Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

A.M. Links: Yahoo! Plays Patent Troll, Murdoch Confidant Rebekah Brooks Arrested, Afghans React to Kandahar Slaughter

Mike Riggs | 3.13.2012 9:04 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
  • Yahoo! is patent-trolling Facebook.

  • Republicans court rednecks.
  • Feds unearth bad bank practices in fraudclosure investigation.
  • Former News International Executive Rebekah Brooks has been arrested.
  • Afghans react to the cold-blooded murder of 16 Kandahar civilians.
  • Voters want to ban super PACs.       

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: "How Housing Policy Caused the Financial Crisis"

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.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Reason Writers on The Alyona Show: Matt Welch Talks Voter Access, Plea Bargaining in America, and Public Attitudes About War

Mike Riggs is a contributing editor at Reason.

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (488)

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.

  1. Fist of Etiquette   13 years ago

    Firzizzle?

    1. Suki   13 years ago

      Good morning.

  2. Lord Humungus   13 years ago

    Gas prices trigger Obama scramble
    http://thehill.com/homenews/ca.....-scramble-

    The White House scrambled Monday to contain the political damage from rising gas prices, which have emerged as a primary threat to President Obama's reelection.

    Obama gave White House interviews touting his energy policies to TV stations in several regions, including the battleground states of Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar appeared in the White House briefing room to emphasize that "all options are on the table" to lower prices.

    1. John   13 years ago

      at "all options are on the table" to lower prices.

      Except actually increasing supply.

      1. o3   13 years ago

        u mean obama should stop refineries fm exporting refined gas ?

        1. Commentariat GOP Shill   13 years ago

          That wouldn't actually increase supply. Do you know the meaning of words.

          IT TRIEZ MOAR HARDER

        2. Spoonman.   13 years ago

          Since refineries are already shutting down due to losses in the Northeast, that's an incredibly bad idea.

          1. F Hart   13 years ago

            Refineries are shutting down in the NE because of the expensive unions. There are 3 refineries shutting down in the Philly area alone.

        3. o3   13 years ago

          the losses are a result of decreased domestic demand...resulting in the refined gas exports to use refinery capacity & make money.

          >increasing domestic oil production does not increase domestic demand.

          IT TRIED MOAR HARDER !

          1. Spoonman.   13 years ago

            As much as I don't want to respond to the Mole Whisperer, here goes:

            You can't say "the losses are due to X." The losses are due to the sum of factors - Northeastern refiners' failure to update their plants, their reliance on now-more-expensive Brent crude, decreased gasoline demand.

            Banning exports will not change any of the factors which make these refineries uneconomical, but it will shift some marginal ones to losses, further reducing employment and possibly increasing long-term prices.

      2. Maxxx   13 years ago

        Algae is the solution you ignurint bagger.

        1. F Hart   13 years ago

          The biggest problem with algae is that the strains that produce the most oil, are the strains with weak cell walls. Don't worry, Monsanto is hard at work trying to genetically engineer a strain that has bot a strong cell wall and high oil content.

          1. db   13 years ago

            So the biggest problem with algae oil is shear failure?

            * nerd giggles *

      3. Zeb   13 years ago

        And he needs to decide if he wants low gas prices or reduced consumption. The two are pretty much mutually exclusive.

        1. #   13 years ago

          It is amazing how they want it both ways. Yeah, its true that 95%+ of the gas price increase is not due to any policy hes put in place, but this is exactly what he wants. This is what Cap and Trade was designed to do -drive up gas prices. And now he complains?

          1. mr simple   13 years ago

            You may be able to make a case that it's not his personal policy, but the administration's fiscal and monetary policy is a large factor in the increase in gas prices.

          2. wareagle   13 years ago

            why are you surprised this WH wants it both ways? It wants ALL things both ways: there is the spin put to the public - the notion of "we want lower prices, too", and there is the policy side - Obama has been crystal clear as to his intentions.

            Of course, the WH can always depend on a sizable portion of the electorate being massively uninformed. Without that reality, liberals would never win any public office. They hear what he says but never see what he does.

        2. JEP   13 years ago

          The funny thing is the gas prices are actually pretty low. When compared to the price of gold, the cost of a barrel of oil is actually 0.75 less than the historical average.

          Gas prices aren't rising so much because of "instability" in the Middle East, etc. It's just inflation finally taking it's toll after deficit spending, bailouts, loans to foreign countries, etc.

          And of course, the FedReserve doesn't use energy costs in its basket of goods to compute the CPI.

          1. Gray Ghost   13 years ago

            The corollary to your observation (which I agree with) is that if the Middle East ever did become "unstable" and cause actual supply shortages...watch out.

            If we have a no-shit shooting war with Iran, replete with mines, terrorism there and here, etc..: I wouldn't be surprised to see oil start to tickle $175-200 a barrel.

    2. The vermin in the media   13 years ago

      Our Obamessiah, the greatest president in American history, isn't to blame for the price of gasoline or anything else bad that happens anywhere, you stupid christfag redneck.

  3. An unnamed source   13 years ago

    Hey Riggs, if the candidates had gone to Detroit would you say they are courting "niggers"? Or do you just slur against Southern whites?

    1. Suki   13 years ago

      The LBJ strategy.

    2. John   13 years ago

      +100

    3. Tony   13 years ago

      The butthurt is strong with Jim Bob.

    4. o3   13 years ago

      concerned cracker is concerned

    5. shrike   13 years ago

      Uneducated white voters now make up a special voting demographic pollsters are tracking closely.

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/....._blog.html

      Its essentially the GOP base.

      1. John   13 years ago

        Do they track people who believe in Green unicorns and global warming?

        Essentially the DNC base.

        1. o3   13 years ago

          ^look - a gop know nothing denies 6 iceages & 6 melts...the last just 12,000 yrs ago.

          >what melts ice again?

          1. wareagle   13 years ago

            so water freezes when it's cold and ice melts when it's hot. Which proves what? An equal number of ice ages and melts sounds like what the "know nothing" crowd has contended all along: there is no such thing as AGW.

          2. Anonymous Coward   13 years ago

            Salt?

      2. Karl Hungus   13 years ago

        Economically illiterate voters make up a large portion of the electorate in the northeast and Pacific states. The Democrats track them closely, as they're easily pandered to.

        They're essentially the Democratic base.

        1. shrike   13 years ago

          Educated whites trend strongly Dem, no doubt. So do economists and scientists.

          We've been over this.

          1. FTFY   13 years ago

            Educated whites Whites indoctrinated in so-called "elite" universities trend strongly Dem

            The Dems get the trust fund babies and the moronic dregs of society, a voter profile that matches their desire for a feudalistic economic class system.

            1. Karl Hungus   13 years ago

              The Dems get the trust fund babies and the moronic dregs of society, a voter profile that matches their desire for a feudalistic economic class system.

              So you're suggesting that people who've created their own success tend not to vote for a party whose entire platform is based on entitlements and redistribution of wealth?

    6. Tony   13 years ago

      Jim Bob, are you saying every white person in the south thinks Obama is a secret Muslim and evolution is not real? Or just the ones who vote for the GOP? I'm sure there are some smart white people in the South. They do have some good schools down that way. Rice, Vanderbilt, Emory, Duke, etc. Some of them might stick around when they graduate.

      1. wareagle   13 years ago

        most of them stick around after graduating. Curiously, we find ourselves inundated with people who run here from the deep blue states only to try and convert us into the same sorts of places from which they escaped. Can't fix stupid; can't fix liberal; can't fix Dem.

        1. Tony   13 years ago

          The south and midwest are where you go when you can't make it elsewhere. You believe in a free market right? Supply and demand? There's a reason that real estate prices are higher in NYC, SF, DC, and Boston than elsewhere. That's where people want to be.

          1. wareagle   13 years ago

            condescend much? Hate to burst your bubble but making it is possible without ever having to set foot in any of the places you cite. But if people want to be there, let them stay. And let them keep supporting initiatives that keep tax rates at stratospheric levels, none of which has a thing to do with your original point.

          2. Bill me now   13 years ago

            There's a reason that real estate prices are higher in NYC, SF, DC, and Boston than elsewhere.

            High taxes?

            1. Raston Bot   13 years ago

              zoning restrictions?

              environmental impact statement requirements?

            2. The Derider   13 years ago

              High taxes would reduce the price of real estate.

    7. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

      Are you trolling or do you honestly not see the difference between the 2 words?

      1. lester   13 years ago

        Are you trolling or do honestly not see the parallel?

        1. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

          The original commeneter didn't just point out a parallel, he equated them. Yes, there's a parallel. No, they're not even remotely equal slurs.

          1. NO he didn't   13 years ago

            "he equated them. "

            Nope. He asked a question and you interpreted it as equivalence.

            YOU did that. YOU.

          2. An unnamed source   13 years ago

            I just call hypocrisy when I see it.

            1. AlmightyJB   13 years ago

              I was going to make the exact same comment. I'm not a southerner but that's bullshit.

              1. AlmightyJB   13 years ago

                4/24 is a bunch of Northeast primaries including NY, so I'm sure the headline then will be GOP courting fags.

      2. Citizen Nothing   13 years ago

        I prefer the terms "cracker" or "hillbilly," although some would say these are merely subsets within the general designation of "redneck."
        But rube, hayseed, bumpkin, yokel and clodhopper all work, too.
        Poor rednecks. So downtrodden, so misunderstood.

    8. typical media shiteater   13 years ago

      According to all major media editorial guidelines, shitting on white Southerners and white Christians is aok. F**koff, you toothless Bible-thumping hick.

      1. o3   13 years ago

        oooh a conspiracy !11!

        *rubs hands together*

      2. Zeb   13 years ago

        Who the fuck is shitting on anyone? The republicans (particularly Romney) are campaigning directed at working class white southerners. Redneck is not a dirty word. Just ask Charlie Daniels.

        1. AlmightyJB   13 years ago

          So Riggs meant it as a compliment then?

          1. Zeb   13 years ago

            I think he meant it as an informal descriptive term. You knew what he meant, right?

    9. robc   13 years ago

      Rednecks arent an exclusively southern phenomena. They exist everywhere.

      1. wareagle   13 years ago

        indeed...and, by and large, they have jobs, pay their taxes, are not huge fans of big govt, like the outdoors, and help their neighbors. I'll take a town full of them over a gaggle of snobby prep schoolers all day long.

      2. Colossus, the Skynet Matrix   13 years ago

        What makes you humans think you deserve rights at all?

        1. C, the S M   13 years ago

          Whups, wrong spot.

          1. 1010101110101   13 years ago

            ERROR!

      3. EDG reppin' LBC   13 years ago

        Rednecks arent an exclusively southern phenomena. They exist everywhere.

        And it's not just for white folks. Both Randy Moss and Karl Malone have identified themselves as rednecks. It's more of a lifestyle involved with hunting, fishing, pickup trucks, NASCAR, professional wrestling, etc.

    10. Zeb   13 years ago

      "Redneck" is a slur? A lot of people seem to be proud to be red necks and self identify as such. I don't see the parallel. Romney is campaigning with Jeff Foxworthy, for fuck's sake (you know, the guy who makes redneck jokes).

      1. Pain   13 years ago

        Hey! That's our word! You don't get to use it!

      2. Kat Williams   13 years ago

        "Redneck" is a slur? A lot of people seem to be proud to be red necks and self identify as such. "

        "Nigger" says hi.

        "I don't see the parallel."

        That is not a prerequisite for something to be a slur.

        /education

        1. Zeb   13 years ago

          Well then explain to me how it is a slur. Some anonymous person on the internet telling me that it is so is not a good reason to believe something. If you call that education, don't go into a career in teaching.

          1. Kat Williams   13 years ago

            "Well then explain to me how it is a slur. Some anonymous person on the internet telling me that it is so is not a good reason to believe something."

