A.M. Links: Ron Paul Picks Up a Bachmann Supporter, Robot Romney Getting Better at Human Interaction, UN Flies Flags at Half-Mast for Kim Jong-Il

Mike Riggs | 12.29.2011 9:00 AM

Onetime Michele Bachmann campaign leader Kent Sorenson is now supporting Ron Paul.
Mitt Romney still "uneasy with off-the-cuff remarks, unnatural at chitchat, and spare with his emotions."
Rick Santorum is surging in Iowa; Newt Gingrich is plummeting.
The U.N. honors Kim Jong-Il.
Gen. Petraeus almost quit over Obama's decision to reduce troop levels in Afghanistan.
Robert Reich: Obama will run with Hillary in 2012.

Do you want hot links and other Reason goodies delivered to your inbox twice a day? Sign up here for Reason's morning and afternoon news updates.

New at Reason.tv: "Crackdowns on Consensual Sex, Veggies, and more! Nanny of the Year (2011)"

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

NEXT: Kelly Clarkson Endorses Ron Paul

Hide Comments (412)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

John 13 years ago

In fairness I think the prospect of a paycheck all the way through to the campaign has something to do with Kent Sorenson now "supporting" Ron Paul. If I hire a hooker tonight, I guess you can say she "supports me".
1. Karl Hungus 13 years ago
  
  But if he was thinking solely in terms of the longevity of his employment, then why not jump ship to Romney? As much as I hate to say it, that's probably still the safe bet.
2. Ken Shultz 13 years ago
  
  It's pretty rotten to do that to his employer right before the caucus.
  
  It's sabotage.
  
  His job was to make his candidate look as good as possible for the Iowa caucus, and then the week of the caucus, he basically tell everybody in Iowa he'd rather support someone else?
  
  You know everybody's thinking--If her own campaign people won't support her, why should I?
  
  This would be like Drew Brees signing to play for the Packers the week before an NFC championship game against the Saints.
  1. Lost_in_translation 13 years ago
    
    Sounds like Bachmann should have written a more ironclad contract or atleast not sounded like a crazy woman during the debates.
    
    Still, I don't see why Paul would have bought this guys support. Seems like a waste of money.
    1. Brett L 13 years ago
      
      Like I said on the previous thread, confusion to the enemy. If Michelle Bachmann's guy will go over to that camp, how hostile can he be to the socon agenda? That's the question a lot of socons will be asking themselves today. Since they already have been taught to distrust the major media, they're less likely to buy the newsletters as being an open and shut case of racism. Seems like a good buy to me if it makes 3-5% of the people take another look at you, and that's about the percentage you need to win.
      1. Lost_in_translation 13 years ago
        
        Depends on the traction that the support purchasing discussion gets. Nobody really likes sellouts.
    2. Ken Shultz 13 years ago
      
      Bachman was Ron Paul's biggest critic in the debates, I thought.
      
      She publicly derided his foreign policy as dangerous, etc.
      
      Having her campaign guy come to his side and defend him? Is a poke in the eye to his biggest critic in Iowa. Now instead of talking about Ron Paul's supposedly dangerous foreign policy ideas? She's trying to avoid talking about Ron Paul at all.
      
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sW9-RRRD14I
      
      P.S. Bachman really is a fear-monger. The stupid shit she says and people make fun of her for isn't a real reason to reject her--I'd reject her for the fear-mongering.
  2. John 13 years ago
    
    But people who do that stuff for a living are the worst sorts of whores. None of them have any morals whatsoever. They really are vermin.
  3. Brett L 13 years ago
    
    Dude, you owe your employer the same loyalty they owe you. If they thought firing your ass was going to keep them afloat, they'd do it. If you think quitting your job is going to keep you afloat, then you should do it. Work hard while you're there, deal honestly with your employer, don't confuse them liking you with them being willing to keep you one day beyond they day firing you will keep the doors open.
    1. Ken Shultz 13 years ago
      
      There's a modicum of trust that can never be replaced, and it's destroyed the moment it becomes clear to everyone that you're not loyal.
      
      It is very important to understand that point. It's widely applicable to everything in life.
      
      Never accept a counter-offer from your ex-employer after you've announced that you're leaving to go work for someone else.
      
      I think he had an ethical obligation to stay through the Iowa caucus, but even if he didn't have an ethical obligation, there's a strategic blunder to avoid there, too. Every hiring decision comes down to whether your employer can sleep well at night knowing that you're going to work in his or her best interests.
      
      Once your employer no longer has that modicum of trust in you? You're a rental. And the long term prospects of rentals are bleak.
      1. Brett L 13 years ago
        
        This guy's job is over in November win, lose or draw. His choice was not to have it end January 3rd. Is there anyone who thinks Michelle Bachmann is going to come in better than 4th in Iowa or anywhere else? No. So you go find another job when the writing is on the wall.
      2. Lost_in_translation 13 years ago
        
        Sounds like an issue for the guy. My only concern would be how this plays for Paul. Buying support seems like a short term benefit with a long term losing strategy. Maybe not, this could be one of those "making sausage" moments.
      3. Sky Captain AuH20 13 years ago
        
        Eh, it's politics. The job is to be a whore. Just remember to keep your jaw loose and limber.
      4. cthorm 13 years ago
        
        Ken,
        
        This is bullshit.
        
        "Never accept a counter-offer from your ex-employer after you've announced that you're leaving to go work for someone else."
        
        There are plenty of reasons why it would be a good idea to do this. There are only two reasons that it could be a bad idea: you really wanted the other job, or you want to work at the existing job for a long time.
        
        If you take the counter offer you get higher base pay for now, avoid looking like someone who jumps ship at every chance, and can continue to look for a much better gig. Who gives a damn if this employer doesn't trust you? If you were looking seriously in the first place you were already a rental there. Better to jack up your rent while you can before you make the next switch. Worked damn well for me.
        
        Ken Shultz 13 years ago
        
        Who gives a damn if this employer doesn't trust you?
        
        You need to rethink that.
        
        It typically takes 6 months or more to fully train somebody at a new job. It can take that much time or more to find someone who's qualified--that's before training starts.
        
        Most of the time, when employers offer you a counter offer? The calculation isn't about how much it's going to cost them to keep you there at a higher salary forever. The calculation is about how much it will cost to keep you there--for another year--while they find someone to replace you.
        
        If you're not happy working for me, but you're willing to leave over a few bucks? Then the chances of you being happy working for me aren't very good generally. You're a marginal guy. You're not somebody your employer is going to invest training in. You're not somebody your employer is going to consider for a promotion. Why would they promote somebody who's on the margin to leave?
        
        And you're not somebody your employer is going to tell any of that to, either!
        
        More often than not, they're just gonna make the counteroffer and give themselves a year to replace you. And the worst victims of this? Never even understand what happened. They just know that they're at the back of the line for vacation and promotions. They see their responsibilities drifting to someone else a year later. They see their careers stagnate.
        
        And they never know why.
        
        P.S. This isn't just about employers. Once you break up with your significant other? You generally don't want to accept any counteroffers there, either.
        
        Brett L 13 years ago
        
        "P.S. This isn't just about employers. Once you break up with your significant other? You generally don't want to accept any counteroffers there, either."
        
        Two of the happiest couples I know have done exactly this.
        
        Ken Shultz 13 years ago
        
        They were lucky.
        
        not exactly 13 years ago
        
        and you're an idiot ken
        
        honestly, you're wrong about every point you made
        
        cthorm 13 years ago
        
        Ken, did you even read the part where I noted "unless you want to work there for a long time?" By your own estimates (which I agree with) you have 6 months to a year to find yourself another job, and when you do get that job offer you'll be working with a higher base to begin with. If you're late in your career that might not be a good thing, but if you're young you can get 2 quick jumps in salary.
        
        This works best if you've already been effectively capped-out at your current job, as I was. I went from a pretty chill job making somewhere around $57k, to about $80k at a much better firm (I'm 25). I wouldn't have gotten that higher offer if, 6 months earlier, I had not used another job offer to force a salary increase at my existing job.
  4. Mike M. 13 years ago
    
    Most of these campaign manager/consultant types are the kind of scum who would sell their own mother for a quick buck. I'd never be able to fully trust one of these creeps.
    1. Karl Rove 13 years ago
      
      Ouch!
      1. Kaon Kristen 13 years ago
        
        Gimmie a fuckin break, Karl - everyone knows you can't feel pain.
3. Troy 13 years ago
  
  That isn't a problem, John. You only hire cheap, fat hookers.
4. Ken Shultz 13 years ago
  
  If I hire a hooker tonight, I guess you can say she "supports me".
  
  I think the analogy is more like Paul hired Bachman's hooker to tell everyone in Iowa that he was really in love with Ron Paul all along...
  
  And, just for the record, people who are willing to sabotage their own employers like that? Their odds for a long term paycheck aren't so hot.
  
  Now that he's switched sides and says he loved Ron Paul all along, you think Ron Paul really believes this hooker has a heart of gold?
  
  I wouldn't want to be in a situation where I had to depend on this guy's loyalty.
  
  He should have waited until after Iowa. From Ron Paul's strategic perspective, I think Bachman really was Ron Paul's biggest critic in the debates--describing his foreign policy as dangerous, etc. This probably does help Ron Paul.
  
  It could conceivably back-fire, though.
  1. John 13 years ago
    
    You say that. But all those people are back stabbing scum. It is just the profession. No one will care.
    1. Lost_in_translation 13 years ago
      
      If the general population would just realize that we couldget past all this endorsement nonsense.
    2. Ken Shultz 13 years ago
      
      I don't know anything about this guy. He may have some huge advantage that people come to Iowa for specifically...
      
      If you have a donor list in Iowa, and you can plug a candidate into the local Republican party infrastructure in a place like Iowa? If you have the contacts, and the people on that list will return your calls? I suspect that's worth a lot of money to politicians who want to be president.
      
      So, maybe he has something to offer the next batch of candidates that come through Iowa four years from now, regardless.
      
      Commercial real estate can be a tricky business, too. There are people I wouldn't ever put myself in a position where I had to depend on them. That ends up meaning there are people with which I wouldn't do deals because the risk of having to depend on that person is just too great.
      
