelled by facts

  39. Ow my balls, Canada-style.

    1. he shot a jack russell? that’s kind of suss.

      otoh, “The most recent official survey, conducted more than a decade ago, determined there were 4.7 million dog bite victims annually in the USA. A more recent study showed that 1,000 Americans per day are treated in emergency rooms as a result of dog bites. In 2010 there were 34 fatal dog attacks in the USA. Most of the victims who receive medical attention are children, half of whom are bitten in the face. Dog bite losses exceed $1 billion per year, with over $300 million paid by homeowners insurance.”

      i can’t imagine shooting a jack russell, though. just seems…well… wussy.

      1. In 2010 there were 34 fatal dog attacks in the USA. Most of the victims who receive medical attention are children, half of whom are bitten in the face.

        We should arm all children and dress them in police costumes. Then the dogs wouldn’t have a fucking chance.

        1. like i said, i personally could not live with myself if i shot a fucking jack russell. it’s a jack russell. kick the fucking thing if it’s coming at you. just seems suss as fuck

          1. kick the fucking thing if it’s coming at you.

            Or perhaps just step around it.

            1. are you claiming it couldn’t cause pretty severe bites to your legs? if so, you are crazy. like i said, one of my partners suffered pretty severe bites (And no he didnt shoot the dog) from a friggin’ pomerian ) that attacked him when he arrested a driver for DUI. he simply grabbed the thing, pulled it off his arm, and threw it back in the car and locked it

              but he did need ER treatment, and it did give him some nasty puncture wounds.

              1. Jack. Russell. That is all.

                1. I was told that among the dogs excluded from liability coverage in our home-owners insurance were Jack Russels and Lhasa Apsos.
                  Too many claims.

      2. To be fair, it was coming right for him.

  40. 5:27 left…down by 3…it’s Tebow time!

    1. Tim Tebow is now officially the Perry the Platypus of quarterbacks. He doesn’t do much but inexplicably comes out on top at the end.

      1. That’s what she said.

    2. TE-BOW!

      1. JeeBus!!

        1. +1 sloopy. I’m on a roll with robotroll here.

  41. If we can jail people without trial under the PATRIOT act or the War on Drugs, why haven’t we been able to put people on Mars either?!

    1. Then again, if Stalin were alive today Medvedev and Putin would be the first to go. The average life-expectancy of a Russian politician between the years 1928 and 1953 was about 20 minutes.

      1. Good one, Brian.

  42. Heroic Mulatto|11.27.11 @ 12:09AM|#
    …”But to paint in broad strokes, different cultures have different ideas about what teaching exactly is and how to do it….”

    Well, I’m sort of stuck with ‘that’s so obvious; WIH didn’t I figure out there was that sort of difficulty?’
    Your comments only raise about a million questions, but let’s start with this:
    In one of the books on Feynman (maybe ‘What Do You Care What They Think’), he teaches in Brazil one year, and has a hell of a time. He assigns the difficulty to the difference in teaching methods.
    But the kids are X-generation removed from the off-the-boat immigrants from the Iberian peninsula, and mixed besides, while the culture also a mix of Iberian peninsula and indigenous.
    Your examples are mostly clashes between heterogeneous cultures.

    1. But the kids are X-generation removed from the off-the-boat immigrants from the Iberian peninsula, and mixed besides, while the culture also a mix of Iberian peninsula and indigenous.
      Your examples are mostly clashes between heterogeneous cultures.

      I’ll have to read that story about Feynman, it sounds interesting. I would say that even in a fairly homogeneous culture, you can have difference in teaching style. Social class also has a lot to do with it. For example, a child growing up in a working-class environment may not have the same sort of early educational experiences as a child who is being raised in a more affluent household. Research (which I’m too lazy to go and cite at the moment :)) suggests that in American households with white-collar professionals value literacy, so that the child is given more opportunities to be exposed to text much more than in blue-collar households. Furthermore, in the white-collar household, the child is given more opportunity to interact with adults through the telling and sharing of narratives. Whereas, in the blue-collar household, the child is exposed more to kinesthetic “hands-on” modalities of learning and a “children should be seen and not heard” mentality.