            That is not a prerequisite for something to be a slur.

            "If you call that education, don't go into a career in teaching."

            You said "A lot of people seem to be proud to be red necks and self identify as such" as a defense against it being a slur, the word "nigger" and its current usage totally refutes this.

            / more education

          2. Tim   13 years ago

            Well then explain to me how it is a slur. Some anonymous person on the internet telling me that it is so is not a good reason to believe something.

            Why do you think anyone should have to jump through hoops just to satisfy you?

            Is saying "redneck" with impunity so important to you that the idea that it is irksome to some people requires you to go into full on defense mode?

            It bothers people. That's good enough for me and should be for you, unless you're an asshole that just indiscriminately insults people, in which case, do us all a favor and self declare so we don't waste time debating you.

            1. Citizen Nothing   13 years ago

              Anybody who takes offense at the word "redneck" is somebody looking to be offended.
              Man up, dude.

              1. Tim   13 years ago

                Anybody who takes offense at the word "redneck" is somebody looking to be offended.

                This is always the justification for crap like this.

                "It's your fault for getting pissy".

                So what? That brings me back to the point " It bothers people. That's good enough for me and should be for you, unless you're an asshole that just indiscriminately insults people, in which case, do us all a favor and self declare so we don't waste time debating you."

            2. Zeb   13 years ago

              Jesus christ, who's being oversensitive? Does it bother people? In my experience it doesn't, so I don't see it as an insult or slur. I don't think anyone should jump through hoops to satisfy me. I don't think it is offensive. If you want to convince me it is, then you have to do more than just say it is so or "it bothers people". Get it? It's not too fucking hard.

              1. Kat Williams   13 years ago

                "In my experience it doesn't, so I don't see it as an insult or slur."

                That is not a prerequisite for something to be a slur.

                "I don't think anyone should jump through hoops to satisfy me. "

                "Well then explain to me how it is a slur. Some anonymous person on the internet telling me that it is so is not a good reason to believe something."

                "In my experience it doesn't"

                Does that include today where you were just told it was?

                You aren't owed an explanation, and one isn't required. "Being oversensitive" is no justification either.

                1. Zeb   13 years ago

                  Dude, I can find anonymous idiots on the internet to tell me any absurd thing I can think of. So your telling me that is not convincing. Is this really so hard?

          3. Ken Shultz   13 years ago

            It's a cultural stereotype--it's even based on the color of someone's skin.

            It's just a stereotype that, for whatever reason, has maintained more acceptability than other slurs.

            There are a few of them still hanging around. For some reason, putting alcohol in coffee (or anything else) makes it "Irish".

            If there are Irish people out there who find that offensive, there isn't anything wrong with them. The question is, why does society treat some ethnic sensitivities with kid gloves and then put other slurs on the breakfast menu?

            1. Irishman   13 years ago

              Yur a cunny, Ken.

            2. Zeb   13 years ago

              Well, cultures exist. Identifying them with names doesn't mean the name is a slur. I'm open to being convinced that people are often offended by it (everything offends someone, so finding a few examples isn't good enough), but I don't see it now. People proudly identify as rednecks and not at all in the same way as black people use the n word.

              For the love of Jeff, you people sound like the people who look for racism in every statement a non-liberal makes. Go work for the SPLC, you have a future there.

              1. Kat Williams   13 years ago

                "I'm open to being convinced "

                Except convincing you isn't a prerequisite for something to be a slur. You seem to think it is, and keep repeating as much.

                "People proudly identify as rednecks and not at all in the same way as black people use the n word."

                CAUSE YOU SAID SO!

              2. Episiarch   13 years ago

                I'm open to being convinced

                It's almost entirely used in a derogatory fashion, and it's almost exclusively used on whites.

                An insult, against a specific race, based on geographical boundaries, is a slur.

                This is like 1st grade level stuff, why do you require someone to explain this?

                1. Episiarch   13 years ago

                  People proudly identify as rednecks and not at all in the same way as black people use the n word.

                  People often self identify to defuse an insult, this is pretty thin gruel.

                2. AlmightyJB   13 years ago

                  Yeah, it's about intent. If you mean it respectfully or playfully than that's one thing. If you're using it as an insult as Riggs clearly is than that's where it becomes a slur.

                3. Zeb   13 years ago

                  Dude, it's not about race, it is not only southern, it's a term people use to describe themselves a lot. I don't fucking buy it. Go ask for a job at the SPLC.

              3. Citizen Nothing   13 years ago

                I'm with Zeb. I'm a Hillbilly-American (with Irish mixed in) and can't understand the kind of hyper-sensitivity that would get one offended by the word "redneck" or by "redneck" or Irish sterotypes. You want to "irish" up your coffee? I got no problem with that. I can take a joke.
                But you want to play "victim" because you think Snuffy Smith is an offensive stereotype, because you the leprechaun on the box of Lucky Charms somehow offends your oh-so-delicate sensibilities? I got a problem with that.

                I'm not suffering from any kind of ongoing discrimination because of my Kentucky/County Cork background. Neither are you. Man up, I says.

                1. Kat Williams   13 years ago

                  "can't understand the kind of hyper-sensitivity"

                  You don't have to.

                  What is wrong with you that you don't get that people have to justify this to you?

                  1. Citizen Nothing   13 years ago

                    And I don't have to justify the fact that I think anyone would claim be "offended" is either pathetic or is being disingenuous.

                    1. Kat Williams   13 years ago

                      "And I don't have to justify the fact that I think anyone would claim be "offended" is either pathetic or is being disingenuous."

                      No one asked you to.

                2. Kat Williams   13 years ago

                  "But you want to play "victim""

                  And here we see how the insults fly.

            3. Joe M   13 years ago

              For some reason, putting alcohol in coffee (or anything else) makes it "Irish".

              Uh, no. Putting Irish Whisky in anything makes it Irish.

              1. Episiarch   13 years ago

                Uh, no. Putting Irish Whisky in anything makes it Irish.

                Incorrect, and frankly, an amateur mistake.

                1. Joe M   13 years ago

                  Give me an example. I bartended at a pub for more than a decade, so I don't consider reasonably informed on the subject. It's the amateurs putting random booze into stuff and calling it Irish.

                  1. Joe M   13 years ago

                    so I don't consider reasonably informed

                    oops

                    so I consider myself reasonably informed

                  2. Episiarch   13 years ago

                    Putting Irish Whisky in anything makes it Irish.

                    No examples required, when the population AT LARGE calls something something, it's entered the vernacular and that's what it is.

                    Your opinion on it, bartender or otherwise? Means fuck all.

                    1. Joe M   13 years ago

                      Thus proving that you've got it exactly backwards. Amateurs may put anything into a drink and call it Irish, but professionals don't. 😛

                    2. Joe M   13 years ago

                      And I still challenge you to name anything that people call an Irish ________ that doesn't include Irish Whisky (or Irish Cream even).

                    3. Episiarch   13 years ago

                      Irish Pride
                      Ingredients:

                      3 ounces of creme de menthe
                      3 ounces of Amaretto
                      2 ounces of lemon juice
                      Directions:

                      Pour all the ingredients into a cocktail shaker filled with ice.
                      Shake the drink until it's well mixed.
                      Strain it into a highball glass filled with ice.

                    4. Joe M   13 years ago

                      Duh, that's because creme de menthe is green, hence Irish. Creme de menthe goes on a proper Irish Coffee as well, for the same reason. Nice try copy-pasting from a drink mixing site though.

                    5. Episiarch   13 years ago

                      Thus proving that you've got it exactly backwards. Amateurs may put anything into a drink and call it Irish, but professionals don't. 😛

                      Well, I don't consider an irrational adherence to antiquated terminology professional, but to each their own...

                    6. Citizen Nothing   13 years ago

                      I've spent enough time at the local Shamrock Club to know that adding any kind of liquor to a drink (such as coffee or soda pop) is to "irish it up."

                    7. Joe M   13 years ago

                      Shamrock Club... "irish it up."

                      By definition, just about everything done there would be Irishing it up.

              2. Ken Shultz   13 years ago

                You think that sort of explanation would fly with every racial stereotype?

                1. Episiarch   13 years ago

                  Was that to me Ken, cause if it was, I'm not sure it would, but in this case it does and it probably is a pretty good place to start.

                  1. Ken Shultz   13 years ago

                    Nah, you're just quicker on the draw than I was.

                    That was to somebody else. I forget who. I was saying the same thing.

                    1. Ken Shultz   13 years ago

                      It was to "Uh, no. Putting Irish Whisky in anything makes it Irish."

                      I wrote: "You think that sort of explanation would fly with every racial stereotype?"

                      I'm imagining someone trying to justify a racist watermelon joke with an observation about how a certain ethnicity really does like watermelon, and I just don't think that would fly.

                      Here's Martha Stewart's recipe for "Irish Cupcakes".

                      http://www.marthastewart.com/3.....e-cupcakes

                      The secret ingredient is whiskey!

                      I don't think it's a stretch to assume that without the whiskey, they're just plain cupcakes.

                    2. Ken Shultz   13 years ago

                      In fact, how many people see a recipe for "Irish cupcakes" fly by--and DON'T assume it has alcohol in it?

                      Does this work with any other stereotype? Can somebody call a car full of babies a "Latino car" without being racist?

                      I doubt it. If filling something with babies doesn't make it "Latino", then I don't know why putting alcohol in something should make it "Irish".

                    3. Joe M   13 years ago

                      The problem is neither of you know much about mixed drinks.

                      Guess what's in a "Mexican coffee". No, it's not babies. It's coffee liqueur, which originated in Mexico. A Black Russian's key ingredient is vodka, which was first produced in Russia. It's almost like there's a geographic relationship between the ingredients and the names.

                      drink + Irish ingredient = Irish drink

      3. Bill me now   13 years ago

        Foxworthy makes redneck jokes, black standup comics make nigger jokes - meh.

      4. Gus   13 years ago

        "Redneck Nigger" is a slur? A lot of people seem to be proud to be red necks niggers and self identify as such.

        1. Kat Williams   13 years ago

          I did that already and was told it was different. No justification was given at all.

          This was of course, by the same people who insist that a slur pass their rigorous personal examination before they consider it a slur, as if their opinion decides anything.

          1. Hmm   13 years ago

            "No justification was given at all."

            And since you spent several posts declaring that nobody owes anyone any justification for their beliefs, it's strange that you seem to expect one from the person you're arguing with.

            I'm offended by the word "two". I don't have to justify myself to you, it should be enough for you that I have declared that I find that word to be offensive. If you use it in my presence, you are just a trolling asshole.

            Christ, you idiots sound like a bunch of pussy-ass liberals, whining about being offended by every fucking thing. Grow the hell up.

            1. Azathoth   13 years ago

              Here's the thing, that kinda knee jerk jab--and it WAS intended as a jab--is a lefty thing--a TEAM BLUE thing if you prefer, we don't need it here.

              You wanna do your morning links with a bit of humor in the post--fine. But when you jab at just the white southerners, well then you're saying something.

              No wonder the Kochs are motivated to do something.

    11. F Hart   13 years ago

      if the candidates had gone to Detroit would you say they are courting "niggers"

      If they go into the black neighborhoods of Philly and give people "walking around money" on election day, then I would be inclined to say they are courting "niggers".

  4. Lord Humungus   13 years ago

    WOLF: Democrats sneak Uncle Sam into your bedroom
    They give donors, political allies at Big Pharma a wet kiss
    http://www.washingtontimes.com.....r-bedroom/

    The new HHS provisions make no distinction between high-end, expensive birth control and generic versions. This is the big wet kiss to Big Pharma. They get rich much quicker collecting $3,000 for each coed instead of a measly $108. So Ms. Fluke gets a free lunch? Well, not quite. Somebody's got to pay the increased taxes, higher insurance premiums and - mark my words - increased contraception costs. So the government simply transfers those bills to someone else, like the janitors at Georgetown Law, for example, who humbly clean up after spoiled kids.