      If I think you may have shot the last person in the back who depended on you to make him or her look good in Iowa, why the hell would I hire you to watch my back?
Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago

Rick Santorum is surging in Iowa

Second worst porno ever.
1. John 13 years ago
  
  Socons really are a cheap date. Throw them a bone on abortion and they are yours forever even if you are a thieving shitbag like Santorum.
  1. Troy 13 years ago
    
    That is what I was thinking too. Especially when Perry said something stupid about being against abortion, even in the case of rape. That is all you have to say, "I am against abortion, even in the case of rape..." and you have the idiots in your pocket.
2. Brett L 13 years ago
  
  Please. SF writes worse on his bad days.
  1. Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago
    
    For Reason's sake, don't invoke it!
John 13 years ago

http://dailycaller.com/2011/12.....un-rights/

Obama plans full scale assault on gun rights in a second term.
1. RoboCain 13 years ago
  
  So says Wayne LaPierre, without much by way of fact to back it up, but it doesn't mean it isn't true.
2. Field Marshall Gill 13 years ago
  
  Oh, please, John, next you will be claiming that Fast and Furious was an attempt...oh wait....never mind.
  1. R C Dean 13 years ago
    
    The amazing thing is that Holder and the DOJ gang are still pushing for more gun control based on shootings involving "illegal" weapons.
    1. RoboCain 13 years ago
      
      It's not amazing. It was their plan from the beginning.
      1. Maxxx 13 years ago
        
        And the media will play along.
        
        Appalachian Australian 13 years ago
        
        Nice to see you again, Maxxx.
    2. mad libertarian guy 13 years ago
      
      "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain."
Bee Tagger 13 years ago

Robert Reich: Obama will run with Hillary in 2012.

Just imagine if Robert Reich was right about anything, ever. This would be such huge news.
1. Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago
  
  My political prediction for 2012 (based on absolutely no inside information): Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden swap places.
  
  How does ones own deepest hopes not count as inside information?
  1. Brett L 13 years ago
    
    Dear God, no. Joe Biden to the Department of State? Like we don't have enough wars going already.
    1. Citizen Nothing 13 years ago
      
      Robert Reich: Obama will run with Hillary in 2012.
      
      I've been saying this for months. I guess I'm as smart as Robert Reich! Woo hoo!
      1. Field Marshall Gill 13 years ago
        
        I guess I'm as smart as Robert Reich!
        
        This is about like cheering the fact that you are as tall as Robert Reich.
        
        Citizen Nothing 13 years ago
        
        That too! Woo hoo!
      2. MJ 13 years ago
        
        Some people need to set more realistic standards for themselves.
  2. Pro Libertate 13 years ago
    
    It would be a good way to get an incompetent out of State.
    1. Pro Libertate 13 years ago
      
      Oh, I missed the part about Biden taking State. No, that makes no sense. Why bother?
      1. Isaac Bartram 13 years ago
        
        Just goes to show. There is someone less qualified.
    2. Brett L 13 years ago
      
      Honestly, I think she's done a competant job. It took her about a year and a half to get the career guys to tow the lion, but now State is the one agency that isn't rife with headline making fuckups. Do I agree with the policy she is pursuing? Nope. But I have to admit that the Department of State has managed to get all its shit in one sock.
      1. Pro Libertate 13 years ago
        
        Her job is policy and in interacting with high-level officials of other countries. Both have been done poorly. The fact that State isn't a disaster might have more to do with the many there who aren't political appointees. Or it may just be dumb luck.
        
        SFC B 13 years ago
        
        I think State only doesn't look like a disaster because they're being compared to other Departments like Justice, Transportation, and Energy. Short of actually killing a head of state during a state dinner I doubt that the Department of State could fuck something up as badly as Justice has with Fast and Furious.
        
        Eric Holder 13 years ago
        
        Fuck you, racist!
2. John 13 years ago
  
  I don't see how Hillary would help. I guess maybe it would get a certain breed of middle class suburban mom to ignore the fact that their husbands are now unemployed. But I think most of them will vote D anyway.
  1. Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago
    
    I really doubt the Clintons are stupid enough to get any closer to that sinking ship, anyway. Watch it slip under from the relative safety of the State Department dinghy, get a facelift and live to challenge President Romney in 2016.
    1. Lost_in_translation 13 years ago
      
      Cute, you think candidate Romney will be calling himself president in 2016.
3. Troy 13 years ago
  
  I'm sorry, but I can't respect anyone to short to ride the "It's a small world" ride at disney land.
  1. Brett L 13 years ago
    
    Oh dear God. Now I've got to go out and smash garden gnomes to get that goddam song out of my head. It burns! It burns!
    1. Isaac Bartram 13 years ago
      
      It's not as annoying as the just plain wrongheaded shit that Reich spouts.
4. juris imprudent 13 years ago
  
  Just imagine if Robert Reich was right about anything, ever.
  
  Sadly, my imagination doesn't go to 11.
5. MJ 13 years ago
  
  Why would Hillary want that?
  
  The Secretary of State exercises real constitutional authority over policy while the VP's constitutional job is to sit around waiting for the President to die.
Lord Humungus 13 years ago

Not sure if this was already posted - but a must-read:

Kevin Williamson: Repo Men
http://www.nationalreview.com/.....amson?pg=1

Here's what Wall Street doesn't want: It doesn't want to hear from Sarah Palin or Michele Bachmann or even Newt Gingrich, or suffer any sort of tea-party populism. It wants you rubes to shut up about Jesus and please pay your mortgages. It doesn't want to hear from such traditional Republican constituencies as Christian conservatives, moral traditionalists, pro-lifers, or friends of the Second Amendment. It doesn't even want to hear much from the Chamber of Commerce crowd, because those guys are used-car dealers and grocery-store owners and for the most part strictly from hick, so far as Wall Street is concerned. Wall Street wants an administration and a Congress ? and a country ? that believes what is good for Wall Street is good for America, whether that is true or isn't. Wall Street doesn't want free markets ? it wants friends, favors, and fealty.
1. John 13 years ago
  
  Shorter Wall Street:
  
  Fuck you pay me.
2. Restoras 13 years ago
  
  +1
3. SIV 13 years ago
  
  That piece is as close as NRO has gotten to a Ron Paul endorsement. I await a real one from Derb.
  1. KDN 13 years ago
    
    Derb is basically a closed-borders libertarian, as contradictory as that stance might be. I don't think he can stomach actually endorsing the guy even though they might have everything else in common, including the bitter and crotchety great uncle gimmick. Paul's on the wrong side in the fight against the great America-destroying Mexican invasion and as such must be stopped.
    1. Brett L 13 years ago
      
      Eh. I'm not a closed-borders libertarian, but I am a sovereignty is one of the few legitimate powers of a state. So I think we should have much looser rules, rigorously enforced. Everyone coming in gets checked for public health and against a wanted felon database. Then they are welcome to stay. Citizenship requirements would be more stringent. But the current system encourages all sorts of heinous shit and I'd rather have completely open borders than the current system.
      
      Also, I'd carry a grudge, too, if I stood in line for a decade and these other people just get citizenship because there's a bunch of them.
    2. Lord Humungus 13 years ago
      
      as far as I can tell, Derbyshire is a Ron Paul supporter.
      1. KDN 13 years ago
        
        as far as I can tell, Derbyshire is a Ron Paul supporter.
        
        That's not surprising, but I just can't see him actively pushing for a Paul win.
Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago

UNITED NATIONS ? The flag of the United Nations flew at half-mast Wednesday at the world's body headquarters in New York and its Geneva offices to mark the funeral for late North Korean leader Kim Jong-Il.

Are you shitting me? For his death, they should have added a second pole on top of the first one, just so they could fly the stupid U.N. flag higher.
1. Bee Tagger 13 years ago
  
  I'm just surprised the UN did anything effectively, even if it was offending the sensibilities of every decent person alive.
2. Brett L 13 years ago
  
  I'm sure they did the same for Vaclav Havel, right?
3. DJF 13 years ago
  
  Isn't the UN still at war or with North Korea?
  1. Eduard van Haalen 13 years ago
    
    That's an excellent point.
    
    But these funeral obsequies for tyrants are very moving - we should have more of them.
    1. Restoras 13 years ago
      
      I see what you did there...
    2. Spoonman. 13 years ago
      
      /this
4. mad libertarian guy 13 years ago
  
  Kim Jong-Il was a communist. The UN is full of people who would love to make a socialist world with them at its head. Jong-Il was one of their heroes.
sarcasmic 13 years ago

MILF poll.
Kate Beckinsale or Ali Larter?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs.....ghter.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs.....cated.html
1. John 13 years ago
  
  Larter, although she has way too many clothes on there.
  1. sarcasmic 13 years ago
    
    You sure about that?
    
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs.....-look.html
    1. John 13 years ago
      
      Yup. Larter is better looking. The 70s called and they would like to ask Kate for their hair back.
      1. Red Rocks Rockin 13 years ago
        
        The 70s was one of the best hair decades in American history, so I see no problem with this.
        
        RoboCain 13 years ago
        
        It was definitely better than the 80's.
        
        Eighties hair was the worst thing ever.
        
        Clich? Bandit 13 years ago
        
        FUCK YOU ROBO!!!! If they hadnt outlawed Aquanet due to its ozone dpleteing properties we would STILL see big hair...I miss the hell out of big hair and leg warmers...and askew torn neckj sweaters.
  2. sarcasmic 13 years ago
    
    Larter
    
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs.....ikini.html
    1. John 13 years ago
      
      She has no boobs, which is a real drawback. But still better looking. And has good taste in dogs to boot.
      1. RoboCain 13 years ago
        
        "25th August 2008"
        
        She grew boobs after she got pregnant.
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        Child birth actually helps the looks of some women.
      2. AlmightyJB 13 years ago
        
        Kate's not exactly Dolly Parton
  3. sarcasmic 13 years ago
    
    I have to ask "which one would I rather have on my lap?"
  4. RoboCain 13 years ago
    
    John, I thought you didn't like skinny women.
    
    Anyway, yes, the correct answer is Larter.
    1. John 13 years ago
      
      They are both too skinny. But Larter is the better of the two. I wouldn't kick her out of bed. But she needs to gain a few pounds and find some breasts.
      1. sarcasmic 13 years ago
        
        For me it's a tossup. I wouldn't kick either of them out of bed.
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs.....apart.html
        
        If you don't mind an IQ south of 80, Katie Perry looks better in a bikini than both of them.
        
        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs.....apart.html
        
        sarcasmic 13 years ago
        
        Day late and a dollar short.
        
        I posted that one yesterday.
        
        RoboCain 13 years ago
        
        What makes you think Katy Perry is so stupid?
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        Have you ever heard her talk?
        
        sarcasmic 13 years ago
        
        What makes you think Katy Perry is so stupid?
        
        She married Russell Brand?
        
        RoboCain 13 years ago
        
        He is a funny guy who makes a good living.
        
        # 13 years ago
        
        those are indeed some A+ shots right there
        
        Troy 13 years ago
        
        I am a small titty sort of guy. But god damn Katie has some nice fucking tits.
        
        Mr. Chartreuse 13 years ago
        
        Breasts are fine, but the ass is where it's at. So far, zippo on perry and Beckinsale. Can't really tell on Larter.
      2. AlmightyJB 13 years ago
        
        Larter with Perrys boobs.
        