      The problem arises when, for example, a classroom of working-class kids is taught by a teacher from a white-collar, professional background. The different expectations of teaching and learning don’t always mesh well together. (See inner city NYC public schools in the late 60′ to the 80’s as a prime example.)

  43. Some Reds just never wash clean.

  44. Thanks for the unverifiable story, dunphy.

    What, we’re supposed to verify our stories now?

    1. Well, at least validate them.

    2. I just get tired of him saying we cherry-pick stories that are reported in actual newspapers, yet he offers up an anecdote as a counter to police misconduct.

      And yes, we are usually asked to verify our claims when we make them.

  45. And, SF, which has regulated restaurants to within an inch of profitability, now struggles with the contradiction between regulation and rent seeking:
    “Restaurants want to put brakes on food trucks”
    Sample comment: ‘But where will people poop if they eat at a food truck?!’…..1M263K.DTL

    1. Where will people eat if they poop at a porta-potty?

    2. No one would notice if you used the bouillabaisse, or the zoo-soup they give out at the Chinese trucks.

  46. If you claim to be from the EPA in your scam, you’re a dick.

    IMO, these guys deserve a lengthy stay in jail. What say reason?

    1. The federal government, though, does not regulate septic tank products.

      After this, however, they will.

      1. Surprisingly, not? Why don’t they care about the children???

    2. Twisted tail! A thousand eyes! Trapped forever!!

    3. “If you claim to be from the EPA in your scam, you’re a dick.”

      Yeah, but, rent seeking in the lower case.
      Did you ever get an ‘official-looking’ letter advising you must do X?
      Did you do X or did you toss the letter in the trash?
      I’m reminded of ‘predatory lending’.

      1. I tossed the letter in the trash. Just as I assume 95% of the people who received these phone calls hung up on the assholes.

        The difference in this and predatory lending, IMO, is that all the terms of the contract were there for the borrower to read, and were never witheld or misrepresented in any way. These dicks deliberately misrepresented themselves to defraud people.

        Oh, and the oldsters probably didn’t misrepresent their incomes and job histories so they could buy the TP. There’s another difference.

        1. “These dicks deliberately misrepresented themselves to defraud people.”

          You’re right; I’m wrong.
          Attempting fraud, whether it works or not, is fraudulent. Even not-real-bright folks don’t deserve to work their way through out-right lies.
          Off to the slammer.

          1. Ask Tony what he thinks about people who are victims of lies… he’ll tell you it’s the price we pay for freedom of speech, unless it’s calling a woman “sugar-tits” in the workplace, which ought to be illegal or shit.

              1. Giggidy!

                1. You missed the other flavor:


                  1. Isn’t this where you’re supposed to also call me a racist?

                    1. I’ll leave that to experts like Al Sharpton.

                    2. Saaaaay… mixing the two flavors would result in “Sugar Tits Swirl”, and kids should be encouraged to get down with the swirl! It’s brilliant!

            1. Mr. FIFY|11.27.11 @ 10:57PM|#
              “Ask Tony what he thinks about people who are victims of lies… he’ll tell you it’s the price we pay for freedom of speech,…”

              Shithead would demand a new cabinet-level government agency dedicated to examining every claim in every advertisement/call/letter to make sure no one could ever make a mistake!

              1. Sugar Tits Cereal? Add some milk, good for the kids! That ain’t no jibber-jabber!

                1. Over in the Stossel thread, Tony opined that it’s just too fuckin’ bad if some schmoe loses his job for saying WORDS to a WOMAN… it’s JUST LIKE grabbing their tits!!!1!one!won!!1!

                  He is, indeed, stupid.

                  1. Argh! Joke-handle fail!

                    I blame Congress.

  47. Sad news:…..f6878.html

    Lisa Riniker needs to lose her job.

    1. Go to the link, then read the words “comments have been disabled”.


    2. That is just a blatant disregard for the First Amendment.

      Not only does Riniker need to lose her job, Judge Bill Dyke needs a fucking lobotomy.