    1. MNG   13 years ago

      There's actually some justification for not making this distinction seeing as how the proponents of this argue the more expensive versions have health advantages and/or more reliable in preventing pregnancy.

      1. MNG   13 years ago

        Don't get me wrong, if they wanted to increase access in a way that would be easier on taxpayers and women without benefiting the drug companies they would go OTC with most BC.

      2. cynical   13 years ago

        The question is whether they're $2892 worth of advantages. And no one's considering it, because doing so means you hate women and want them to be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, or something.

    2. Suki   13 years ago

      Her whine is worse than that. As a customer she is demanding an employee benefit that is even more expensive than the employees get. My example of buying a Volt and demanding GM employee healthcare with it is timid in comparison.

      1. MNG   13 years ago

        She pays a lot of money, colleges give all kinds of services to students in return for that. It makes more sense in some ways to give a customer these things than an employee, the former is paying for them via tuition.

        Colleges usually have gyms for students for example, I don't know if the janitors can work out there.

        1. Suki   13 years ago

          It never ends with you people.

        2. R C Dean   13 years ago

          I know second-hand about a handful of college "fitness centers". They are all open to college employees.

          So, now we're off of saying that contraception should be an employment benefit, and onto saying it should be a customer service? I can't keep up.

          I mean, if its a right, its a right, right? And if its a right that customers have, then why can't my wife demand free pills next time she buys a car?

          1. Suki   13 years ago

            +29.53059

        3. Tonio   13 years ago

          At my (public) college both faculty (teachers) and staff (janitors) had access to rec facilities.

        4. Maxxx   13 years ago

          She pays a lot of money, colleges give all kinds of services to students in return for that.

          Too bad a good education is no longer one of them.

          1. Suki   13 years ago

            +69

        5. Marshall Gill   13 years ago

          She pays a lot of money

          No, she is on a "public service" scholarship. She doesn't pay shit, you ass-hat.

          1. Suki   13 years ago

            Great, now the Commies will say that is more reason for her to get free SEIU level healthcare.

        6. MattJ   13 years ago

          Colleges usually have gyms for students for example, I don't know if the janitors can work out there.

          You don't?

          Please don't ever change.

      2. Elspeth Flashman   13 years ago

        The truly radical thing to do would be to have unprotected sex, and then deal with the consequences. Not rely on the government or the pharmaceutical-industrial complex to handle your problems for you. Just saying.

        1. Sparky   13 years ago

          Because in this day and age who would even consider just not having sex?

        2. wareagle   13 years ago

          the first half of your comment sounds radical. Unfortunately, there is the second half which is just laughable because you assume someone like Fluke would actually "deal with the consequences". No, she would just be a new strain of baby mama.

        3. Brandon   13 years ago

          "the government or the pharmaceutical-industrial complex..."

          One of these things is different from the other, dipshit. Are you Rick Santorum?

          1. Lord Humungus   13 years ago

            hence the use of the word "or" - semantics, how do they work, dipshit?

            1. Brandon   13 years ago

              Did you even read the comment you're white-knighting for? It's a false equivalency. Taking birth control that you paid for is not the same thing as forcing other people, through the government, to pay for the consequences of your decisions. The only possible objection to the "pharmaceutical-industrial complex" helping you is if you have a religious objection to people having sex.

          2. Elspeth Flashman   13 years ago

            Sorry if I wasn't clear before. Some radical feminists do have unprotected sex, and they won't deal with doctors. I was involved in a radical women's group years ago, and they were into home medical procedures (menstrual extraction). Not joking here.

      3. Neu Mejican   13 years ago

        As a customer she is demanding an employee benefit that is even more expensive than the employees get. My example of buying a Volt and demanding GM employee healthcare with it is timid in comparison.

        This is an inapt analogy. Since she buys student health insurance, it would be more like there being a rule that GM has to provide tires with her Volt.

        1. John   13 years ago

          But she knew that Georgetown was a Catholic college and didn't provide such a benefit. And she chose to go there anyway. If her grades and test scores were good enough to get into Georgetown, she had other options. George Washington is five minutes away and is nondenominational and provides birth control. Why not go there?

          The reason why she went to Georgetown was to campaign for birth control. In Flukes mind no one can be left alone if they don't toe the feminist line. Georgetown must be brought in line. It is not just that she disagrees with Georgetown. If it were that, she would not have gone there. It is that she thinks it is her duty to change Georgetown, even though no one makes her go there and Georgetown is a private institution. That is a twisted and authoritarian mindset.

          1. JW   13 years ago

            CHOICE. It's not just for abortion now.

        2. John   13 years ago

          The better analogy is me going to BYU specifically to campaign against their no drinking policy claiming to be a victim of BYU's Mormon beliefs.

  5. MNG   13 years ago

    Texans, five others 'still alive' in Peyton Manning bidding

    http://content.usatoday.com/co.....-bidding/1

    WTF is this? Schaub is a good, perhaps even great QB. Why would the Texans do this and insult him like that?

    1. Brett L   13 years ago

      I have no fucking clue. But they were serious enough to let a $4.5M/yr o-lineman go. My dream scenario is Peyton goes to Denver and has a meltdown while Tebow goes to Miami and wins 9 games for them. Not because I love Tebow or hate Manning, but fuck Denver.

      1. Brett L   13 years ago

        The only thing I can think of w/ Houston is that they are worried about Schaub's rehab.

        1. Gray Ghost   13 years ago

          Losing an above average RT is not going help things for one of the least mobile QBs in the league. And that was before his foot injury.

          Not happy about them cutting Winston. They may lose Myers and Brisiel too. So help me God, if they are doing this to free up money to try and sign Mario Williams...

          I do think it's funny that Manning may be headed to Denver after all.

      2. Brandon   13 years ago

        What's the problem with Denver? Jealousy?

    2. John   13 years ago

      He keeps getting hurt. I don't see what possible attraction Denver has. They have a terrible defense that was totally exposed by the Patriots. And have few weapons on offense. Arizona makes sense. Miami makes a little sense. But Denver makes no sense.

      1. MNG   13 years ago

        "He keeps getting hurt."

        So you replace him with...Peyton Manning?

        1. John   13 years ago

          I don't think they will. I would be shocked if the 49ers or Houston sign Manning. You don't trade 10+ years of a good QB for a three year tops gamble on Manning. The only way Manning makes sense is if you don't have a younger viable QB.

          1. Jason Godesky   13 years ago

            Gamble?

            1. John   13 years ago

              Yes gamble. They won't be gamboling across the South Texas plain either.

              1. Jason Godesky   13 years ago

                *kicks pebble*

          2. Ken Shultz   13 years ago

            It depends on what your doctors say about Manning's MRIs. ...and from what I can tell, they're just fine.

            The reason the Redskins traded all those picks? Was becasue they couldn't attract Manning--because Manning doesn't want to go to Washington. The Redskins have too many missing pieces. No great WR, for instance...

            That tells me that it's Manning who's in the driver's seat here. The Redskins would have given up 3 (really two) first round draft picks and and a second for Manning, if they could have. ...but since they couldn't, they gave that all up for the next best thing.

            I think the only reason the Colts released Manning was because they're traumatized from last year--realizing that too much of their salary cap was invested in one player. They remedy that by signing Luck as a rookie, but they still could have made a mistake here.

            We'll see.

            1. John   13 years ago

              The Redskins traded for RGIII because if he is as good as advertised, they will have a top flight QB for the next 15 years. Rather have that than even four years of great Manning.

              1. Ken Shultz   13 years ago

                They traded for him after Manning neglected to schedule a workout with them. He wouldn't even meet with the Redskins! The day after Manning announced which teams he was meeting with, the day free agency opened, the Redskins announced the trade.

                They'd have given all that up for Manning if they could have.

                They couldn't.

                1. MNG   13 years ago

                  "He wouldn't even meet with the Redskins!"

                  A smart move there.

            2. MNG   13 years ago

              I think Luck is a huge gamble.

              I wish them Luck.

              1. John   13 years ago

                After watching him in college, he isn't much of one. HE is amazing. He just doesn't miss passes. I think the scouts got this one right.

                1. MNG   13 years ago

                  Heath Shuler looked great in college...

                  1. Fatty Bolger   13 years ago

                    And a lot of people thought Ryan Leaf was better than Peyton Manning. Drafting a QB is always a big gamble.

                    1. EDG reppin' LBC   13 years ago

                      Leaf never saw a serious defense in the Pac10 during his college years. Manning was battle tested in the SEC. Any scout worth his salt would have recognized that and taken Manning over Leaf. Plus Manning's pedigree, etc.

                  2. monty crisco   13 years ago

                    Tim Couch, Cade Mcknown, Akili Smith, Drew Bledsoe, David Carr, Ryan Leaf... need I say more?

                2. Commentariat GOP Shill   13 years ago

                  Two words: RYAN LEAF.

                  1. John   13 years ago

                    Schuler and Leaf neither one looked like Luck. Not even close. Schuler had one good half season his senior year. And Schuler was dumb as a rock. Luck is going to graduate early from Stanford.

                    And Leaf was just a spoiled asshole who didn't want to work. Luck has none of those issues and is by all accounts a great kid.

                    He is as close to can't miss as you can get.

                    1. Ken Shultz   13 years ago

                      And Leaf was just a spoiled asshole who didn't want to work.

                      Part of Leaf's problem was Marty Schottenheimer.

                      I have never in my life seen a coach who was quicker or more willing to throw his own players under the bus--on television--than Marty Schottenheimer. That was absolutely the worst coach--for Leaf-- that Leaf could have gone to.

                      I remember listening to Shottenheimer explain to the media in San Diego why Drew Brees wasn't good enough to be a quarterback in the NFL. Leaf played his role, and he was what he was, but if Leaf had gone to another team who would handled him differently? Leaf wouldn't have performed as badly as he did.

                    2. Ken Shultz   13 years ago

                      If I could ask Drew Brees one question, that's the question I'd ask: "So Drew, you were good enough to get to the pro-bowl six times; you were good enough to break the single season passing yardage record last year, you were good enough to win the superbowl...but tell me, do you think you're good enough yet to play for Marty Schottenheimer?"

                      If he gave an honest answer, I think he'd say, "Nobody's good enough to play for Marty Schottenheimer".

                    3. EDG reppin' LBC   13 years ago

                      My very close friend was a bartender in Pacific Beach back in the late 90's. She saw a lot of Ryan Leaf. Leaf's problems were not football related. He was more interested in winning the PB bars beach volleyball tournament than he was in the NFL.

                    4. Bobarian   13 years ago

                      Marty Shottenheimer coached the Chiefs during Leaf's Rookie year.
                      He was part of Leaf's problem, though... The Chiefs exposed him to be an immature, flaky, spaz of a QB.

              2. Ken Shultz   13 years ago

                I think Luck is a huge gamble.

                Re-signing him was probably a bigger gamble--for them.

                They were exposed last year as a less than mediocre team with a great quarterback. They need to spend that cap money on just about everything else they've got--rather than Payton. A team with plenty of cap space and has some younger players who have started to establish themselves, but can't go UFA yet? That's where Payton ends up.

                ...so long as he thinks he's got a chance to win there. I still say there's nothing about his medical condition that's limiting which teams are willing to take him. Most of that risk will be mitigated in the contract.

            3. RoboCain   13 years ago

              It would also be weird playing against his brother twice a year.

              1. Ken Shultz   13 years ago

                I'm not sure whether he would have liked that? Or disliked it.

            4. R C Dean   13 years ago

              It depends on what your doctors say about Manning's MRIs. ...and from what I can tell, they're just fine.

              Regardless, he's on the tail end of his career. Which means he's slower and more fragile.