        RoboCain 13 years ago
        
        That would look ridiculous.
2. Eduard van Haalen 13 years ago
  
  A guy who might be Beckinsale's bodyguard is looking straight at the camera. He's probably trying to remember if they have a restraining order out on this photographer yet.
  1. Eduard van Haalen 13 years ago
    
    I mean, instead of buying some stalker's photos, you could just sit in an outdoor restaurant in some busy street and watch all the hot women. Then you get to leer at lots of women, not just vicariously leer at just one person. And you get to be outdoors, and your in-person leering adds the personal touch so much missed in today's fragmented, bureaucratized world.
    1. Ska 13 years ago
      
      And you wouldn't even need to drink your beer out of a paper bag.
3. Restoras 13 years ago
  
  Beckinsale for me, though not by much.
  1. Troy 13 years ago
    
    It is almost too close to call.
4. Troy 13 years ago
  
  Beckinsale, because I like brunettes.
  1. RoboCain 13 years ago
    
    I do too, but Beckinsale comes across as a prude, while Larter knows how to totally eye-fuck a camera.
5. Pip 13 years ago
  
  Sarah's prettier.
SugarFree 13 years ago

Mitt Romney still "uneasy with off-the-cuff remarks, unnatural at chitchat, and spare with his emotions."

They spent so much time on getting the hair to look real, they neglected to work on the "small talk" module and the "hoo-mon emotions" chip. But you should see him work a pair of chopsticks! Like that has any traction in Iowa! Goddamn out-sourcing!
1. John 13 years ago
  
  Those older models just don't have the RAM to run that many functions at once.
  1. SugarFree 13 years ago
    
    "The 600 series had rubber skin. We spotted them easy, but these are new. They look human - sweat, bad breath, everything. Very hard to spot. I had to wait till he moved on you before I could zero him."
    1. Cytotoxic 13 years ago
      
      All I can see now is naked expressionless Romney materializing out of a mid-air electrical storm. I hear the soundtrack too.
2. Tim 13 years ago
  
  "you green blooded son of a bitch!"
3. Lord Humungus 13 years ago
  
  so Romney = me (at least personality-wise).
  1. SugarFree 13 years ago
    
    Considering it's Romney, he's probably comfortable and relaxed in social situations and they are whipping up a lie to attract votes from folks on the spectrum.
    1. Tim 13 years ago
      
      "I didn't mean to say that the Enterprise should be hauling garbage. I meant to say that it should be hauled away AS garbage" -- Romney working the crowd at Comic Con.
      1. Eduard van Haalen 13 years ago
        
        "Instead of firing first at that banking representative, Han should have had the Empire bail him out."
        
        Joe M 13 years ago
        
        Should've just gone with the more direct "Greedo shot first!"
  2. Brett L 13 years ago
    
    Who knew he was an IT guy at heart?
4. Warty 13 years ago
  
  Does Mitt Romney dream of electric sheep?
  1. SugarFree 13 years ago
    
    One of my Christmas presents...
    1. R C Dean 13 years ago
      
      I got one with the following on it:
      
      i > u
      
      My new favorite.
      1. Ted S. 13 years ago
        
        Oldie but goodie
  2. Sky Captain AuH20 13 years ago
    
    That book was TRIPPY.
5. Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago
  
  Q: Governor Romney, healthcare costs have risen in Massachusetts since Romneycare was enacted.
  
  A: This sort of thing has cropped up before, and it has always been due to human error.
  1. Rich 13 years ago
    
    +9000
Ken E. 13 years ago

David Horowitz and Co. are really ramping up the assault on Paul: today's entry.
1. Field Marshall Gill 13 years ago
  
  Horowitz lost his mind when Obama was nominated. He was certain that you couldn't oppose the man unless you were a racist. I used to go to that site fairly regularly but no more.
  1. John 13 years ago
    
    Horowitz endorsed Obama? Really? I never have heard that.
    1. Field Marshall Gill 13 years ago
      
      No, I didn't say he endorsed him. He remained in opposition to his positions but claimed everyone else who opposed him did so because they were racist. It was really bizarre.
RoboCain 13 years ago

#OccupyNipples

"If you've you ever heard a baby cry when their hungry, it's really unpleasant," said Cora Shaw, a Chicago mom. "And it's really unfair to them. He knows I've got food all the time and he wants it, so to hear him screaming and wanting food and me not giving it to him, he doesn't understand that."

http://www.nbcchicago.com/news.....05428.html
1. JW 13 years ago
  
  Huh. Still not giving a shit about their indignant outrage and demands to accede to their demands.
  
  Also, boobies.
  1. Troy 13 years ago
    
    Also, boobies.
    
    That is all you really ever have to say.....
2. Joe M 13 years ago
  
  Local moms say the demonstration is meant to raise awareness
  
  I could not possibly be more aware of the subject, but thanks for trying.
3. Montani Semper Liberi 13 years ago
  
  Michelle Hickman, a Houston mother of four, apparently was nursing in a remote area of a Target store when staffers told her to move into a fitting room. There were so many employees confronting her, she said, that it was time to speak up.
  "Basically I got harassed by a whole handful of women Target employees," she said.
  
  I'm struggling to think of a reason other than attention whoring why that woman wouldn't have wanted to go to a private fitting room rather than flashing her boob to any random passerby.
  1. Brett L 13 years ago
    
    Honestly, I don't see why people had a problem with it. But the store can make whatever stupid rules it wants. To me, and I've heard women say this too, there's nothing the least bit sexual about a kid on a tit. No more than changing a diaper is some disgusting chore. Babies need things now. That's how it is.
    1. Rule 34 13 years ago
      
      "there's nothing the least bit sexual about a kid on a tit. No more than changing a diaper is some disgusting chore"
      
      Heh, heh, heh.
  2. Joe M 13 years ago
    
    She was covered with a blanket.
  3. mad libertarian guy 13 years ago
    
    For the same reason why no one asks you to eat that box of crackers you opened in the dressing room.
    
    It's a woman feeding her child. It's no one else's fault that people like you see boobies as so heinous that they must be hidden while doing a job so innocent as feeding a baby.
4. Appalachian Australian 13 years ago
  
  One of the few victories for liberty in recent times has been getting nearly all states to decriminalise public breastfeeding.
5. Destrudo 13 years ago
  
  I have no problem with women breast feeding in public, as long as they have no problem with me walking by and saying, "I'll have what he's having."
DJF 13 years ago

""'Gen. Petraeus almost quit over Obama's decision to reduce troop levels in Afghanistan."''

Has the US military fallen this far that a US general thinks that leaking a story about "almost quit"ing shows anything besides the fact that he wimped out.

What next, that when he was with Obama he showed his disapproval by not laughing out loud at the Presidents jokes but instead only smiled.
1. John 13 years ago
  
  I agree. If it was that bad, then quit. If it wasn't, then shut the fuck up. Petreus is wildly overrated.
RoboCain 13 years ago

Rick Perry running for Prime Minister,
Stephen Harper wishes Canadians a Merry Christmas

"Every barrel of oil that comes out of those sands in Canada is a barrel of oil that we don't have to buy from a foreign source," Mr. Perry said in Clarinda, earning a loud round of enthusiastic applause.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.....seid=auto#

http://pm.gc.ca/eng/media.asp?.....26&id=4552
1. Brett L 13 years ago
  
  Canadians aren't foreigners. They're like our weird cousins. Sure we don't want to live too close to them, but their antics make us laugh.
  1. DJF 13 years ago
    
    That is what they want you to think!!!!! But really they have plans to conquer, first the USA and then the world
    
    They are just waiting for the right moment in winter when a "CANADIAN" arctic front rolls down into the US shutting down the USA. They then cut off power, oil and natural gas to have us frieze. Then all those Canadian motor homes in Arizona and Florida, combine with Canadians attacking from their Caribbean winter strong holds, along with those so-called hockey players in even southern cities who are really assault troops and finally wave after wave of Molson swilling snowmobile riders take over the country.
    
    The next thing you know we will all be singing 'Oh Canada" in French!!!!!!
    1. Brett L 13 years ago
      
      Please. In North Florida, we've been fleecing Canadians for years. Its practically the state sport. This would just give us more and richer marks.
    2. Citizen Nothing 13 years ago
      
      ...those so-called hockey players... who are really assault troops
      
      My city has the Blue Jackets, so I don't think I have to worry.
      1. Appalachian Australian 13 years ago
        
        If we're going to compare hockey players to assault troops, the Blue Jackets are basically the First Army.
        
        SFC B 13 years ago
        
        The Blue Jackets are a bunch of overweight, unfit guys who haven't been seen a line unit since Clinton and are camping out in a trainer position racking up service time while hoping to avoid deployment?
  2. Ted S. 13 years ago
    
    The funny Canadians all come to the US to make careers for themselves in the entertainment industry.
    
    The rest stay behind and bitch about what an awful place the US is. 😉
Lord Humungus 13 years ago

The dirty secret in Uncle Sam's Friday trash dump
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....story.html

In fiscal 2011, the cost of the promises grew from $30.9 trillion to $33.8 trillion. To put that in context, consider that the total value of companies traded on U.S. stock markets is $13.1 trillion, based on the Wilshire 5000 index, and the value of the equity in U.S. taxpayers' homes, according to Freddie Mac, is $6.2 trillion. Said another way, there is not enough wealth in America to meet those promises.
1. Spoonman. 13 years ago
  
  But "we're bankrupt" is a lie, according to Those Who Know.
  
  Dipshits.
  1. Appalachian Australian 13 years ago
    
    Well, He Who Knows isn't bankrupt--he's got millions of dollars.
    