      Question for our legal eagles out there: can this judge enforce this gag order if the people leave his jurisdiction and talk? Can he enforce it if the parents accidentally leave some documents and they materialize in a newsroom somewhere?

      Riniker and Dyke: a cunt and a cock*

      *No specific order implied.

      1. Good calls, sloop.

        Reason needs to do another link on this disturbing turn of events.

        That kid is gonna be fucked up for life, and those guilty of steering him in that direction need to pay for it.

    3. I’m kind of drunk and that just ruined my buzz. All the Kahlua can’t make me unmad. I understand if her parents don’t want to but they should disregard the gag order. They’re child will hopefully be a little less fucked up and the country a little freer if they do so.

      1. I’d ignore the gag order in a heartbeat. Come arrest my ass, bitches.

  48. Could Russia send a cosmonaut to Mars?
    Could Russia bring him back?

    1. We could send someone on a one-way trip to Mars just as well as the Russians could.

      I nominate Chuck Schumer for the trip.

      1. A three-man crew is much more logical.

        I’m all for Henry Waxman making the trip.

        1. He’s a good choice, as well, but we need a third… and it ought to be a right-wing shitheel.

          Santorum of Mars has a nice ring to it.

          1. Damn, sloop, you’re good at digging up vile pictures.

            1. Then again… why stop at three? It’s a one-way trip – pack those fuckers in like sardines… 535, give or take…

              1. 536. Shouldn’t Gabby Giffords’ husband fly the thing?

                1. Nah, he’s not a politician.

                  Besides, it doesn’t *need* a pilot. Put it on auto and aim it for the heart of the sun… pack some nuclear waste in there, too, make it worth the trip.

                  1. Being a politician shouldn’t be a requirement. And to prove my point:
                    Andy fucking Dick.

                    1. Andy Dick was great in Newsradio.
                      I nominate Bruce Willis and Bill Maher.

                    2. I’d send Joy Behar before I’d send Andy Dick… we can build more rockets later, sloop.

                      Best to get rid of the politicians, first.

                    3. But if we get rid of all the politicians first, how are we gonna get the second rocket built?

                    4. We have plenty of nuclear rocket surgeons, sloop. Politicians can’t build IKEA furniture, let alone rockets.

                    5. Not Bruce Willis. He was great as the voice of Muddy Grimes in “Beavis and Butthead Do America.”

                      Bill Maher is a go for launch.

                    6. Definitely “B” Ark material, those celebrities:


                    7. RAAAACIST!!!

                      Why do the “B” Ark-ers get the black “Sugar Tits?”

                    8. Who said anything about *feeding* them?

                    9. Mmmmm… black Sugar Tits…

                    10. Is they good? Law’s yes!


                      Not to leave out the Mexicans…

                    12. I understand, but the Chinks mightn’t.

                    13. Beat me to it. Damn your fast typin’ skilz, sloopy.

                    14. Damn your zipper, Pants!

                      Curses, I have been double-foiled! Back to the lair!

                    15. Cubs win! Cubs win! Cubs win!

                    16. Okay, sloop, ya got me. How many internets do I owe you?

                    17. You owe me nothing.

                      [Hands crown to PantsFan]

                      That’s just…just…just…beautiful.

                    18. But… but… okay, so Pants won it. I see how this is… I turn my back to fry some bacon, and next thing I know crowns are being exchanged.

                      Good day to you, sir.

                    19. I’m willing to call it a three-way tie since I’ve got to get to sleep.


                    20. I’ll take third place.

                      THIS time.

                      Mwahaha and so forth.

  49. “Super” Committee > Tebow

    1. Super-Committee 0-3
      Tim Tebow 5-1

  50. I’m in 2nd place bitches.

    1. Fuck Sam Brownback.

      Hell, no, I ain’t apologizin’.