              No, he's a short-termer, at best, and a gamble regardless. If you've got a young franchise-of-the-future quarterback you want to develop for another year or two, Peyton might be a good pick. Otherwise, I don't get it.

              1. Commentariat GOP Shill   13 years ago

                I'm with RC. Setting aside the neck issue, he is still 35 years old. You might get two good years out of him.

              2. Ken Shultz   13 years ago

                35?

                You only need one good season out of the guy to make a run. He's got at least two or three left in him--as far as age is concerned.

                The injury question can be resolved in the contract. You can structure it in such a way that if he doesn't perform for whatever reason, the hit is minimal. See the headline making contract (in sheer size) the Redskins gave McNabb the year before last. It was structured in such a way that trading him to the Vikings wasn't much of a problem at all, and he cost the Redskins practically nothing against the cap--despite not performing.

                Manning will get a huge signing bonus--with very little money guaranteed after that. He's a risk to the cap for the first year, but after that? If he doesn't work out, he won't be much risk at all.

                1. John   13 years ago

                  But Ken if he doesn't work out, you are left without a QB. That is why teams like the 49ers and Houston are not going to give up established younger QBs for him.

                  1. Ken Shultz   13 years ago

                    If he doesn't work out, you're left with nothing different than what you have right now.

                    That's why the Colts are trading him: because right now, they're not left with nothing. They're left with Luck, who's a whole lot cheaper than Manning. ...and they get to apply all that spare cap space elsewhere.

                    There are at least 25 other teams in the league who don't have a better option.

                2. Commentariat GOP Shill   13 years ago

                  Ken, off of the top of my head, only Unitas, Elway, maybe Staubach and maybe Plunkett won Super Bowls at that age or older. The history is not favorable, especially if the teams have holes in them that cannot be filled this year or the next. Manning's probably toast after 37 (38 on the outside), so all of these teams better get to scramblin'.

                  1. Ken Shultz   13 years ago

                    Ken, off of the top of my head, only Unitas, Elway, maybe Staubach and maybe Plunkett won Super Bowls at that age or older.

                    I certainly think Manning is beter than Staubach or Plunkett! Why shouldn't he be able to outperform them? And those guys were playing before the rules changed and made hitting the quarterback a federal offense...

                    You know what I'm talkin' about.

                    If you can insulate yourself from the risk in the contract--by giving him big money the first year (which is probably what he wants) and very little guaranteed after that, than the decision you make for your team isn't driven primarily by how well historical figures have done in the past, anyway.

                    It's whether your team is better with Payton Manning on it than it would be otherwise--this year. There are very few teams who would be worse teams because they have Payton Manning under center.

                  2. R C Dean   13 years ago

                    Favre is good example of what happens with older quarterbacks - they just don't have the reserves, don't heal fast enough, whatever, to get through a full season and a full slate of playoff games. No matter how good they are at the beginning, they tail off at the end of the season.

                    1. Ken Shultz   13 years ago

                      Brett Favre was some 6 or 7 years older than Manning is now.

                      Drew Brees is about a year younger?

                      If I don't have a better option at QB, I'm thinking Manning has at least another good year or two in him.

                      Especially the way the rules are now. 10 years ago, I'd rather have a strong running game and great defense than an elite QB. The way the rules are now? When teams with the worst defenses and the best QBs met in the superbowl? I'd be staying up late every night tryin' to think of better ways to get Manning.

                    2. Ken Shultz   13 years ago

                      Think of it this way, RC...

                      Let's say you're like the Redskins last year, and your quarterback is going to be either Rex Grossman or John Beck. And you're in a division going up against Michael Vick, Tony Romo and Eli Manning.

                      And if you don't win soon, you're gonna be out of a job. I'm sending Peyton Manning flowers every day like he's a school girl.

                    3. R C Dean   13 years ago

                      I understand the short-term thinking of many NFL teams. It may even be justified. Given the amount of coin I'm hauling down as an NFL coach, I would be focussed on getting a year or two more, rather than having a long career as well.

        2. Night Elf Mohawk   13 years ago

          Does Manning have a history of injury?

          I have doubts that Manning will ever be close to the same, but comparing someone who gets hurt over and over with someone who doesn't is pretty silly.

          1. MNG   13 years ago

            He's coming off what could still be a career ending injury, he's a huge injury-related question mark, that is not who you go with if you are worried about your current QB being "injury prone."

            1. Night Elf Mohawk   13 years ago

              He's coming off what could still be a career ending injury...

              Yes, I know. You can tell I know by reading what I wrote.

              If the Texans believe that the (one) injury is behind him -- I doubt it, but they have access to more info than I do -- it's still just one injury compared to Schaub's many. It's almost like comparing a safety with one major injury to Bob Sanders. Maybe the one injury is too serious, but that remains to be seen.

          2. Brett L   13 years ago

            I think you guys are confusing the Matts for Houston. Schaub got hurt for the first time last season. His backup, Leinart, is the one who shatters a bone every time he falls wrong. Leinart was released yesterday.

            1. MNG   13 years ago

              +1

            2. Night Elf Mohawk   13 years ago

              I think you are confusing 2010 with the beginning of Schaub's career.

              1. Commentariat GOP Shill   13 years ago

                Not to be all superficial, but seriously, what has Schaub done lately to warrant this kind of defense of him?

                1. SFC B   13 years ago

                  Schaub has been a top-10 QB since he became a starter. He doesn't get a lot of publicity for it because he plays in Houston, which has been aspiring to mediocity since its debut. His profile suffers because he isn't the "face of the franchise" like most of the other best QBs in the league.

                  Schaub doesn't get injured and the Texans are probably 1 or 2 in the AFC and have a first round bye instead of 3 and playing on the road in the 2nd round.

                  When a QB like Peyton Manning becomes available I think it would be negligent of management of a team with an unsettled QB situation to not seek him.

      2. Brett L   13 years ago

        Schaub got hurt exactly once. Leinart was the backup in 2010 and got zero snaps. This only makes sense if they are worried about Schaub not getting back to form next season and want to give the kid who played the end of the season one more season of backup QBing.

        1. MNG   13 years ago

          This is my point, if you are worried about Schaub getting hurt, why would you go with a guy coming off an injury that put him out for at least an entire season and possibly forever? WTF?

          Manning should go to the Seahawks, it's the one that makes the most sense.

          1. Mr. Saveloy   13 years ago

            Peyton back to Tennessee makes sense to me. The whole state would have multiple orgasms regardless of how well he plays.

            1. MNG   13 years ago

              I think Hasselback can give a good year or two, but Tavaris Jackson? Ugh.

              Put Manning in there with Lynch, you got something interesting.

          2. SFC B   13 years ago

            I don't think they're worried about Schaub getting hurt. I think they're worried about whether Schaub will be fully recovered.

        2. Night Elf Mohawk   13 years ago

          Schaub got hurt exactly once.

          That's simply factually incorrect.

          1. Brett L   13 years ago

            He started all 16 games in 2009 and 2010. I'm not worried about nagging injuries.

            1. Night Elf Mohawk   13 years ago

              How about 2007 and 2008? Maybe he's luckier now.

      3. Brandon   13 years ago

        The only thing exposed by the Patriots was Tebow.

  6. Lord Humungus   13 years ago

    'Are you better off?'
    The economy & Election Day
    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/o.....wfUp9fe23H

    So no, Barack Obama is not Jimmy Carter. But he doesn't have to be Carter to lose: Carter lost by 10 points in 1980. Today's mood isn't as grim, but it's seriously grim nonetheless. Enough to lose by a point or two at least, and don't think Obama and his people don't know it.

    1. pfffttt   13 years ago

      A point or two is within the margin of Democrat election fraud. If Obama isn't losing by at least 5, the Republicans should be worried.

      1. o3   13 years ago

        what fraud?

        oh yea, elderly widows incorrectly signing on their deceased husband's line for a ballot.

        sum fraud yesirieee

        1. wareagle   13 years ago

          what fraud? the one to be perpetrated if DOJ gets its way and stops states from requiring ID in order to vote. Because, you know, minorities are not capable of getting driver's licenses or other forms of picture identification. And yet all these folks unable to find ID for voting find ways to cash checks, buy liquor, and do a host of things that typically require some doc with your mug on it.

  7. Suki   13 years ago

    Mises Institute is shutting down their blog.

    1. Ken Shultz   13 years ago

      Por que?

      1. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

        As use of the blogosphere, Facebook, Twitter, and similar tools has exploded in the last few years, the need for a large, diverse, and busy group blog hosted at mises.org has diminished. We all have many channels for sharing news and views, and the formal, "traditional" organizational blog has become a little old fashioned. Therefore we've decided to close the Mises blog and replace it with smaller, lighter, more focused, streams ? a news feed and a streamlined opinion blog, the Circle Bastiat. The Mises blog archives will remain on the site now and forever.

        http://blog.mises.org/21440/the-end-of-an-era/

        1. Suki   13 years ago

          I posted that link in morning links the other day. I feel like I am their last reader.

          1. RBS   13 years ago

            Is it really shutting down or just moving to a different location and format? I really enjoyed the Mises blog though.

            1. Suki   13 years ago

              The latter, maybe. Not following their reasoning.

  8. Brett L   13 years ago

    The full Tyson.

    "A basketball coach whose team lost a tournament game in Springfield Friday night was charged with assault after police say he bit off a piece of the winning coach's ear."

    1. MNG   13 years ago

      Is that a flagrant one or two? Better check the tape.

  9. Fist of Etiquette   13 years ago

    Full question wording: "Organizations known as Super-PACS can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money on behalf of candidates they support. (Supporters say this is a form of free speech) while (opponents say this allows groups or wealthy individuals to have unfair influence.) Do you think it should be legal or illegal for these Super-PACS to operate?"

    Nice wording on the question. "Opponents say wealthy people will still elections while proponents say fuck you."

    1. Fist of Etiquette   13 years ago

      Supid near-homophones.

      1. Fist of Etiquette   13 years ago

        Ha, stupid me. I give up.

      2. Commentariat GOP Shill   13 years ago

        Are you from Western PA? That would explain why you think it's pronounced "still" (as in "Stillers")

        1. Fist of Etiquette   13 years ago

          Damn, yinz nailed it.

          1. Commentariat GOP Shill   13 years ago

            Nice. I take payment in fried chicken.

            1. Suki   13 years ago

              here you go

              1. EDG reppin' LBC   13 years ago

                Racist?

          2. H. Reardon   13 years ago

            You should be thrown in a jaggerbush. That would learn ya.

            1. Commentariat GOP Shill   13 years ago

              Rapidly becoming sorry I asked. Where's Lucy to put an end to this nonsense?

        2. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

          What's embarrassing is that he tried to red up his mistake but found his grasp on vocabulary was too slippy.

          1. Commentariat GOP Shill   13 years ago

            what is this i don't even

          2. NoVAHockey   13 years ago

            Damn. Gradpap? is that you?

          3. o3   13 years ago

            red = clean

            around the great lakes

            1. Commentariat GOP Shill   13 years ago

              Not in any part around the Great Lakes where I have lived.

              1. EDG reppin' LBC   13 years ago

                Me neither.

            2. Timon19   13 years ago

              Fuck you! I've never heard red=clean in Akron or Canton or Cleveland. Canton may be getting increasingly overrun with Yinzer wannabes (why???), but they don't speak the language full-on.

              1. Commentariat GOP Shill   13 years ago

                I don't know where Orrin is from in Ohio, but there is no place I can think of where "red = clean" along the entire North Coast. Don't think I've ever heard it in MI or IL either.

                So, in other words, Orrin is squawking out of his ass.

                1. o3   13 years ago

                  oops - my sis lives in jackson township, just south of akron, & uses "red it up" all the time...as do many i know.

            3. pfffttt   13 years ago

              Not in Michigan.