    And ample food reserves.
  2. Kaon Kristen 13 years ago
    
    The reasoning behind the "we're not really bankrupt" arguement is that there are still rich people out there. And if there are still rich people, they must not be paying their fair share. Therefore, Uncle Sam just needs to go in with tanks and troops to collect what's due.
RoboCain 13 years ago

Woman caught making meth inside south Tulsa Walmart

http://www.fox23.com/news/loca.....KsN_w.cspx
1. Bee Tagger 13 years ago
  
  Won't someone please think of the mom and pop meth trailer shops that wal-mart continues to destroy?
RoboCain 13 years ago

NY Times Proves CCL Holders More Law-Abiding Than the Population. Unintentionally.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.c.....more-90403
RoboCain 13 years ago

Time to elevate the public discourse about sexual assault

http://falserapesociety.blogsp......html#more
John 13 years ago

http://www.politico.com/news/s.....70907.html

The fact that Holder was caught red handed selling said illegal guns for the purpose of creating the argument doesn't stop Holder from saying that we need tougher gun laws because illegal guns are killing cops. Amazing.
1. Appalachian Australian 13 years ago
  
  Where's MNG?
  1. Restoras 13 years ago
    
    Oh, he'll be along.
2. Warty 13 years ago
  
  What do you expect, shame?
  1. John 13 years ago
    
    BTW you asked the other day what book I am reading on the French Revolution. Citizens by Simon Schima.
    1. Warty 13 years ago
      
      Thanks, I'll check it out.
    2. Kaon Kristen 13 years ago
      
      *Schama
      1. Clich? Bandit 13 years ago
        
        I preferred callipygian (but with a K) better Kristen. And I am still using that word as often as possible.
Appalachian Australian 13 years ago

Reason is back-dating these posts. There were NO A.M. links at 9 AM!
1. rsi 13 years ago
  
  Investigate Nixon!!
Lord Humungus 13 years ago

Middle Class Aided Its Own Decline
http://www.rasmussenreports.co.....wn_decline

Frugality used to be a central middle-class theme. What happened to it? We now read the stories of middle-class families in free fall because they lost a job and had no savings. Back in the mists of time, there was a rule about setting aside six months of salary to cover a possible job loss. Not only did the middle class stop saving, but it famously borrowed to maintain extravagant living beyond what its stagnating salaries could support.
1. John 13 years ago
  
  There is something to that. But there is something else going on here too. In the last 40 years we have taxes the shit out people and also raised the prices of nearly everything via taxes and regulation. Maybe that has something to do with it. People just were not willing to be be poor in order to pay for the government.
  1. Citizen Nothing 13 years ago
    
    I agree that absent profligate government spending/taxation, the middle class would be a lot richer. But absent the 3,000 square-foot home, the new car every two years, the yearly trips to Disney World and Aruba, et al, the middle class would be a lot richer, too.
    1. John 13 years ago
      
      We are a lot richer as a society than we were. So the middle class ought to be richer as well. I don't begrudge people their vacations and nice homes. I do begrudge the government however.
      1. Citizen Nothing 13 years ago
        
        I begrudge no one anything. Just don't come to me (who drives shitty cars, never carries a credit-card balance, scrimps to feed the 401K) to bail your profligate ass out when you go broke.
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        I won't bail you out. But I would cut your taxes and stop trying to control how you live.
        
        Citizen Nothing 13 years ago
        
        Oh, you'll bail me out if the government says you'll bail me out.
        
        J_L_B 13 years ago
        
        Go over to the CNN boards and they'll insist that you aren't capable of funding your own retirement because you just aren't as smart as our benevolent government bureaucrats.
        
        Maxxx 13 years ago
        
        I begrudge no one anything. Just don't come to me (who drives shitty cars, never carries a credit-card balance, scrimps to feed the 401K) to bail your profligate ass out when you go broke.
        
        Or alternatively they are trying to get back what a corrupt system stole from them.
  2. Concerned Citizen 13 years ago
    
    Don't underestimate the Fed's role in this. Per Walter Williams, in the first 100 years of our Republic, wholesale prices fell 6%. Gold and silver coin were legal tender in payment of debt in those days. In the next 100 years, with the Federal Reserve in place to "stabilize" the economy, wholesale prices have risen 1,600%. Between this inflation and the taxes and regulations, households have gone from one paycheck supporting many, to two paychecks supporting one or two children.
    1. R C Dean 13 years ago
      
      Somewhere recently, I saw an analysis that the economy grew an average of something like 4% a year before the Fed was established, and 3% a year after. With compounding, the economy would be twice as big now if it grown at the pre-Fed rate.
      
      Now, how you guesstimate the rate of growth in the 19th and early 20th centuries is a major caveat here. I just throw it out (link-free!) for your consideration.
      1. Concerned Citizen 13 years ago
        
        These are the kinds of facts that the anti-Paul idiots either ignore or can't comprehend.
        
        mad libertarian guy 13 years ago
        
        This is but one entry in a long list.
2. Appalachian Australian 13 years ago
  
  Girls from the middle class -- or from what once was -- now scamper through the mall baring cleavage, and wearing thick eyeliner and outrageous heels. Their intellectual interests seem nil, and their apparent need to push their sexual availability on boys depresses the feminist soul.
  
  An author loses credibility when they point to what those darn young whippersnappers are wearing as evidence of social decline.
  1. Brett L 13 years ago
    
    Right. They used to have the class to wear painted on blue jeans, platform heels, and tight shirts. Now, they flaunt themselves shamelessly.
    1. Appalachian Australian 13 years ago
      
      So I'm guessing the "feminist soul" would prefer they gambol about in burqas?
      1. Brett L 13 years ago
        
        Only the ones prettier than that particular feminist soul.
  2. RoboCain 13 years ago
    
    As opposed to what? Slutwalk?
  3. Red Rocks Rockin 13 years ago
    
    Back in the mists of time, there was a rule about setting aside six months of salary to cover a possible job loss. Not only did the middle class stop saving, but it famously borrowed to maintain extravagant living beyond what its stagnating salaries could support...Their intellectual interests seem nil, and their apparent need to push their sexual availability on boys depresses the feminist soul.
    
    Harrop's lack of self-awareness here comes as no surprise. You and your tribe spend 50 years undermining what you consider to be oppressive social mores, you shouldn't be surprised when the ensuing generations take your arguments to their logical conclusion.
    1. Red Rocks Rockin 13 years ago
      
      Many middle-class parents of the '50s and '60s well remembered the privations of the Great Depression. Thus, they raised their children to be survivors in an uncertain world, not as princes and princesses who can do no wrong. They understood the importance of education and manners. They regarded teachers as authorities to be respected.
      
      Here's another example--Harrop's entire philosophy revolves around "FUCK YOU, DAD!" Yet, she can't understand why traditional authority figures aren't respected anymore.
3. DJF 13 years ago
  
  There was also a time when banks were not leveraged up to their ears thinking that there would be no run on the bank, when businesses actually had parts on hand instead of "just in time", when people and businesses did not use short term loans to cover long term debts, when financial experts did not tell you that cash money was wasting your money and you should be all in making that money work.
  
  Short term economic thinking has a lot of advantages since you are maximizing your use of your assets. But when things go bad and you can't get that short term loan reapproved, or when that one supplier that supplies that vital just in time part goes out of business or when your atm card and credit cards get stolen then having some longer term thinking and planning helps a lot
4. Jordan 13 years ago
  
  Anybody who lived beyond their means deserves blame, but the fact remains that the Federal Reserve worked overtime to disincentivize saving.
5. SFC B 13 years ago
  
  Just yesterday I was working on trying to increase the amount of money I save. I was doing the math on the CDs available and I realized that, even if I was able to make the maximum deposit and keep it in there until it matured, it would earn me about $300.
  
  I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the middle class "frugality" of yesteryear was actually people getting enough value out of saving to make saving more attractive than spending. Between the crap interest available on simple savings products and inflation the only reason to save is for the sake of saving.
  
  This cannot be good.
  1. rsi 13 years ago
    
    Hey! back off Sarge!! At the last check they were offering .35% interest on CDs!!
    1. SFC B 13 years ago
      
      I saw a commercial with George Costanza's dad yelling at me about how his bank gave him 5x the interest rate on a savings account. I remarked to my mother that they might as well have said 20x because when you're multiplying by 0 it really doesn't matter what you're tossing out there.
      1. rsi 13 years ago
        
        People at work in their 40s are cashing in their 401ks. They've taken big hits on them lately. I tell them to hang in but hey don't want to.
        
        If you think we the boomers are a prob, wait until these peeps retire (or at least try to).
        
        rsi 13 years ago
        
        BTW SFC RET USA
        
        Red Rocks Rockin 13 years ago
        
        People at work in their 40s are cashing in their 401ks. They've taken big hits on them lately. I tell them to hang in but hey don't want to.
        
        If the government makes investment in bonds mandatory for 401Ks, they probably won't regret the decision to cash out.
        
        SFC B 13 years ago
        
        I see the writing on the wall for my retirement and TSP. I seriously doubt that my military retirement will available to me for the duration of my post-military life.
  2. Appalachian Australian 13 years ago
    
    The only place to park your money these days is either in a small business where you're a big enough investor to matter or in commodity speculation.
    
    I'm personally uncomfortable with gold at $1500, there's just no room for growth left, and if it gets too high, the government can just ban gold ownership again.
    1. Concerned Citizen 13 years ago
      
      Ban gold ownership? Why, that's un-Constitutional! Wait, the ghost of FDR is trying to tell me something.
Lord Humungus 13 years ago

Americans see Obama as farthest from their own politics; Romney, Huntsman, Paul the closest
http://news.investors.com/Arti.....-obama.htm

A provocative new poll out this morning indicates that Barack Obama has a whole lot more convincing to do for Americans to see him as the centrist kind of candidate they historically prefer electing to the White House.

On the flip side, the new national Gallup survey finds many Americans already see Republican Mitt Romney as a political moderate. This won't do him any good in the upcoming GOP nominating contests but would stand him in excellent stead if he makes it to the podium in Tampa at next August's national convention to start the general election campaign.

Interestingly, the poll finds Americans also perceive Jon Huntsman and, somehow, Ron Paul as closest to them ideologically along with Romney.
Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago

Is that Megan Mullally on the phone?
Appalachian Australian 13 years ago

Rick Perry was against abortion until he was for it.

(Maybe this will make the anti-Paul abortion abolitionists shut up?)
1. Appalachian Australian 13 years ago
  
  Er, he was for abortion before he was against it. I can't really tell what's going on.
  1. Brett L 13 years ago
    
    As a Democrat, he was for it. As a Republican, he's agin it. The short answer is, he really doesn't give a shit.
    1. sarcasmic 13 years ago
      
      Shorter answer, he's a politician.
Tim 13 years ago

Is Cheetah dead or what?
1. Pro Libertate 13 years ago
  
  So long as men are swinging on vines, from tree to tree, Cheetah will live in our hearts.
Arduin Grimoire 13 years ago

Progressive Era Hacker Griefed Marconi Demonstration

Why the Left Is Losing the Argument over the Financial Crisis
John 13 years ago

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/argen.....45123.html

Argentine President diagnosed with cancer. Cancer strikes another deserving victim.

She is not bad looking. Is there such a thing as "evil sexy"?
1. Brett L 13 years ago
  
  The Bond franchise has made a living off of "evil sexy".
2. Arduin Grimoire 13 years ago
  
  Is there such a thing as "evil sexy"?
  
  Besides Epi, you mean?
  1. Fletch 13 years ago
    
    Is there such a thing as "evil sexy"?
    
    One name.
    
    Linda Fiorentino.
3. Kaon Kristen 13 years ago
  
  Hheeelllllooo..Famke Janssen in GoldenEye
  1. Trespassers W 13 years ago
    
    Ooh, good taste, Kristen.
sarcasmic 13 years ago

Extreme angler catches 40lb fish that kills men by biting off their testicles.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....icles.html
1. Citizen Nothing 13 years ago
  
  What did he use for bait?
  1. sarcasmic 13 years ago
    
    *rimshot*
    1. SugarFree 13 years ago
      
      That's a different type of deadly fish.
2. Fist of Etiquette 13 years ago
  
  Pacu fish are usually found in the Amazon, where they need their teeth to crack into the tough cases of nuts and seeds.
  