  51. Well, this is depressing. Just found out that Earth will only be habitable for about 600M years rather than 4B.

    During the next four billion years, the luminosity of the Sun will steadily increase, resulting in a rise in the solar radiation reaching the Earth. This will cause a higher rate of weathering of silicate minerals, which will cause a decrease in the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. In about 600 million years, the level of CO2 will fall below the level needed to sustain the C3 method of photosynthesis used by trees. Some plants use the C4 method, allowing them to persist at CO2 concentrations as low as 10 parts per million. However, the long term trend is for plant life to die off altogether. The resulting loss of oxygen replenishment will cause the extinction of animal life a few million years later.

    By one billion years from now, about 27% of the modern ocean will have been subducted into the mantle. If this process were allowed to continue uninterrupted, it would reach an equilibrium state where 65% of the current surface reservoir would remain at the surface. Once the solar luminosity is 10% higher than its current value, the average global surface temperature will rise to 320 K (47 ?C). The atmosphere will become a “moist greenhouse” leading to a runaway evaporation of the oceans. At this point, models of the Earth’s future environment demonstrate that the stratosphere would contain increasing levels of water. These water molecules will be broken down through photodissociation by solar ultraviolet radiation, allowing hydrogen to escape the atmosphere. The net result would be a loss of the world’s sea water by about 1.1 billion years from the present.

    1. Alert Al Gore!

    2. I suppose we should all stop driving and watching telly?

      1. Not unless Al Gore stops flying jet planes and living in a big-ass “energy-efficient” mansion.

        1. In Algor’s defense, a lot of those nice things were bought with the family’s tobacco money hypocrisy.

          1. Oh, real mature, sloopy.

            1. Sorry, I had my mouth full of George Soros’ cock. What did I just miss?

              1. Quit hogging that, mustard. Save some for the rest of us.

                1. I’m super-cereal, guys!

                  1. Super Sugar Tits-real, Al?

                    1. I keep my Sugar Tits in a lockbox.

                    2. Al hasn’t touched my tits in years. He says it doesn’t release his Chaka or something.

                    3. Al doesn’t need Super Sugar Tits. He has his own cereal.

                    4. Al, I’d love to help ya out, ol’ buddy, but there just ain’t no way I’m touchin’ Tipper’s tits.

  52. Dropshipping Wholesale and retail fashion brand items on network online!

  53. Hi,Friend ! How are u ? So happy notice u that New Arrival from our site : :

    Fashion Brand Handbags, Jordan, Free Nike ,Air Griffey Max shoes , Newest style Shox shoes , Air Max 2012 , Warm Coat . Hoodies , Fashion and Nice brand t-shirts .

    Newest Jerseys : :

    Nice NFL,MLB,NHL,NBA,Football Jerseys.

    Free Shipping to USA, UK, France , Australia ,Canada

    Authentic Quality but cheaper price ! Accept Paypal , Credit Card ,Western Union for payment !

    Friend , ,Welcome to visit , Maybe u would find out some ones u are interested in !Free gift for your first order !

    Looking forward to hear from you ! Thank you !

    Have a nice day !

  54. Don’t worry, Tulpa — we’ll be living in artificial environments by that time, an we’ll probably look like Ithorians that far into the future.

  55. Russia is a good example of so much potential talent wasted on so many stupid government projects.

    1. Russia’s a fantastic example of how to waste civilizational amounts of wealth, human talent, and latent potential.

  56. Yeah. I was going to go into biomedical research to cure diseases, but HillaryCare was popular when I was an undergraduate. So, I switched out of the biomedical field. Now, every obituary I read reminds me of that decision.

  57. did you ever read the stories of the gulags? horrible! punishment and cruelty rarly makes people more productive in fact it makes them more dangerous. in fact cruelty only makes people cruel themselves. defensive as it were. stress kills, just watch the national geographic documnetary on that. of course in gulags it may have been about killing you slowly as painfully as possible and not about productivity. the normal response to cruelty and unfairness is lashing out, in defense against it or at the least becoming a bedfellow with them and becoming cruel to others yourself to avoid it coming on you. go along to get along idea. when someone loves you you can trust them not to hurt you but when they hate you watch out.


Please to post comments

Comments are closed.