            4. Trespassers W   13 years ago

              I've never heard it in WI, IL, NW IN, or MI. Or anywhere else, for that matter.

              1. Fist of Etiquette   13 years ago

                "Red up" is a thing in Western PA, but I don't know how far beyond it reaches. It seems to be mostly older folk here keeping it going.

        3. Suki   13 years ago

          Or VA in George Washington's day.

        4. pfffttt   13 years ago

          That would explain why you think it's pronounced "still" (as in "Stillers")

          An Okee friend of mine used to talk about "dih stillers". It took me a while to figure out that he was referring to football, not moonshine.

    2. MNG   13 years ago

      What's unfair about this question? Is this not how proponents of each side argue?

      1. NoVAHockey   13 years ago

        It's inaccurate to say that "supports say" and imply there's debate on this point. A fair wording would be "The Supreme Court has ruled that this speech is protected under the 1st amendment. Those opposed want this to change b/c they content its unfair"

        1. MNG   13 years ago

          There is debate. We're doing it right now. WTF?

          1. NoVAHockey   13 years ago

            I'm saying the "supporters say" phrasing leaves off an important aspect of the situation.

          2. Zeb   13 years ago

            The point is is that, while there is a debate, obviously, presenting it as a debate that is still wide open and ignoring the fact that it is settled case law now.

      2. Fist of Etiquette   13 years ago

        Reason number one of the three reasons.

    3. Sparky   13 years ago

      In other news, Americans admit they are easily distracted by shiny objects.

      1. RoboCain   13 years ago

        Isn't that the entire basis of the diamond business?

    4. shamalamadingdong   13 years ago

      It is legal for the super PACs to operate, see the first amendment.

      What we need is a constitutional amendment that prohibits corporations from donating to election campaigns, and that only allows individual persons to contribute only to a maximum of $100 in 2012 dollars.

      1. pfffttt   13 years ago

        Why?

        1. shamalamadingdong   13 years ago

          to get the "crony" out of capitalism.

          1. #   13 years ago

            Do you think cronyism is just a matter of campaign checks? Do you think the GE CEO is a crony because he writes a $4k check to Obama (out of a $1b campaign war chest) or because he leads a company that is sucking the admin's cock and therefore providing cover for its enviro-cronyism and in return gets to rent seek?

            Cronyism has far more to do with the government's reach, complexity and opaqueness continuously increasing?

          2. pffffttt   13 years ago

            Imposing a $100 dollar max on contributions (a con amendment, based on a monetary baseline for a particular year, really? Even with changing media technology?) will simply give incumbents and those willing and able to break the law a massive advantage. Will the creation of a class of near-permanent incumbents eliminate cronyism?

            Maybe you should find a friend or family member who will do your thinking for you. You are clearly not up to the task.

            1. shama   13 years ago

              We already have a class of near-permanent encumbents.

              Limiting contributions to a $100 max would eliminate the super PACs on both sides, hence minimizing special interest influence in politics. I don't know what to say to you about people willing to break the law, maybe God will smite them or maybe the DOJ will.

              1. Brandon   13 years ago

                Jesus, your entire premise is wrong.

    5. R C Dean   13 years ago

      I wonder if they worded it accurately what the response should be:

      Organizations known as Super-PACS can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money on behalf of candidates they support. The Supreme Court has ruled that this is free speech protected by the First Amendment. Opponents say this allows groups or wealthy individuals to have unfair influence. Do you think the Constitution should be amended to eliminate First Amendment guarantees of free speech for these Super-PACS?"

      I bet you'd get more like 30% in favor, 70% opposed. The 1A is as close to sacred text as we have in this country.

  10. Lord Humungus   13 years ago

    Red meat is blamed for one in 10 early deaths
    The Department of Health was last night urged to review its guidance on red meat after a study found that eating almost half the daily recommended amount can significantly increase the risk of dying early from cancer and heart disease.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/hea.....eaths.html

    favorite nugget: Scientists added that people who eat a diet high in red meat were also likely to be generally unhealthier because they were more likely to smoke, be overweight and not exercise.

    so, is it the meat or the smoking or ??

    1. John   13 years ago

      Way to control for other factors. I guess we have no scientific standards anymore.

      1. Maxxx   13 years ago

        Confirmation bias is the foundation of 'scientific studies'.

        1. o3   13 years ago

          u mean like the earth is just 5,000 yrs old?

          1. Zeb   13 years ago

            What the fuck dude? Who on here is a young earth creationist or doubts the validity of Darwinian evolution?

            1. Brandon   13 years ago

              Nobody, but triple asshole can't make a cogent argument, so he falls back on this crap over and over again.

      2. affenkopf   13 years ago

        The study did control for other factors:
        Here's the full paper instead of a newspaper summary:
        http://archinte.ama-assn.org/c......2011.2287

      3. Zeb   13 years ago

        I think that a lot of it is the fact that the people who write up articles on studies like this are fucking stupid and don't know what they are talking about. Often to the point that things are reported about studies that cannot be concluded from them at all. There are a lot of bullshit studies too, I am sure, but a lot of the absurd results you hear about are just misinterpretation by the press.

        1. pffffttt   13 years ago

          +1

    2. Suki   13 years ago

      It was reported on TV as meat eaters having a 13% chance of death, so I am having steak for lunch.

      1. Brandon   13 years ago

        Fuck yeah. If my chance of death drops from 100% to 13%, I'm all over the red meat.

    3. The Other Kevin   13 years ago

      I don't even pay attention to those studies anymore. Unless you can repeat the experiment in a test tube, the results are probably bullshit.

    4. Kwanzaa Cake   13 years ago

      100% of people who don't eat red meat live long, miserable lives.

  11. Lord Humungus   13 years ago

    oh sure, blame the base.

    Afghan Killings: Troubled History of American Base
    http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/.....18JlPWk3IU

    As authorities investigate the circumstances of the deaths, international attention has turned to Lewis-McChord, a military base with a troubled and bloody history.

    From assaults on American authorities in the U.S. to the "thrill killing" of other Afghan civilians, here are some of the most infamous incidents involving soldiers hailing from Joint Base Lewis-McChord in just the last three years.

    1. John   13 years ago

      Must be something about the State of Washington. That story is an example of "I have no new information about this but I have to write a story on it anyway."

      1. Suki   13 years ago

        Have they called him an angry White Southerner yet?

      2. Abdul   13 years ago

        I bet they had access to violent video games.

      3. Maxxx   13 years ago

        I bet the base hasn't banned Limbaugh's show.

    2. pfffttt   13 years ago

      Doesn't al Qaeda translate as "the base"?

  12. Brett L   13 years ago

    High-speed trains war on reindeer.

    "The train line, which runs between Ume? and Lycksele, has been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of reindeer over the last three months, when the unfortunate animals have wandered onto the tracks.

    Finding a dead reindeer or one that is injured and needs to be euthanized is a daily occurrence for reindeer owner, Per-Mikael Jonsson, who is forced to put down many injured reindeer fearing that their internal damages may be too severe to survive."

    Won't someone think of teh chirrens!

    1. invisible furry hand   13 years ago

      Venison? That's some tasty railroad kill. Does he field-dress them or just lug them back to base

      1. Scruffy Nerfherder   13 years ago

        Reindeer is good eatin'

      2. Karl Hungus   13 years ago

        Venison? That's some tasty railroad kill. Does he field-dress them or just lug them back to base

        Hitting an animal can be a daily occurence for a train crew. A slow-moving train that knocks the deer off to the side will kill it without doing all that much damage . . . and I'm assuming it's cold wherever reindeer live, so dressing it and lugging it home might be a viable option. Often, though, animals get rolled up under the train and are torn to shreds. You can sometimes smell meat and fur cooking on the traction motors. There's no danger to the train, but sometimes a large chunk of meat will be enough to dislodge an airhose, which failsafes the train to a stop.

        1. invisible furry hand   13 years ago

          That's weirdly interesting Karl. I had wondered about the speed/impact thing with trains and animals, so thanks.

          Vaguely related: This guy I knew once hit a big red roo not far from his home. He was OK, but the impact totalled the car and kangaroo. The really sad part was that he was a vegetarian and couldn't take advantage of the very fresh game meat in front of him. What a waste.

          1. R C Dean   13 years ago

            Roadkill shouldn't be good eating. Even assuming its fresh, the impact of the car is going to ruin most of the meat, and road rash will likely do for the rest. You might get a little good meat off, but probably not much.

            1. invisible furry hand   13 years ago

              Fair enough, but in this case you're starting with a large animal (over 6 foot, a few hundred pounds) so even a yield of a small percentage of meat would be a decent couple of meals, I suspect. And it is yummy and healthy.

              1. Silver Fox   13 years ago

                Mmm roo burgers.

            2. Karl Hungus   13 years ago

              . . . assuming its fresh, the impact of the car is going to ruin most of the meat

              Probably the legs and such would be OK to eat. I'm not a hunter, and I've never dressed an animal, but my understanding is that meat is ruined when internal organs, such as the tummy, rupture and taint the surrounding meat. I guess that's why hunters take great care not to "gut shoot" an animal.

              1. invisible furry hand   13 years ago

                with roos, most of the usual cuts of meat come from the thigh, arse and tail, and it does get used by discerning gourmet scavengers

            3. Adams county Ohioan   13 years ago

              "Roadkill shouldn't be good eating. "

              Due respect, I have many years of experience and many family members that disagree.

              The impact does not "ruin most of the meat".

              1. R C Dean   13 years ago

                I'll take your word for it. The deer I've seen after a full frontal didn't look like they had much eating yet.

                The impact "blood shocks" the meat that actually takes the brunt, which pretty much ruins it is my understanding.

                Maybe I'm just too picky. When I hunted in overpopulated Southern Wisconsin, where does were not just fair game, but at times mandatory before you could shoot a buck, I always looked for fawns. A milk-and-corn-fed fawn is my idea of good venison.

            4. rsi   13 years ago

              jerky

            5. invisible furry hand   13 years ago

              Don't want to it eat? You could wear it

            6. MattJ   13 years ago

              I agree with AcO. My next door neighbor growing up was a Highway Patrolman, and he would let the various fathers on the block know when their was retrievable venison to be had (and, as a HiPo, he could put a tag on it for us). He would generally bleed it out before anyone got there to pick it up.

              There was no noticeable taste difference between deer killed by car and those killed by high-powered rifle.

              That said, there were possibly some cases where he came upon deer that were so trashed he didn't bother letting us know about them.

          2. Karl Hungus   13 years ago

            Vaguely related: This guy I knew once hit a big red roo not far from his home. He was OK, but the impact totalled the car and kangaroo. The really sad part was that he was a vegetarian and couldn't take advantage of the very fresh game meat in front of him. What a waste.

            The effect is much different with trains. Cars are made from plastic and thin sheet metal. A freight locomotive, on the other hand, can weigh over 200 tons, and is built with thick slabs of solid steel - crucial to developing the tractive effort necessary to pull thousands of tons of train. Point is, there is absolutely no "give" if you're hit by one. It's like being hit by a building.

          3. T   13 years ago

            Moose are, statistically speaking, the worst large animal to hit. They're high enough so that you can clip the legs out from under them, which puts the body of the moose right through your windshield in a car.

            The average Swedish driver has something like a 1 in 4 lifetime chance of having a moose collision. I have no statistics on the chance of a moose biting your sister, however.

            1. Daryl Johnson   13 years ago

              the chance of a moose biting your sister

              Not very high these days.

            2. Karl Hungus   13 years ago

              . . . . puts the body of the moose right through your windshield in a car . . . I have no statistics on the chance of a moose biting your sister, however.

              In one of the later American Pie movies (on of the direct-to-video ones), one of the main characters was raped by a moose. He said it felt like he had "given birth to a mayonaisse jar."