  The previously vegetarian fish were introduced to Papua New Guinea 15 years ago to increase stocks.
  
  So they imported it, but when it found there weren't enough hard nuts to eat, it found soft ones.
  1. sarcasmic 13 years ago
    
    *wince*
  2. Tim 13 years ago
    
    Brings new meaning to the term "master baiter"
3. Lorena 13 years ago
  
  At least two fishermen have bled to death after being bitten by the beast although Jeremy believes they were 'pretty unlucky' as it is quite shy.
  
  More like 'pretty not wearing a cup in Pacu-infested waters'.
Lord Humungus 13 years ago

completely OT: Last Tuesday I had to have a root canal. Mutha-fucken-A, I never had worse pain ever. Breaking ribs wasn't half as bad. Thank god for Vicodin, though the pharmacist treated me like a criminal for getting it.
1. John 13 years ago
  
  I will be in my bunk flossing.
2. SugarFree 13 years ago
  
  I've long advocated that all medical professions should have something broken on them during medical training--a forearm, say--and have to spend a few days with no painkillers.
  
  By the way... cold water extraction.
  1. Appalachian Australian 13 years ago
    
    I was expecting an article about making coffee using only cold water, but instead now I'm on a DEA watchlist.
    
    I should have known not to click on a SugarFree link. 🙁
  2. brotherben 13 years ago
    
    I saw an article online day before yesterday. The FDA may be close to approving hydrocodone without any nsaids for pain relief. As usual, I can't find the article now. cheers
    1. brotherben 13 years ago
      
      disregard...I see someone linked it farther down.
3. Pro Libertate 13 years ago
  
  Technically, you are a criminal for even asking.
4. Kaon Kristen 13 years ago
  
  Two words - sedation dentistry. Worth every goddamn penny.
  1. mad libertarian guy 13 years ago
    
    ^^THIS^^
5. Rhywun 13 years ago
  
  I had two last year and they were surprisingly un-painful. One Vicodin each covered it, so I was left with a whole jarful of the things.
Arduin Grimoire 13 years ago

Lobster Girl motivational poster
1. DJF 13 years ago
  
  Thank you, Reason has gone down hill since they stopped having lobster girl pictures on the site.
  1. Brett L 13 years ago
    
    Do I have to drink now under a corollary to the Postrel rule?
  2. Kaon Kristen 13 years ago
    
    Wasn't she posted a couple months ago? Do boobies lose their effect if they're posted every day, or are they hotter if they only pop out occasionally?
Brett L 13 years ago

Pissed off hacker, 1903 style

"LATE one June afternoon in 1903 a hush fell across an expectant audience in the Royal Institution's celebrated lecture theatre in London. Before the crowd, the physicist John Ambrose Fleming was adjusting arcane apparatus as he prepared to demonstrate an emerging technological wonder: a long-range wireless communication system developed by his boss, the Italian radio pioneer Guglielmo Marconi. The aim was to showcase publicly for the first time that Morse code messages could be sent wirelessly over long distances. Around 300 miles away, Marconi was preparing to send a signal to London from a clifftop station in Poldhu, Cornwall, UK.

Yet before the demonstration could begin, the apparatus in the lecture theatre began to tap out a message. At first, it spelled out just one word repeated over and over. Then it changed into a facetious poem accusing Marconi of 'diddling the public'. Their demonstration had been hacked - and this was more than 100 years before the mischief playing out on the internet today. Who was the Royal Institution hacker? How did the cheeky messages get there? And why?"
P Brooks 13 years ago

Middle Class Aided Its Own Decline

I made it through about three paragraphs of that. What a heaping helping of maudlin nonsense. Froma Harrop (if that really is your name), seek help.
1. Appalachian Australian 13 years ago
  
  Froma Harrop (born March 18, 1950 in New York City) is a liberal writer and author.
  
  She is also a blogger for RealClearPolitics.
  
  Born in New York City, Harrop was raised in suburban Long Island. After graduating from New York University, she worked on the financial desk at Reuters, covering business and the Federal Reserve.
  
  Man, that's all I needed to know. Wasn't she the one who called tea partiers terrorists and then turned off comments on her blog?
2. Concerned Citizen 13 years ago
  
  We get Harrop regularly in the Columbus Fishwrap. She and Robyn Blumner are as far to the left as one can get.
  1. Citizen Nothing 13 years ago
    
    ...in the Columbus Fishwrap
    
    Hey. Fuck you, too.
    (Actually, I say that with love, since you must be one of the last three subscribers.)
    1. Pro Libertate 13 years ago
      
      I thought it was The Columbus Disgrace?
      1. Pro Libertate 13 years ago
        
        Present company's work aside, of course.
    2. Concerned Citizen 13 years ago
      
      I've been a subscriber since I moved to Cbus in 1986. Love your column in the Sunday edition. But, please, don't mention the Lake Erie islands so much. We love to visit them and don't want to deal with crowds.
3. JW 13 years ago
  
  All I took away from that drek is "Get off my middle class."
Appalachian Australian 13 years ago

Man, I just learned about these obnoxious folks. Pay toilets used to be common in America until these geniuses had them outlawed.

Places like Detroit now have a grand total of 1 public toilet downtown; homeless people (who could well afford a quarter for a place to go) have no place to go to the bathroom.
1. John 13 years ago
  
  Them and the fuckhead disability advocates did it. It is very expensive to make them handicapped accessible. So, they tried passing a law that said no business could turn down a handicapped person wanting to use their bathroom. But that wasn't good enough. They would rather everyone go without than things not be equal.
  1. R C Dean 13 years ago
    
    I had a conversation with a deaf advocate years ago where he confirmed straight up that they would rather have no public telephones at all that public telephones that weren't deaf-accessible.
    
    I was gobsmacked. Even though his peeps would be no worse off under either scenario, he was perfectly happy to make everyone else worse off.
    
    And nobody else in the room (it was a rulemaking negotiation) even batted an eye.
    1. sarcasmic 13 years ago
      
      Equality means the lowest common denominator.
    2. Lost_in_translation 13 years ago
      
      nobody else in the room batted an eye
      
      They didn't hear him? *swish*
    3. John 13 years ago
      
      The deaf culture is some weird sick shit. My wife had a friend who worked at Gauludet. Imagine the worst sort of victim culture turned sideways so that is embraces being handicapped as superior to any other state and you have Gauludet.
2. Sky Captain AuH20 13 years ago
  
  Counterpoint: Have you ever seen the pay toilets of Paris? Those things are gross. Tourists line up in a McDonald's to use a goddamn decent bathroom.
  1. Appalachian Australian 13 years ago
    
    In a competitive pay toilet marketplace, those operating clean pay toilets would be able to set higher prices and earn more profit.
Tim 13 years ago

New Army helmets?
lOOKS VIDEO GAMEY TO ME

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.....dyssey=tab|topnews|img|FRONTPAGE
1. DJF 13 years ago
  
  Looks like someone went down to a motocross dealership and then painted them camouflage colors. I wonder how much of a markup they charge?
  1. Destrudo 13 years ago
    
    Makes sense. Same place the hacks at Bungie got the armor design for their overrated turd franchise!
2. SFC B 13 years ago
  
  It looks like they took the standard ACH and have developed an attachable face-mask for it. Improving the NVG mount is a great idea and something that is long overdue. My first concern with that facemask though is it looks like it is going to make the helmet intolerably hot. My second concern is what it will do to situational awareness. Between hearing protection and the ACH's wear sound is already muffled. Seal off the front of the helmet and it is going to be even worse.
  
  The thing in the article which made me scratch my head was the combination of the remarks that the "Big Army" was ignoring the needs of Soldier's gear, while also stating that the reason for the facemask was that the injury profile has changed.
  
  The reason more Soldiers are taking injuries to the face and jaw is because it is the only part of the head which is exposed. I'd bet that Soldiers aren't suffering more facial injuries than in the past, it's that injuries which used to be fatal or were massive chest injuries are now limited to the face and jaw.
Brett L 13 years ago

Daniel Henniger attacks Ron Paul in the WSJ.

"Let no one deny that swimming eternally amid the rightward waves of American politics is an ever-present school of fish that would solve Washington's spending problem mainly with cuts in the defense budget (ending foreign 'entanglements'), set a place at the nuclear table for Iran ('Who are they going to bomb?'), cut Israel loose, cut the Federal Reserve loose, and legalize many currently controlled substances. "

I swear the WSJ used to be in favor of smaller, less powerful governments and lower taxes when I was younger. Did I just imagine that?
1. John 13 years ago
  
  Yeah but he goes on to say
  
  Mr. Romney is running a campaign strategy indeed targeted at the broad fiscal conservative coalition that emerged in 2010: Hold the worried independents and centrist Democrats by avoiding what in his Dec. 24 Wall Street Journal Weekend Interview he called "incendiary things." OK, we get that. Independent voters are easily flustered, dependent as they are on the policies of strangers.
  
  But if the former Massachusetts governor doesn't reach out pretty soon to the Paul-Perry-Bachmann Republican protest voters, he may never get them. The longer he waits, the more pressure will build for a third-party challenge that will cost him the election. That it would be led by a Ron Paul or Donald Trump is irrelevant to why these people would vote third party?or stay home.
  
  Mr. Romney is going to have to take a risk with some piece of his locked-down strategy?the RomneyCare denial, the "middle-class" ceiling on his tax cut, naming a running mate who could have beaten him in the primaries.
  
  Mr. Romney needs to give these Republicans a reason to come in his direction, before they walk away from him forever.
  
  It was as usual a pretty good column.
  1. Appalachian Australian 13 years ago
    
    Like any of the Paul-Perry-Bachmann voters will get fooled by Romney "reaching out" to them.
  2. Brett L 13 years ago
    
    I guess I'm glad someone learned that lesson from 2008, but Romney is just going to sign a gargantuan 2013 budget from the Republican Congress and it'll be 2003 all over again. Does the WSJ not understand how bad this is going to be?
    1. John 13 years ago
      
      It won't be good. Which is the lesser of the evils, Obama appointing the next two supreme court nominees or Romney doing anything?
      1. Doug 13 years ago
        
        Both are bad. Romney might be the second most dangerous man in America.
        
        But Paul is actually more worrisome. A Paul administration would result in the deaths of Americans and Israelis at the hand of Islamofascists. He'd allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon. He'd end our foriegn bases so the fight would move from over there to here. And he'd cut our military down to where we would be a third rate power, emboldening our enemies to attack us.
        
        Lost_in_translation 13 years ago
        
        So not going to war with Iran will kill more Americans than going to war with them. Got it.
        
        Doug 13 years ago
        
        Preventing Iran from acquiring a weapon that could be used to decimate New York or Tel Aviv would save millions of lives. They've been clear about their intentions and we know they are close. And Paul buries his head in the sand to this.
        
        Lost_in_translation 13 years ago
        
        Jesus Christ man you really think they're suicidal to try and nuke anyone. Iran would be glass before the end of week.
        
        You really ought to calm down before you pee your pants.
        
        Clich? Bandit 13 years ago
        
        I CALL ALMAINIAN!
        
        Clich? Bandit 13 years ago
        
        I CALL ALMAINIAN!
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        It might. You assume that they don't get a vote in the matter. We will go to war with Iran if they decide we will.
        
        I understand your point. But Libertarians don't help themselves by assuming that no country other than the US would ever chose war.
        
        Lost_in_translation 13 years ago
        
        If a country decides to go to war with us, it's pretty obvious what would happen and we wouldn't have to worry about any appearance of nation building. Go in, extract the remnants of civilization from them and leave and none of the mess of worrying about civilians. If we want to Marshall plan them then, we can do it on our terms and for a profit. This preemptive war shit has led no where but bankruptcy and misery.
        
        I'm sure my argument falls flat amongst the pantswetters but it's perfectly logical.
        
        Fuck it though, if the neocons want to ruin us, fine, i keep my plans short term anyway.
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        LIT,
        
        We can sit around and let them hit us first. But considering the kind of damage they could do with a nuke, that is pretty big risk.
        
        And libertarians do themselves no favors with the "pants wetting" rhetoric. In saying that, you are betting all of your credibility that nothing will ever happen. If something ever does happen, that will be the end of any political movement who smugly assured everyone it wouldn't.
        
        Lost_in_translation 13 years ago
        
        And you're betting all your credibility on that something WILL happen. That shit that it's unacceptable that Iran get a nuke is just stating that we're preparing for war for Iran as long as it keeps asserting it's rights as a sovereign nation. What surer way to build up for a war. Just start establishing absolutes and talk yourself into it. Neo-cons are unwilling to look for any third way. Maybe it's not pants wetting then, it's just slavering over the chance to remake yet another country into the image we have for what it should be.
        
        All in the name of anti-terrorism.
        
        Pro Libertate 13 years ago
        
        I doubt seriously that we'll shut down all foreign operations just because Paul gets elected. And Paul has never said that we should stop defending ourselves. If Iran is a real threat and pulling back from the Middle East won't solve it, even a Paul administration is likely to attempt to deal with the threat.
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        You are right Pro. There are some things even a peacenik Libertarian President has to do. I would like to see Paul win if for no other reason to laugh as he disappoints all of his supporters on these issues.
        
        Lost_in_translation 13 years ago
        
        Atleast if Paul starts a war with Iran I'll be comforted by the thought that he tried every other possible option. I look at Bachmann, Gingrich and Santorum and the bloodlust is evident. They truly believe already that we have no option but to start the bombing campaign.
        
        Doug 13 years ago
        
        "I doubt seriously that we'll shut down all foreign operations just because Paul gets elected."
        
        So you're banking on Paul not living up to his own naive rhetoric. Ask Obama supporters how that worked out.
        
        Pro Libertate 13 years ago
        
        No. I'm saying that the risks of an out-of-control government that is killing our economy are about ten thousand times greater than any present foreign risks. Besides, if Paul does start acting more neutrally, why on Earth would a country like Iran give him a reason to return to active intervention?
        
        I'm not even saying that I completely agree with Paul, because I think we are, at least for the time being, stuck with maintaining some aspects of the Pax Americana. But there are simply no other choices. Obama and Romney, doesn't matter who, will keep strumming the lyre as Rome burns.
        
        Doug 13 years ago
        
        "I'm saying that the risks of an out-of-control government that is killing our economy are about ten thousand times greater than any present foreign risks."
        
        A nuke exploded in America would kill our economy more than our admittedly insane amount of government. And then there is the little matter of possibly millions of lives. Sorry, but nukes > than "government too big."
        
        Maxxx 13 years ago
        
        A nuke exploded in America would kill our economy more than our admittedly insane amount of government.
        
        Nope, the insane government is way more destructive than a single nuke.
        
        Lost_in_translation 13 years ago
        
        In foreign policy, it has led to more of what neocons like than what pacifiers like, so if you think Paul will be like Obama you should be happy. He's happily pursued wars that neocons support.
        
        Appalachian Australian 13 years ago
        
        Should we invade Russia too? I hear they have nuclear weapons and an unstable leader.
        
        John 13 years ago
        
        If Russia didn't have nukes and kept saying they were going get them and use them, maybe we should do something to stop that. Iran doesn't have nukes. Maybe they mean what they say. You're only response to Iran's insane statements is "they can't mean that". Why can't they?
        
        Appalachian Australian 13 years ago
        
        Russia has nukes, and they haven't invaded us, so what's the big deal?
        
        The only nation that has used nuclear weapons against civilians is the U.S.
        
        Doug 13 years ago
        
        "The only nation that has used nuclear weapons against civilians is the U.S."
        
        Here we go. Scratch a Paulite, get an America hater.
        
        Maxxx 13 years ago
        
        Here we go. Scratch a Paulite, get an America hater.
        
        So which other country has used nukes?
        
        It's telling that neo con douchebags thinks telling the truth = hating.
        
        Lost_in_translation 13 years ago
        
        I think they fully intend to develop nuclear technology and likely nuclear weapons, just like Pakistan, India and North Korea, three nations that apparently were acceptable in developing them.
        
        Timon19 13 years ago
        
        They can't mean that because they don't. Naive Westerners are, for some reason, hard-wired to completely fuck up the concept of "face" and the Middle Eastern way of negotiating. The bluster and threats will continue to make insecure 'Muricans shit themselves as long as 'Muricans remain insecure. That's why the bluster hasn't abated - too many people actually take them at face value.
        
        The surest way for Iran to be destroyed is for them to actively attack us on our soil. Hell, they might even get ended if they attack Saudi Arabia or even the other Gulf States.
        
        They know this. They also know that a large, influential group of 'Muricans for some reason do NOT.
      2. Maxxx 13 years ago
        
        It won't be good. Which is the lesser of the evils, Obama appointing the next two supreme court nominees or Romney doing anything?
        
        Is there any reason to believe that Romney's SC picks will be strict constructionists?
  3. R C Dean 13 years ago
    
    So Henniger is saying ROMNIAC needs to start lying, pronto?
    1. Brett L 13 years ago
      
      He needs new, better lies.
2. Doug 13 years ago
  
  " smaller, less powerful governments and lower taxes"
  
  What do those things have to do with what he's talking about: threatening the safety of our nation and our best allies? There are candidates like Newt Gingrich who are for smaller, less powerful government and lower taxes and who will defend us and Israel from Islamofascism. You don't have to choose.
  1. Brett L 13 years ago
    
    Pull my other one. Do you sleep with a light on at night so the boogeyman doesn't get you?
    1. Doug 13 years ago
      
      I'm not sure what you are getting at. I could introduce you to literally thousands of Americans and Israelis who lost family and friends from attacks by Islamofascists. It's not like this is some imagined threat. And Paul buries his head in the sand. You don't have to choose. We know how a Gingrich government would look from the last time he was in a position of power: balanced budgets and tax cuts, but with our safety protected too.
      1. Brett L 13 years ago
        
        So you agree that in the 35 years since the Camp David Agreement, the problem still hasn't been solved after all the blood and treasure spent? You're almost there. Now take that next step. Personally, I don't think the US government action has done a damn thing to lower that casualty number one iota. In fact, I can point to 5000 American lives that didn't need to be lost in Iraq. So take your flag and your bloody rag somewhere else, I'm not buying.
        
        Doug 13 years ago
        
        How many known members of terrorist groups have been killed in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Afghanistan in the past few years? What in the world makes you think if they were alive they would not have taken the fight here?
        
        Brett L 13 years ago
        
        Umm, kept playing their power games in their own country. Hell, Saddam probably would have killed most of those Iraqi terrorists if we left him in power. He was never one to tolerate a threat. I'm glad the sonofabitch is dead, but don't pretend the terrorist problem in Iraq wasn't solely our doing by destabilizing the power structure.
        
        The Pakis would have continued to use India as a foil for their worst elements, but those guys deserve each other. The Afghans will spend the first decade we finally GTFO killing each other before they get powerful enough to do anything else.
        
        If "Islamofascism" is your single issue, WTF are you doing here? I mean, think how you like, vote how you like, and God bless, but peddling your hysteria here isn't going to win any hearts nor minds. Libertarians don't have hearts and our minds are controlled by the Kochtopus.
        
        Doug 13 years ago
        
        "If "Islamofascism" is your single issue, WTF are you doing here?"
        
        It's not my single issue, but the result of failure on this issue could be that we are dead, so yeah it kind of takes priority. The number one function of government is to eliminate bodily threats to our nation. Islamofascism is a proven threat, one they themselves acknowledge. Combating it doesn't undercut one's devotion to smaller domestic government. Gingrich cut taxes and balanced budgets while not burying his head to this threat.
        
        sarcasmic 13 years ago
        
        Not everyone buys the "if you don't fight them there you'll be fighting them here" doctrine.
        
        Why the heck would terrorists want to take on the best equipped and best trained military in the world, vs attacking harmless civilians?
        
        Makes not sense.
        
        Doug 13 years ago
        
        "Why the heck would terrorists want to take on the best equipped and best trained military in the world"
        
        The only Americans killed by terrorists lately have been part of that best military in the world. Here in America there are plenty more harmless civilians. They'd love to fight us here by your own logic!
        
        sarcasmic 13 years ago
        
        They'd love to fight us here by your own logic!
        
        Exactly. And the fact that they haven't leads me to believe that if we pulled the troops home, the terrorists would not follow.
        
        Doug 13 years ago
        
        They can't fight us here because they are being hunted, harrassed and killed over there. But Paul and his supporters would remove that second part. What, do you think they are going to go home and tend sheep?
        
        sarcasmic 13 years ago
        
        What, do you think they are going to go home and tend sheep?
        
        Goats more than likely.
        
        sarcasmic 13 years ago
        
        If I lived in Afghanistan I'd be setting up IEDs every chance I got, and once the occupiers left I'd go back to tending my herd.
        That's not to say I celebrate the killing of Americans. No. But I can see the other side's point of view.
        
        Timon19 13 years ago
        
        Doug, how the fuck can Iran, with their zero nuclear weapons, kill a huge nation of 330 million people?
        
        Holy shit, son. Even if they managed 10 nukes tomorrow, they wouldn't be able to do much of anything before being wiped off the face of the Earth.
        
        Timon19 13 years ago
        
        Dougie McBedshitter,
        
        How many militant Shi'ite groups pledging fealty to the Islamic Republic of Iran have even been identified, let alone pulled off something against the US?
        
        How many Shi'ite members of Al Queda do you suppose there are?
        