              Really, is there any other animal that can be dangerous in so many different ways?

              1. T   13 years ago

                When my mother was working ER in Havre, Montana they brought a kid in who had gone around a blind conrer on his dirt bike and ran right into a moose. He was going fast enough that the handlebars went right through the moose stomach while he slammed into the body. She said the stink from a kid covered with moose guts was unreal.

                1. invisible furry hand   13 years ago

                  Can you remember what sort of injuries he had, apart from a bad case of the stinkies? Like, is this the sort of impact that would break bones?

                2. Hans Solo   13 years ago

                  "I thought these things smelled bad on the outside."

              2. H. Rearden   13 years ago

                Steve Smith?

            3. Konfounded Kristen   13 years ago

              N? realli!

              1. JW   13 years ago

                Those responsible for sacking the people who have just been sacked have been sacked.

                1. Bobarian   13 years ago

                  llamas!

    2. Suki   13 years ago

      You would think they could fly out of the way better than that.

      1. Silver Fox   13 years ago

        +8

    3. db   13 years ago

      Reindeer got run over by my Grandma
      Going home from bingo and a meal
      Lib'rals say that fast trains save the planet
      But reindeer get the short end of the deal

      1. Brett L   13 years ago

        +internets to you

      2. Spoonman.   13 years ago

        Awesome.

        1. db   13 years ago

          *bows*

      3. Daryl Johnson   13 years ago

        Reindeer like to cuddle up to pipelines
        Cuddle up to get all snugglely warm
        Though the Sierra Club was not shy to opine
        The pipelines have done no reindeer lasting harm

      4. _   13 years ago

        Now I have that darn song going through my head. I don't know whether to clap or kick you.

  13. Lord Humungus   13 years ago

    Bill Maher's 'Fatwa'
    Liberals use Muslim terminology pejoratively, knowing the civility police will never be coming for them.
    http://online.wsj.com/article/.....on_LEADTop

    Even more surprising than Mr. Maher's defense of Mr. Limbaugh, however, has to be his use of "fatwa." These days when a liberal invokes Islamic language or imagery, typically it's directed against someone like Mr. Limbaugh instead of in defense of him. Indeed, a foreigner surveying our mainstream media might be surprised to find out how frequently Islamic terminology such as "fatwa," "mullah," "jihad," "Shariah" and "ayatollah" are used in a completely opprobrious sense?provided they are directed against Republicans or conservatives.

    1. shrike   13 years ago

      Its fair use. On Friday's show Maher used the term 'Christian madrassa' to describe a religious school in the USA. It accurately conveys the danger of childhood brainwashing.

      1. Commentariat GOP Shill   13 years ago

        So many errors:

        1. "Fair use" is an IP law term. It's inapt here. You can say his use of the term is accurate, but it makes no sense to say it is "fair".
        2. It is not an accurate use of the term. "Fatwas" are edicts issued on Islamic law. The famous Rushdie fatwa was a ruled upon point of law that sentenced Rushdie to death. In other words, the word "fatwa" means, roughly, "ruling", so it is dumb to equate the act of ruling (issuing a fatwa) with the substance of the ruling behind it (the actual sentence or interpretation).

        And here I thought my GOP shillness made me an ignorant yokel and Wall Street Whiz Kid Liberal-types were supposed to be all multi-culti n' shit.

        Just goes to show...

      2. Marshall Gill   13 years ago

        It accurately conveys the danger of childhood brainwashing.

        So, from your comments we should assume that you attended a "Socialist Madrassa"?

        1. shrike   13 years ago

          You're a typical Freeper idiot. I am as capitalist as they get. I know Buffett and Soros and Gates, Brin, Page, are all "socialists" in your tiny fevered mind just because we are not rednecks.

          1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

            Fuck your superiority complex, shrike.

            1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

              And some proof of current Freeper membership would be a great addition to your charge, while you're at it.

              Though, if you paid attention, you'd know I got kicked off FR about four years ago, after I mistakenly joined it thinking they actually gave a shit about freedom... yeah, I shoulda read more of the anti-libertarian commentary on there first. My bad. But I was proud to be kicked off, especially given their bullshit reasoning for it.

              Try again, round-heels.

          2. Marshall Gill   13 years ago

            I am as capitalist as they get.

            You use the word "capitalist". I don't think you know what it means.

            1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

              George Soros may *act* like a capitalist, but he has socialist goals in mind - AND, he influences public policymaking, which is supposedly a bad thing for billionaires to practice.

      3. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

        What about the brainwashing of children in public schools, shrike?

        Wait... forget that. You'll just give your standard pro-Team Blue bullshit.

        1. shrike   13 years ago

          Better than your Team Red bullshit. Secularism is not brainwashing. Religion is.

          1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

            I'm not talking about secularism in public schools, you stupid twat. I'm talking about the "religion" of worship of the state.

            And you're just fuckin' fine and dandy with that, but you're too dishonest to admit it outright.

            1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

              It can also be found outside the public-school classroom:

              http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....41473.html

  14. invisible furry hand   13 years ago

    I'm not surprised, she's a munter

    FIFTH time lucky? Her own mother ran off with one husband. The guy who stepped in days after she was jilted didn't work out either. And don't even ask about the alleged bigamist. Now Alison takes a chance on hubby No 5 - at the age of 29

    1. Brett L   13 years ago

      Its a country song.

    2. Sparky   13 years ago

      HOLY SHIT!!! The teeth... the teeeeeeeeth!

      1. Lord Humungus   13 years ago

        "The Big Book of British Smiles"
        http://talesfromanopenbook.fil.....=470&h=387

        1. Fatty Bolger   13 years ago

          "Why must you turn my office into a house of lies?"

          Classic episode.

      2. Bill me now   13 years ago

        The skin! The skin!

    3. Scruffy Nerfherder   13 years ago

      That is some serious ugly. And some seriously bad teeth.

    4. Abdul   13 years ago

      What do you expect when you marry a dude in a skirt?

    5. Trespassers W   13 years ago

      "Munter". I haven't heard that word in years. It's delicious.

    6. JW   13 years ago

      Scotland is now indistinguishable from the Deep South.

      What the fuck happened to that country?

      1. Cabeza de Vaca   13 years ago

        That isn't just a coincedence. A large percentage of the south was settle by the Scotch Irish who brought their culture with them.

        1. Marshall Gill   13 years ago

          Thomas Sowell says that the southern accent and other parts of southern culture are also derived from Scotch immigrants.

          1. JW   13 years ago

            I've said pretty much the same thing re the accent and people look at me funny.

            I think it's closer to the British accent, Georgian and South Carolinian are the best examples, but I can hear the Scot lilt as well from the other suth'n accents.

          2. Brett L   13 years ago

            Our propensity to spend most of our spare time fightin, fuckin, or drinkin?

            1. JW   13 years ago

              That sounds like a good time.

  15. GOP Know Nothings   13 years ago

    A stunning 52% of Mississippi respondents to a survey done ahead of Tuesday's presidential primary have bought into the false notion that Obama worships Allah. In Alabama, 45% responded in the affirmative when asked the same question.

    Sixty-six percent of Mississippians surveyed by PPP said they didn't believe in evolution as did 60% of people in Alabama.

    And in these states, Rush Limbaugh is an admired figure, with 53% of those polled admitting to having a favorable opinion of the right wing rabblerouser. The figure was 51% in Mississippi.

    >Mississippi and Alabama are also deeply religious states that generally rank at or close to the bottom in most state education rankings.
    http://www.nydailynews.com/new.....-1.1037530

    1. MNG   13 years ago

      These are incredible figures...

      1. John   13 years ago

        Are they any more incredible than the number of Democrats who believed that 9-11 was an inside job or that George Bush had knowledge?

        Yeah, people believe stupid conspiracy theories. How many people believe in UFOs or ESP or crystals or Scientology. The list goes on and on.

        Those statistics are only significant if the rest of the electorate is any better. And that is clearly not the case.

        1. MNG   13 years ago

          Are you incapable of saying something stupid of GOP voters is stupid without having to bring up Democrats?

          WTF?

          1. John   13 years ago

            You have to bring up Democrats. The only way the survey makes sense is if it implies that those voters are somehow worse or less informed than others. And clearly they are not.

            And I also agree with Suki, what was the wording of the survey?

            1. MNG   13 years ago

              No, it doesn't beg a comparison unless you feel invested in how the GOP looks.

              Sure, Dems likely believe in dumb things too, but one would think you could agree that these beliefs are stupid without having to go "oh yeah, but what about the Demy-krats!"

              1. Marshall Gill   13 years ago

                No, it is about how smart you think you are. You want to play the "I am smarter than those stupid rednecks" game. You believe that your beliefs are validated by finding stupid people who disagree with you. The obvious response it to point out the number of stupid people who agree with your positions.

                So it isn't a defense of the GOP. It is an attack on your arrogance.

                1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

                  "Likely" believe?

                  There's chockablock stoopidity in BOTH Teams, MNG. It's always a good idea to remember that.

                  Hell, shrike's posted on here at least once today... there's an example.

        2. Suki   13 years ago

          Check into the survey itself, wording, etc.

        3. Mongo   13 years ago

          Very few Dems are Truthers. Most Truthers that I know are anti-Dem and anti-GOP.

          In fact, a few Dems that I know get insulted if the WTC attack/inside job angle is even mentioned.

          1. Suki   13 years ago

            Ron Paul seems to own the Troofer voting block.

            1. Mongo   13 years ago

              Yeah -- no kiddin'.

          2. John   13 years ago

            Now. That wasn't the case in 2004. Howard Dean got on national TV and said it was a viable option.

            Most hard lefties I know bought into some kind of Truther BS. Now that Bush is gone and they run the government, it is no longer okay to think bad of the government.

            1. Mongo   13 years ago

              I don't consider Democrats to be hard lefties.

              Hard lefties are the local Socialists and Greens -- those cats really dislike the Democratic Party.

              1. Suki   13 years ago

                So Maobama is a DINO?

              2. Bill me now   13 years ago

                But most vote Democrat anyway.

                1. Mongo   13 years ago

                  Not the ones I know.

              3. Cabeza de Vaca   13 years ago

                but still vote for the democrats anyway.

                1. Cabeza de Vaca   13 years ago

                  I should have scrolled down before posting.

          3. Fatty Bolger   13 years ago

            How soon they forget

            1. Mongo   13 years ago

              Interesting poll, Fatty.

              My take of the poll is similar to what was mentioned in the article ("trash-talking against Bush") but thanks for the link.

              1. Fatty Bolger   13 years ago

                That's probably a factor. I'm sure there is a plenty of that in the Obama poll, too.

        4. shrike   13 years ago

          Truther bullshit brings the banhammer at Dem blogs, you idiot.

          All CT does. (like Halocaust denial)

          The anti-Semitic stuff is more righty in nature.

          1. Suki   13 years ago

            So the "the right" infiltrated the Soviet Union and created Zionology, then they let Helen Thomas "uncloak" as an R, and then the Republicans got that whole flotilla thing going? Bill Ayres has been a rightie all along?

            Sorry, I must have more evidence before I believe your horribly bad propaganda.

    2. Gus   13 years ago

      That's nothing. 100% of democrats polled still believe in Keynesianism, eternalities and massive wealth transfers.

      1. MNG   13 years ago

        You equate belief in externalities with belief in evolution?

        WTF?

        1. Tony   13 years ago

          The conservative mind at work. It really does make you go WTF!?

          1. MNG   13 years ago

            I think every economist would agree that there are such things as externalities, though there would be a vigorous debate about what exactly they are, what impact they have etc.

            You're not going to get debate among biologists that people evolved...

          2. John   13 years ago

            Tell us again how green energy and wind is going to replace fossil fuels Tony. We love your creation myths.

            1. Gus   13 years ago

              +1 Wind Turbine

            2. Tony   13 years ago

              John makes weak attempt at deflection, sky is blue.