        Field Marshall Gill 13 years ago
        
        Dude, I am as hawkish about Islamism as anyone. I still fail to see how keeping troops in Afghanistan forever "keeps us safe" or what Ron Paul could actually do that would change our actual security situation. Newt Romney won't do shit about stopping terrorists from crossing the borders. When it comes to Israel, Newt Romney will undoubtedly push for appeasement with Hamas. How is leaving Israel alone worse than forcing them into the arms of an enemy bent on their destruction?
        
        If Newt Romney gets elected our "security" won't matter because there won't be a Nation left to secure.
        
        Doug 13 years ago
        
        "I still fail to see how keeping troops in Afghanistan forever "keeps us safe" or what Ron Paul could actually do that would change our actual security situation."
        
        Paul, and Obama btw, would pull out of Afghanistan allowing the Taliban to take back over. The direct result of the last time the Taliban ruled was thousands of dead Americans.
        
        Paul would stand by and allow Iran to get a nuke which would embolden them to step up attacks on Americans and Israel. This is not rocket science (well, for the poor Israelis it might be if Paul were President).
        
        sarcasmic 13 years ago
        
        Paul would stand by and allow Iran to get a nuke which would embolden them to step up attacks on Americans and Israel.
        
        When has Iran attacked anyone?
        
        Doug 13 years ago
        
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....story.html
        
        http://www.cfr.org/iran/state-sponsors-iran/p9362
        
        You really were not aware of any of this? Like Paul I guess you've buried your head in the sand.
        
        sarcasmic 13 years ago
        
        From the first link
        
        But in response to a question, he demurred on whether the operation was known or "blessed" at the very top of the Iranian hierarchy.
        
        The second comes from the same folks who said Iraq had WMDs. So I take it with a grain of salt.
        
        Apatheist 13 years ago
        
        and Obama btw, would pull out of Afghanistan
        
        Rofl, the same Obama who has expanded the war in Afghanistan, expanded drone attacks and assasinated a US citizen? Who attacked Libya? Who went back on his campaign promise and followed Bush's Iraq withdrawal plan? Who didn't close Gitmo, renewed the Patriot Act and pushed for the NDAA?
        
        Fuck you, Obama's foreign policy is the same as yours you partisan hack.
        
        Douggie 13 years ago
        
        Fuck you, Obama's foreign policy is the same as yours you partisan hack.
        
        Yeah but he's the wrong sort.
        
        We need the right people running it.
        
        Clich? Bandit 13 years ago
        
        See...Almainian. Well done. you waited the right amount of time to drop the "right people" line. Love it.
        
        Kaon Kristen 13 years ago
        
        Obama's middle name is Hussein and his daddy was a negro, so his escalation of the WoT ain't as good as a good ol' Joe-ja fatboy's escalation of WoT.
  2. sarcasmic 13 years ago
    
    You really believe Newt wants a smaller government?
    Seriously?
    He may pay a little lip service to smaller government, but he doesn't mean it.
    1. Doug 13 years ago
      
      Actions speak along with his words. When he was Speaker we had balanced budgets and cuts in taxes, and he did all of that with a Democratic President in charge!
      1. sarcasmic 13 years ago
        
        There was no balanced budget. That's a myth.
        
        They raided Social Security. Sucked it dry.
        
        There was still a budget deficit, but instead of selling bonds on the market, the government bought the bonds with the Social Security surplus.
        
        Intragovernmental debt. Government borrowing from itself.
        
        Like that scene in Dumb and Dumber where they open up the suitcase that was filled with money to reveal IOUs.
        
        No different.
        
        Doug 13 years ago
        
        "There was no balanced budget. That's a myth."
        
        They should call you Thor friend, because you are dealing in mythology. The last time the budget was balanced Gingrich ran a third of the government.
        
        sarcasmic 13 years ago
        
        Obviously you can't read. Whatever.
        
        Doug 13 years ago
        
        Not believing the nonsense you type does not equal not reading it.
        
        Red Rocks Rockin 13 years ago
        
        The last time the budget was balanced Gingrich ran a third of the government.
        
        And the government still ended up spending more than they took in, anyway. A budget's pointless if you don't stick to it.
        
        sarcasmic 13 years ago
        
        Doug - if you pay your bills by raiding your child's college fund (while still promising that the fund is there), are you really balancing your budget?
        If you drain your 401K dry to pay your bills, are you really balancing your budget?
        Think about it.
        
        Doug 13 years ago
        
        Ha ha, assuming your point arguendo, you've answered your own question!
        
        "if you pay your bills"
        
        Your college fund or retirement fund are your assets like anything else. Whether I pull money from my stock investments, my checking account or my IRA to pay my bills, when my bills are paid they are paid, I've met my obligations and that is what it means to balance your budget!
        
        sarcasmic 13 years ago
        
        I've met my obligations
        
        by borrowing from future obligations
        
        and that is what it means to balance your budget!
        
        There's still more going out than coming in, which is an imbalanced budget.
        
        Brett L 13 years ago
        
        Call it what you want. I've downloaded the figures from the Department of Treasury website. They'll give you CSV (excel) file of total US government monetary obligations (debt) for every fiscal period back until the mid 1980s. In no fiscal year did the monetary obligations decrease or stay the same as the previous. In my house, when your debt increases every year, you haven't balanced your budget.
        
        Concerned Citizen 13 years ago
        
        Gingrich was once my congressman. I will NEVER vote for that shitheel.
        
        And I'm a citizen of the United States, not a citizen of Israel. How is Israel our friend? Are they like that friend who gets obnoxiously loud in bars and is always getting into fights? Yeah, yeah, it's not their fault - but they're still a lousy friend.
        
        Concerned Citizen 13 years ago
        
        Hey, get your own handle!
  3. Tonio 13 years ago
    
    Israel is not our ally. The Israel lobby ensures that we remain Israel's ally even when it's not in our best interest.
P Brooks 13 years ago

I've long advocated that all medical professions should have something broken on them during medical training--a forearm, say--and have to spend a few days with no painkillers.

Don't be half-assed about it. See if they're brave enough to let their fellow high priests of nurturing and care hack off a body part and then sew it back on. Like a group project final exam.
1. Sky Captain AuH20 13 years ago
  
  That'll show those fuckers the miracle of anesthetic.
P Brooks 13 years ago

the WSJ used to be in favor of smaller, less powerful governments and lower taxes when I was younger. Did I just imagine that?

The WSJ editorial board went hard core "Occupy the Fainting Couch" quite some time ago. The Bogeyman looms large.
Tim 13 years ago

Shitheads in the news:

When Amber Lafountain posted photos of her new engagement ring on Facebook, she unwittingly implicated her fiance in the theft of that ring from a Burlington jewelry store, according to court papers.

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.....dyssey=tab|topnews|img|FRONTPAGE
1. Ice Nine 13 years ago
  
  Dude deserves it for giving her an army helmet.
  1. Tim 13 years ago
    
    mistakes were made...
    http://www.burlingtonfreepress.....y=obinsite
John 13 years ago

Yes California is officially America's most retarded state.

Under California law starting Jan. 1, children must use car seats until they are 8 years old or 4-feet-9 inches tall, up from the current requirement of 6 years or 60 pounds.

http://online.wsj.com/article/.....ifestyle_6
1. Doug 13 years ago
  
  "or 4-feet-9 inches tall"
  
  So Robert Reich has to use a car seat in California?
  1. RR 13 years ago
    
    4 feet 10.5 inches (148.6 cm) tall
    
    Suck on it.
    1. Pro Libertate 13 years ago
      
      Let's not attack him on his height. I was like a Nordic frost giant standing near Milton Friedman some years ago, but he was the real giant.
      
      Reich, of course, is a Marxist buffoon.
2. Robert Reich 13 years ago
  
  Whew!
3. Ice Nine 13 years ago
  
  To hell with ungrateful 7 year-olds. Let the little meat rockets take their chances.
4. mad libertarian guy 13 years ago
  
  Though not high on the list, it's just another reason to never go to CA.
Solanum 13 years ago

Addiction Experts Warn Against New, Powerful Painkiller

If the Federal Drug Administration approves the new pain killer, it will be the first time patients can legally buy pure hydrocodone.

"(Zohydro) does not have acetaminophen with it. We don't have to worry about liver toxicity," pharmacist Cindy Burns said.

Officials with the National Coalition Against Drug Abuse said Zohydro could be the next OxyContin.

"We just don't need this on the market," NCADA officials said.

http://www.theindychannel.com/.....etail.html

If there's any justice every single one of those cunts at NCADA will die a slow, painful death.
1. Tim 13 years ago
  
  I can't even buy decongestants that work anymore thanks to all this garbage.
  1. Appalachian Australian 13 years ago
    
    I get 'em by showing ID to the pharmacy and signing the logbook, but God help you if you buy more than 3 grams in a month.
    
    Makes me wonder why they sell 30 count packages of 120 mg time release. Who has a cold that lasts a month? I usually only need the stuff for a day or two to get over the worst congestion.
2. Brett L 13 years ago
  
  I dated a girl whose father died of acute liver failure from acetometaphine. Maybe these fuckholes should have to say goodbye to their brain-dead father before turning off the life support. Goddam I hate these fuckers.
3. SugarFree 13 years ago
  
  It's been legal in Europe for decades. I guess Europe is only a good example for American policy when they are restricting freedom.
4. RoboCain 13 years ago
  
  Right, we don't need painkillers that don't rot your liver, because people in pain don't have livers, apparently.
  1. John 13 years ago
    
    If it doesn't rot out your liver, addicts might not die painful deaths. And then where would we be?
Ice Nine 13 years ago

he turned to find a man who proudly told him, "You already have my vote." It was the kind of comment that might normally elicit an expression of gratitude, or an inquiry into the voter's background.
Mr. Romney replied, "Well, that's good."

Weak stuff, NYT, weak stuff. We understand that you had to try to slime Romney of course, and that you needed a 1500-page article, it seems. It shows.
1. Brett L 13 years ago
  
  I hope it was a 1500 word article. The Sunday NYT is thick, but damn.
  1. Ice Nine 13 years ago
    
    good one
2. Tim 13 years ago
  
  Meanwhile at the Gingrich function:
  
  he turned to find a man who proudly told him, "You already have my vote." It was the kind of comment that might normally elicit an expression of gratitude, or an inquiry into the voter's background.
  Mr. Romney replied, "I'm looking forward to completing your training. In time you will call *me* master..."
AlmightyJB 13 years ago

Blair Witch girls second career...growing pot. At least she's not acting anymore.

http://www.foxnews.com/enterta.....ot-in-new/
1. SugarFree 13 years ago
  
  "J-J-J-JOSH! JOOOOOSSHHH!"
  
  I once read a review of an early cut of BWP. It was an hour longer and the reviewer said the entire hour was "all her screaming and crying." Jeesh.
  1. Ice Nine 13 years ago
    
    Yeah, maybe she's not such a good actress but I bet her book, "GrowGirl: How My Life After 'The Blair Witch Project' Went to Pot" is going to be great.
2. Sky Captain AuH20 13 years ago
  
  Eh, I've seen hotter marijuana models.
  