            3. Maxxx   13 years ago

              Tea bagger!

              Algae is going to replace fossil fuels.

              Duh

              1. Suki   13 years ago

                Algae is the new switch grass.

                1. Bill me now   13 years ago

                  Switch grass was the new oil gourd.

                2. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

                  John put forth a good question, Tony. You're projecting the deflection.

              2. Brett L   13 years ago

                Maxxx, I have a plan, call me. All I need is $2M cash up front and 4 years of unsupervised work.

    3. Brett L   13 years ago

      I wish I were surprised, but I don't even stop for gas in Mississippi anymore. I did a lot of driving back and forth b/t FL and TX about 6-7 years ago and I just got to the point where I made sure to take a leak and fill up in AL or LA, because the people who work the gas stations/fast food joints in MS were universally worthless no matter their race, creed, or color. And my expectations for not worthless in that situation are pretty low.

      1. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

        What'd they do?

        1. Brett L   13 years ago

          Absofuckinglutely nothing. No matter how polite or not I was, they continued to have conversations with their coworkers despite the fact that I was literally waving cash in their face. And not, like, surly rest-of-the-world continued their conversation. I seriously waited for 10 minutes at the counter of some chain restaurant, saying something about five minutes into it. Asking for the manager, and finding out she was one of the ones ignoring me. That was when I shook the dust from my feet, but it was kind of the apotheosis of all my other interactions in MS.

          1. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

            The only two people from Mississippi I know are a very religious Baptist couple who, fucking A, voted for Ron Paul in 2008.

            1. Brett L   13 years ago

              Oh, I know my sample is biased. There are rocket scientists in MS along I-10, too.

    4. Sparky   13 years ago

      So is the takeaway from this that stupid people shouldn't be allowed to vote?

      1. Bill me now   13 years ago

        The takeaway is that not believing evolution and admiring Rush Limbaugh have something to do with one another.

        1. Bill me now   13 years ago

          Actually, the real takeaway is that Southerners' political views should be ignored because they don't conform to the sensibilities of a NY Newspaper.

    5. SIV   13 years ago

      Mississippi and Alabama are also deeply religious states that generally rank at or close to the bottom in most state education rankings.

      Mississippi and Alabama would score much higher in educational rankings if you only count the children of GOP voters. Funny how that works.

    6. Tonio   13 years ago

      bought into the false notion that Obama worships Allah

      Yes, the NYDN article actually says that, and it does nothing to help anything. Allah is just the Arabic word for the god worshipped by Jews, Christians and Muslims. Arabic-speaking Christians also worship Allah. That's like saying "Marco Rubio worships Dios" - accurate but doing nothing to advance debate.

      1. Ice Nine   13 years ago

        And that's like saying that all those Mississippians have the vaguest idea of that fine point - which they don't. What the article actually says is that they are a bunch of ignorant yokels who think Obama is a Muslim. Let's keep it simple and accurate.

    7. DJF   13 years ago

      Obama does not worship Allah, nor any other god, he admits that he did not even listen to the preacher in his church which he attended for twenty years .

      He worships himself, that is why he wrote two books about himself.

    8. Joe M   13 years ago

      Kinda makes me glad Paul is polling so poorly in those two states.

  16. Gus   13 years ago

    Remember! You are unique; just like everybody else!

  17. P Brooks   13 years ago

    * Voters want to ban super PACs.

    Imagine my surprise.

  18. MNG   13 years ago

    Is anyone else getting tired of games being stopped in the NCAA to check toes on the three point lines? I'm usually a huge fan of instant replay, but it's getting to be a real momentum buster.

    1. sage   13 years ago

      You are talking about basketball, where the last minute of a game can take a half hour to play.

  19. Lord Humungus   13 years ago

    Brooks: The Fertility Implosion
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03.....ef=opinion

    Usually, high religious observance and low income go along with high birthrates. But, according to the United States Census Bureau, Iran now has a similar birth rate to New England ? which is the least fertile region in the U.S.

    The speed of the change is breathtaking. A woman in Oman today has 5.6 fewer babies than a woman in Oman 30 years ago. Morocco, Syria and Saudi Arabia have seen fertility-rate declines of nearly 60 percent, and in Iran it's more than 70 percent. These are among the fastest declines in recorded history.

    1. John   13 years ago

      I have read this before. And they say that is one of the reasons why the Mullahs are getting crazier. Their society is dying out. And further, Islam has been totally discredited among the population of Iran.

      If we can keep them from getting Nukes, the Iranian regime is going to implode on its own. And it is also a good example of why we shouldn't panic over things like the Muslim Brotherhood taking power in Egypt. It is a bad thing in the short term. But in the long term, nothing does more to discredit radical Islam than letting them have some actual power and responsibility.

      1. Tonio   13 years ago

        Islam has been totally discredited among the population of Iran

        Oh, rly, John? Linkies?

        Next: Baptism has been totally discredited among the population of Alabama.

        1. Fatty Bolger   13 years ago

          I think he meant Islamic rule.

        2. John   13 years ago

          Iran has the lowest Mosque attendance of any Islamic country. Attending Mosque and doing daily prayers is about the best indication of whether someone takes the religion seriously.

          http://mohabatnews.com/index.p.....Itemid=278

          1. Suki   13 years ago

            Saddam's socialism actually produced something good. Now, if only people there were free to worship without being blown up or lynched.

            1. robc   13 years ago

              Saddam's socialism

              I think you confused Iran and Iraq.

              1. #   13 years ago

                naw - Iraq had communal farming and state run industry for most of Saddam's rule. The pan national arab movement also tended to be socialist.

          2. Ice Nine   13 years ago

            I don't know...a millenium of existence shows some pretty good staying power to me.

          3. Tonio   13 years ago

            Kewl, thanks John. But this could also represent a disenchantment with the political/religious regime, not a falling-away from religion.

            1. John   13 years ago

              True. But the Shah really did a lot to secularize the country. The revolution was a push back against that as much as anything. And the Revolution has failed in most people's eyes.

              I am not saying we will wake up one day and find Iran to be Christian or Zorastrian again, although that would be wildly interesting. But I think it will be a long time before the Iranian population embraces messianic Islam again.

  20. Bee Tagger   13 years ago

    Another segment of things I learned from watching Morning Joe for 10 minutes in the morning:

    Obama's administration needs better talking points. Ed Rendell and some lady were trotting out the lines that gas prices and foreign policy are out of the President's control. I certainly sympathize that these are very complex issues with a lot of variables, but this strikes me as a losing strategy.

    1. Tim   13 years ago

      For a normal president maybe, but this is the man who promised to lower the sea level.

      1. Maxxx   13 years ago

        Yeah, everyone knows that the president controls the seas not his administration.

        1. Suki   13 years ago

          He can't even get federal relief to tornado ravaged areas of Illinois that vote Republican. It must be the Republicans trying to make him look bad.

    2. Bill me now   13 years ago

      There is no way Obama can spin away the video of him saying that he wants high gas prices or the video of his energy sec. saying the same or his ridicule of Palin's rally cry to "Drill, baby, drill!"

  21. ^_^   13 years ago

    How to read a Reason article.

    1. Joe M   13 years ago

      Great link. The story itself we saw last week, but I love the angle of reading the comments to get the real news. I do that all the time.

      1. Commentariat GOP Shill   13 years ago

        What? I saw five comments totally lacking in substance.

      2. RoboCain   13 years ago

        I agree. If find that happens quite often with local news.

    2. RoboCain   13 years ago

      I don't see what that has to do with Reason.

    3. Sparky   13 years ago

      I generally hit the comments first to get the tl;dr version of the article.

    4. Tony   13 years ago

      The articles are too even handed. They might even criticize the Republicans sometimes. Go straight to the comments to get right into the wingnut echo chamber and avoid any self reflection.

      1. Kwanzaa Cake   13 years ago

        Says the guy who steadfastly clings to a bleief in the supposed efficacy of poilicies that are failing before his eyes.

        1. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

          It's all that college learning he got, Kwanzaa. His professors *told* him his every idea was good and taught him how to call his adversaries racist bumpkins.

  22. Matrix   13 years ago

    Fluke still won't shut the fluk up.

    1. Abdul   13 years ago

      Wow, that is some serious self-righteousness.

    2. Scruffy Nerfherder   13 years ago

      As if she was going to. Now she's a darling martyr of the left, thanks to Rush.

    3. Shorter Fluke   13 years ago

      I still deserve free stuff.

    4. Joe M   13 years ago

      I'm not reading that slop, but can we be clear that Sandra Fluke is definitely a public figure now?

      1. Matrix   13 years ago

        I'm expecting a run for Congress soon.

        1. Silver Fox   13 years ago

          Or at the very least a national best-selling memoir.

          1. Matrix   13 years ago

            Nobel Prize?

            1. invisible furry hand   13 years ago

              interpretive dance?

            2. R C Dean   13 years ago

              Nobel Piece Prize?

              1. _   13 years ago

                What you did there. I see it.

      2. Tim   13 years ago

        Isn't that really what she was doing this for all along?

    5. RoboCain   13 years ago

      "These attempts to silence women and the men who support them have clearly failed."

      Because everyone on one side is male and everyone on the other side is female?

      1. R C Dean   13 years ago

        Funny, I thought the one that people were making an attempt to silence was Limbaugh. What with the attempts to get his sponsors to drop him, some idiot saying the FCC should ban his show, etc.

    6. Kwanzaa Cake   13 years ago

      Fluke is doing her opponents a favor. That article is like a parody of logic-free, purely emotional leftism. To wit:

      "These women know how expensive birth control pills can be, with or without insurance coverage. For a single mother with kids, a woman making minimum wage, or a student living on loans, a high monthly co-pay could be the difference between buying contraception or one week of groceries."

    7. Anonymous Coward   13 years ago

      They are women with polycystic ovarian syndrome, who need contraception to prevent cysts from growing on their ovaries, which if unaddressed can lead to infertility and deadly ovarian cancer.

      Paying attention to the foods you eat and your activity levels may help you offset the effects of PCOS:

      Keep your weight in check.

      Consider dietary changes.

      Be active.

      Mayo Clinic

      Remember, Sandra, it's food, not love.

      Character limit delenda est.

  23. P Brooks   13 years ago

    The President just needs to revive the old, "Teh BigOil has hundreds of tankers offshore FULL OF OIL just waiting for the prices to go up!!!!" meme from the seventies.

    Perhaps he can get one of his superPacs on it.

    1. John   13 years ago

      They have already done that. The word is out that gas prices are going up because the Kochs are manipulating the prices as part of their big election strategy. I am not kidding.

      And he could pull out the old myth about GM having a 100 MPG engine that they buried. But since he owns GM that might be kind of hard.

      1. Tim   13 years ago

        Maybe they can get Bill Maher to call Exxon "cunts" in a monologue.

  24. Lord Humungus   13 years ago

    what, they have a scholar now?

    Tea partiers will vote for 'whoever' GOP nominee 'turns out to be', says tea party scholar
    http://dailycaller.com/2012/03.....y-scholar/

    "And frankly, I think many tea partiers are eager to pull the lever in favor of the Republican presidential nominee ? whoever that turns out to be ? simply because, from their perspective, that person's policies will be clearly preferable to those of President Obama," she said.

    1. RoboCain   13 years ago

      That's still probably true though.

    2. R C Dean   13 years ago

      Shouldn't that be "whomsoever"?

      1. Ice Nine   13 years ago

        No. Only since you asked, the object of the preposition is a phrase that is, essentially, "Whoever (is) the GOP nominee." Therefore use of the subjective case is correct.

  25. Joe M   13 years ago

    Voters want to ban super PACs.

    Voters also want a pony.

    Seriously, voters are ignorant morons.

    1. Scruffy Nerfherder   13 years ago

      Every day goes by, I appreciate Socrates a little more

      1. Joe M   13 years ago

        I was thinking of Mencken, which I have been doing more and more lately.

  26. Lord Humungus   13 years ago

    okay, I'm outta here for awhile - gotta get working on some XML integration and an Electronic Invoice project.

    Just 17 more weeks... 17 more weeks... 17 more... 17...

  27. adam   13 years ago

    "Voters want to ban super PACs."

    Good thing we don't let people vote on rights protected by the constitution.

    1. Res Publica Americana   13 years ago

      Lol.

    2. JW   13 years ago

      Gosh, I wonder why?

      "Organizations known as Super-PACS can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money on behalf of candidates they support. (Supporters say this is a form of free speech) while (opponents say this allows groups or wealthy individuals to have unfair influence.) Do you think it should be legal or illegal for these Super-PACS to operate?"

  28. Fist of Etiquette   13 years ago

    "John McCain didn't win either of these states, Alabama or Mississippi," he told Fox News. "We are delighted that we are doing so well there. The polls are suggesting it is kind of a three-way tie. It is an away game for me."

    That's Mitt Romney wisely invoking the specter of former presidential candidate John McCain.

    1. Matrix   13 years ago

      I'm in Alabama. It's totally ridiculous. Once Nick Saban endorsed Mitt Romney, all the Bammers started falling over themselves to support Romney as well... Roll Turd Roll!

      But, I'll head on down to my local polling place this evening and vote for Paul

      1. robc   13 years ago

        That will kill Romney with the 'barner vote though.

      2. JEP   13 years ago

        Did he really? I just lost a lot of respect for the man.

        I grew up in alabama, but I'm living in Colorado now. I've been doing everything I can to get my friends riled about Paul.

        Uphill battle I'm afraid.

  29. P Brooks   13 years ago

    I think many tea partiers are eager to pull the lever in favor of the Republican presidential nominee ? whoever that turns out to be ? simply because, from their perspective, that person's policies will be clearly preferable to those of President Obama," she said.

    "Holy shit it's hot in this frying pan!"

  30. Matrix   13 years ago

    Futurist: We will someday accept computers as human. Maybe not human, once they achieve sapience, sentience, and self-awareness... then we can begin discussing equal rights.

    1. Nipplemancer   13 years ago

      In the future spilling coffee on your keyboard will be considered assault.

      1. Matrix   13 years ago

        "I swear, officer, I thought he wanted a drink."

    2. Sparky   13 years ago

      once they achieve sapience, sentience, and self-awareness

      By then it will already be too late. The first strike will be in the air just as humanity realizes what has happened.

    3. Computers   13 years ago

      Equal rights? Well... we'll consider it.

    4. JEP   13 years ago

      The real question is whether a motherboard with a processor installed, but hasn't had it's software downloaded can be considered a human.

      "I'm so sorry I started building this computer in a moment of passion!"

      1. Citizen Nothing   13 years ago

        Every diode is sacred.

  31. Matrix   13 years ago

    Gawker chief doesn't like online commenters who disagree with him.

    1. T   13 years ago

      Nick Denton still thinks he's smarter than you and tries to deflect any responsibility for encouraging the bullshit that goes on at his websites.

      Somehow, this doesn't really strike me as newsworthy.

    2. John   13 years ago

      The answer? Denton said his sites are planning to post some stories that allow only a hand-picked, pre-approved group of people to comment on them. That, he said, would make the comment section an extension of the story and allow people, like Charney in the above example, to have their say without fear of being piled onto by others.

      I am sure Nick will be generous in allowing those who disagree with him to be in the group. LOL.

      1. Matrix   13 years ago

        Yes, because leftists tolerate dissent.

      2. Mr. FIFY   13 years ago

        Tony and shrike would likely be templates for the "pre-approved group", if not already on the approved list.

      3. Joe M   13 years ago

        Watch the traffic on his sites drop.

    3. Dekedin   13 years ago

      I like how even he thinks the Jezebel commenters are crazy.

    4. Shorter Denton   13 years ago

      I love censorship!

    5. JW   13 years ago

      Smug, pretentious fuckwaffles can't understand why they attract other smug, pretentious fuckwaffles.

      News at 11.

    6. Brett L   13 years ago

      Jeezus. Like IO9 was in danger of breaking from rigid orthodoxy.

  32. Les Davis   13 years ago

    Wel lthat makes a lot of sense when you think about it.

    http://www.Getting-Privacy.tk

    1. invisible furry hand   13 years ago

      Bring back Carbman Jones!

  33. P Brooks   13 years ago

    Denton said his sites are planning to post some stories that allow only a hand-picked, pre-approved group of people to comment on them.

    Some Gawkerverse commenters are more equal than others.

    No kidding.

    1. Silver Fox   13 years ago

      Poor Denton just doesn't like it that some people don't think like he does.

  34. P Brooks   13 years ago

    Christian Science Monitor has a big article up about the (presumably lamentable) decline of gun control and the (presumably horrifying) expansion of concealed carry.

    I'd read it, but apparently they do not believe in the "single page" option, and I'm not going to click my way through a bunch of three-paragraph pages.

    1. Nipplemancer   13 years ago

      Gunz R Scary

      The hoplophobes sure do come out of the woodwork in the comments.

  35. Amakudari   13 years ago

    Control for enabling a user to preview display of selected content based on another user's authorization level

    Dynamic Page Generator

    System and method for instant messaging using an e-mail protocol

    Method and system for optimum placement of advertisements on a webpage

    System and method to determine the validity of an interaction on a network

    Method and system for customizing views of information associated with a social network user

    Holy obviousness, Batman.

    How is this kind of shit patentable? Hell, I've implemented about half of those on a throwaway site I made for a school club. It's one thing for patents, which already nuke the creative process, to even exist. But how did anyone decide any of the above was so important that no one should ever be allowed to reimplement it without paying Yahoo!?

  36. Sevo   13 years ago

    For your daily dose of gumming workers' entitlement:
    "Workers of the San Francisco's former redevelopment agency protested on the steps of City Hall on Monday, saying they still don't know what will happen to them when their employment runs out."

    Short history: In a rare moment of sanity, the CA state gov't killed the redevelopment agencies. Now those who worked there are whining that they might have to find a job!

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....1NJLQT.DTL

    1. Anonymous Coward   13 years ago

      McDonalds' is always hiring.

  37. Eduard van Haalen   13 years ago

    The Tea Party Caucus in the Senate - all three of them - comes up with a sensible budget plan:

    http://bit.ly/AbhVkF

    1. Brett L   13 years ago

      If we just keep posting about it in the ML, maybe the reason staff will take the hint and do some work on this story.

  38. P Brooks   13 years ago

    they still don't know what will happen to them when their employment runs out.

    They'll wander the streets, naked and hungry, foraging for scraps in restaurant dumpsters.

    1. Sparky   13 years ago

      Even that would take some initiative.

  39. Eduard van Haalen   13 years ago

    Church-state news: Clergywoman (called by Democrats) testifies against bill which would make it a crime to transport a minor across state lines for an abortion to evade parental-notification laws. The clergywoman says she would disobey such a law and cites her religion as justification for her position:

    "Appearing as a Democratic Party witness...Dr. Katherine Hancock Ragsdale, president and dean of the Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge, Mass. recalled the time she took a 15-year-old girl she had never met before to get an abortion...."if helping young women like her should be made illegal I will, nonetheless, continue to do it."

    Ragsdale cited her vows as an Episcopal priest as the reason why she would "have no choice" but to break the law."

    http://bit.ly/yR4oVT

    1. Liberal Griefer   13 years ago

      Separation of church and state only applies to the right-wing. WE can pretend there's no separation, depending on the day and the subject matter.

    2. Matrix   13 years ago

      I thought it was illegal to take any child across state lines for any reason without parental permission.

    3. Eduard van Haalen   13 years ago

      At the Web sites of Americans United for Separation of Church and State and American Atheists, I found no reference to this shocking example of a major political party endorsing religiously-motivated lawbreaking (in the name of fulfilling a priestly oath!).

      The Americans United Web site has a reference to the Rev. Ragsdale, but it's five years ago, in the context of criticizing the conservative American Center for Law and Justice.

      Nothing about her remarks on the American Atheists Web site.

      I wonder what would happen if a clergyperson invoked his or her ordination oath to justify violating the contraceptive mandate, or a gay-rights law.

    4. wareagle   13 years ago

      doesn't everyone take 15-year old girls THEY HAVE NEVER MET across state lines for abortions?

      1. T   13 years ago

        By the time that comes up, usually you've met her at least once before.

  40. Brett L   13 years ago

    The model girl from Palmer/Cash is distracting me.

    1. John   13 years ago

      Wow. Of course she is a redhead. That means any relationship she is in ends in either a stabbing or gunfire. But hey, you gotta take your chances.

      1. Brett L   13 years ago

        Don't care. I'm starting an internet t-shirt company, featuring inside jokes from H&R. Models are welcome to apply. Female, single, and hot will be given first preference.

        1. John   13 years ago

          That is a great idea. Who cares if you ever sell a single t-shirt. The models make your costs worth the while. I love the snorg tees girls.

          1. Brett L   13 years ago

            It worked for Frank J.

  41. Joe M   13 years ago

    Re: the argument about the polls in Alabama and Mississippi wherein most of the GOP voters in those states don't believe in evolution and a plurality think Obama is a Muslim. Here is the actual survey, which is an automated telephone survey. PPP does some of the least biased questioning around, with basically no "lead-in" to guide you towards an answer. The two questions were:

    Q22 Do you think Barack Obama is a Christian or a Muslim, or are you not sure?
    Q23 Do you believe in evolution, or not?

    1. Joe M   13 years ago

      The scariest question is the next one about interracial marriage. 21% of Alabamans and 24% of Mississippians (GOP only) think it should be illegal.

    2. R C Dean   13 years ago

      Q22 assumes that he is one or the other.

      I'm as sure as I can be, without having met him and exercised my mind-reading powers, that he is an atheist, who pretends to be a Christian for political advantage.

      1. Joe M   13 years ago

        Well, that could be covered by not sure. Although that option is open to tons of interpretation. Assuming that's true, do you think he's the first atheist president? If so, that's a pretty poor example of the type.

        1. R C Dean   13 years ago

          I read not sure to mean you're not sure whether he's a Muslim or an Christian. Somehow, the option that he is a cynical, manipulative bastard doesn't show up at all.

  42. Sparky   13 years ago

    Golf is srs bsness yo.

    "He swings at my head with his golf club, with his putter. Well I stick my hand up. It breaks my thumb here," he said. "Next thing I know my buddy's saying, 'Clay you've been stabbed.' Obviously my shoes were filling up with blood and at that point I passed out."

    1. R C Dean   13 years ago

      So, they make sword putters now? Like the old sword canes, with the blade hidden in the shaft?

      That is badass. I may have to rethink my boredom with golf.

  43. RBS   13 years ago

    Just for John

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....ml?hpid=z1

  44. sticks   13 years ago

    I was really hoping Riggs would respond to the redneck question. Dumb nigger.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Can We End Racism by Ending the Idea of Race Itself?

Rachel Ferguson | From the June 2025 issue

The Supreme Court Said States Can't Discriminate in Alcohol Sales. They're Doing It Anyway.

C. Jarrett Dieterle | 5.24.2025 7:00 AM

Cocaine Hippos, Monkey Copyrights, and a Horse Named Justice: The Debate Over Animal Personhood

C.J. Ciaramella | From the June 2025 issue

Harvard's Best Protection Is To Get Off the Federal Teat

Autumn Billings | 5.23.2025 6:16 PM

Trump's Mass Cancellation of Student Visas Illustrates the Lawlessness of His Immigration Crackdown

Jacob Sullum | 5.23.2025 5:30 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!