  ...
  
  What? Weed always made me horny.
3. John 13 years ago
  
  She went from being homely hippie girl to pretty cute.
Sky Captain AuH20 13 years ago

Couple makes tribute to miscarried child; Jezebel is not amused.

Apparently, by even putting the video up online, these evil religious bigots are not only pushing the idea that a fetus is a person, but they are FORCING people to see their unborn baby.

Y'know, it's this kind of shit that makes me sometimes embarrassed to be pro-legalized abortion.
1. Red Rocks Rockin 13 years ago
  
  The Jezbians are just pissed because the Duggars had what they believe to be the gall to raise nearly 20 well-adjusted, happy, intelligent kids. That kind of success really chaps them, because they know their own children are going to grow up to be pozzed-out emotional basketcases--at least the ones whose wombs don't end up dessicating because they're looking for Fonzie with a PhD.
  1. Sky Captain AuH20 13 years ago
    
    Oh, you mean like the featured comment?
    
    Oh great, conservative nutbags co-opt another religion when naming their miscarried child.
    
    Assholes.
    1. Red Rocks Rockin 13 years ago
      
      Google up any of the threads on Jezebel about the Duggars. The level of insecurity on display about all their kids should be astonishing, but really isn't.
      1. Concerned Citizen 13 years ago
        
        Do the Jezebel readers also object to the welfare mom with 10+ kids?
      2. Mr. Chartreuse 13 years ago
        
        They may probably be more pissed because the Duggars have insured their bloodlines will continue for quite for sometime, while the jezebel posters are wondering if their cats will eat them if they die suddenly.
2. Appalachian Australian 13 years ago
  
  Having a miscarriage can be a traumatic event for some people, especially late term. Some people hold small funerals and bury the remains.
Sky Captain AuH20 13 years ago

Measure requiring condoms in porn will be on LA Ballot

Hey, California, wanna know what else you should vote on? Whether a construction worker wears a helmet. Jackasses.
1. John 13 years ago
  
  Because porn has to be produced within Los Angeles. Not like you can't make it in a basement of anything. How fucking stupid are these people?
  1. Sky Captain AuH20 13 years ago
    
    John, what are you saying? That people would produce porn in *shudder* Duluth?
  2. Red Rocks Rockin 13 years ago
    
    Like Vegas needed any more incentive to grow their already robust porn industry.
  3. Pro Libertate 13 years ago
    
    Hey, quite a bit of that is filmed in Florida. We're a leader.
    1. John 13 years ago
      
      Florida and the rest of the South has a good supply of dumb, hot young women with low morals and high need of cash.
      1. Pro Libertate 13 years ago
        
        Yes, we're rich in national resources.
      2. brotherben 13 years ago
        
        Sweet Home Alabama!
2. RoboCain 13 years ago
  
  California won't stop until there is no private business left.
  1. Doug 13 years ago
    
    I guess it's not best to be using government to act against it, but surely there are better targets of government regulation to defend than the porn industry. Its an industry that ruins quite a few lives.
    1. Sky Captain AuH20 13 years ago
      
      So, people aren't allowed to choose to ruin their own lives?
      
      Better start standing outside of bars as well, buddy.
      1. Doug 13 years ago
        
        Like I said, I guess I wouldn't be enthusiastic for preventing them from ruining their lives (and their families lives btw) via porn, but I don't think they are the most pressing victim of government, no.
        
        Sky Captain AuH20 13 years ago
        
        Um, dude. They are allowed to make money however they see fit. I really take umbrage at this whole "ruining their lives and the lives of their family" shit.
        
        The only reason that it "ruins" lives is because we have a puritanical society that freaks the fuck out when a Sasha Grey decides to do a good deed by reading to children. Their is really nothing immoral about porn. Oh, sure, give me that "graven images" crap, but in my belief system, God has better shit to do with his day than care.
        
        Honestly, for a nation where almost every male has consumed porn at one time or another, it is a bit rich for us to judge the people who do it, as well as their families by proxy. I respect a person who does porn a hell of a lot more than I do a nanny state bureaucrat.
        
        Doug 13 years ago
        
        "The only reason that it "ruins" lives is because we have a puritanical society"
        
        I'm talking about the lives ruined by porn addiction where people ignore their families and spend their time and money on porn instead, or on the unhealthy images and expectations the industry fosters among young men and women. That hardly has to do with our "puritanical society."
        
        Sky Captain AuH20 13 years ago
        
        Porn addiction is not in the DSRM, so... that. Even accepting that porn addiction does exist, so apparently do a lot of addictions- booze, caffeine, drugs, etc. etc. I don't blame Bud for people having drinking problems- I blame those people (and I say this as someone who has had my own troubles with the sauce at various times in my life). I do the same for porn.
        
        As for "unrealistic expectations"... All art creates unrealistic expectations. Being a lawyer is closer to Bartleby the Scribner than The Firm. Most doctors aren't House M.D.. And so on. I think it a bit rich to single out porn for creating unrealistic expectations in young people. Personally, I'd be more pissed at shit like Jersey Shore than porn.
        
        SFC B 13 years ago
        
        If they are spending money on porn they have much, Much, MUCH greater issues than just being addicted to porn.
        
        Fluffy 13 years ago
        
        the lives ruined by porn addiction where people ignore their families and spend their time and money on porn instead
        
        I see. So it appears that your real problem here is that people are making their own judgments of how to use their time, and they don't always make the choices you think they should.
        
        Nice.
        
        Tonio 13 years ago
        
        "porn addiction" LOL.
        
        Maybe sex addiction. Even without porn they'd spend all their time masturbating. Or being peeping toms.
        
        Doug, meet Llewelyn; Lew, Doug...
        
        Lord Humungus 13 years ago
        
        who spends money on porn?
    2. RoboCain 13 years ago
      
      It's an industry that makes quite a few lives.
    3. Kaon Kristen 13 years ago
      
      Porn doesn't ruin lives, people ruin their own lives. "Porn" is an inanimate object.
      
      I suppose you subscribe to the "guns kill people" argument, too, huh?
    4. Appalachian Australian 13 years ago
      
      Doug, are you perchance a social conservative?
      1. Tonio 13 years ago
        
        I'd say liberaltarian. Poor conflicted sod.
      2. juris imprudent 13 years ago
        
        A pro-Israel, anti-porn commenter, who had nothing but good things to say about Newcular Titties and can't wait for a war with Iran.
        
        Either he got lost and stumbled in here by accident, or we are witnessing a new phenom in trollery.
3. Brett L 13 years ago
  
  Honestly, I thought all the porn has moved to cheaper digs north and west years ago. I didn't know they still made it in LA.
  1. Tim 13 years ago
    
    In fact that's the premise of a new FOX sitcom for 2012...
    or it should be.
    1. Sky Captain AuH20 13 years ago
      
      Dude, HBO. It's been a while since they produced a new funny show. Plus, they can show tits.
    2. Brett L 13 years ago
      
      I mean, I'm sure there are sketchy dudes filming runaways in hourly motels paying a hot meal and bag of dope, but somehow I doubt those guys are maintaining their proof-of-age requirements and reporting their income, so what the hell would this new law do?
4. mad libertarian guy 13 years ago
  
  It's like they don't want ANY businesses in CA.
Sky Captain AuH20 13 years ago

So, has anyone ever seen any of the House of Cards trilogy?

Awesomely Machiavellian.
Joe M 13 years ago

The U.N. honors Kim Jong-Il.

Further proof, as if we needed it, that the U.N. is a worthless piece of shit organization.

Rick Santorum is surging in Iowa; Newt Gingrich is plummeting.

This is the narrative. Santorum will get all the attention if he finishes in third in Iowa. I will put money on it.

The survey suggests that turnout on January 3 could be crucial in determining who comes out on top in the caucuses.

"Santorum and Paul may benefit from lower turnout, since they have an edge over Romney among likely voters who say that 'nothing at all' would prevent them from attending the caucus," says [CNN Polling Director Keating ] Holland.

I hope turnout is huge, and Paul still wins with 40%. Because fuck these people.
John 13 years ago

http://www.treehugger.com/econ.....ption.html

Mooching is not stealing. It is "collaborative consumption". Must be read to be believed.
1. Brett L 13 years ago
  
  Mooching isn't stealing. Its trading self-respect (and the respect of others) for things. Some people are okay with that. I'm not one of them, and I don't associate with people who won't pay their own way, but I understand the price of not doing so and find it too high. Others might not.
2. Ice Nine 13 years ago
  
  Incredible. This is the take away gem: "I've been pondering in my own experiences with setting up a neighborhood tool share. So far my neighbors seem delighted to lend, but I am the only one doing the borrowing. It's easy to start feeling like a freeloader, until you realize that the borrower is as valuable a part of the transaction as the lender is."
  
  How conveniently perceptive. But at least he is resolute (from his online bio): He once vowed never to fly again, then he fell in love with someone on the other side of the Atlantic.
  1. Brandon 13 years ago
    
    Read the damn post. He's not advocating free riding, he's saying that in those situations, someone has to be the first to borrow something, thereby going into "debt," or the system is pointless.
    1. Ice Nine 13 years ago
      
      I RTDP, Dipweed.
      
      I occasionally borrow from my neighbors and they occasionally borrow from me. But no one of us is "the only one doing the borrowing." Were it so, pride for most of us would quickly preclude that. Not so apparently for EnviroBoy.
3. Fluffy 13 years ago
  
  You know what's gonna happen to that neighborhood tool share?
  
  People will begin withdrawing their tools from it, and Krugman will write a column about how this proves that we need capital controls ("no tool backsies") and deliberate inflation ("let's print vouchers saying you can borrow tools even if you don't lend any").
  1. Brett L 13 years ago
    
    Its the free rider problem at the basic level.
rsi 13 years ago

F**k Cheetah. Here's Jane.
Happy GoLucky 13 years ago

Should be interesting to see how that all turns out.

http://www.privacy-works.tk
Shorter Doug 13 years ago

I am opposed to pornography but think Gingrich, with his countless wives and affairs, is awesome.

I think playing accounting tricks to bankrupt social security counts as "balancing the budget".

Pornography tears apart families, but setting a baby's face on fire is the price of liberty.
johnl 13 years ago

California redevelopment agencies lose lawsuit against State. http://www.bizjournals.com/sac.....nding.html

Please log in to post comments

A.M. Links: Ron Paul Picks Up a Bachmann Supporter, Robot Romney Getting Better at Human Interaction, UN Flies Flags at Half-Mast for Kim Jong-Il

Latest

Trump's Tariff Blueprint Called for 'Careful Planning' and 'Precise Execution'

Nintendo Delays Switch 2 Preorders Over Trump Tariffs

Trump Is Giving Everyone What They Want In the Dumbest Way Possible

An Executive Power Case That Trump May Win

Are Trump's Tariffs Constitutional?

Recommended

Login Form