Americans OK With Military Cuts, CIA Kidnapping Scrutinized in Court, First-Offender Granny Gets Life: P.M. Links


  • Before the next election, we have just enough time to grab some souvlaki.

    Politicians may not be so keen on cutting the cost of waging multiple wars around the globe, but a recent survey finds that Americans would be comfortable with trimming an average of 18 percent from military spending.

  • Saying marriage-equality should not be decided on a state-by-state basis, Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina vows to introduce a bill to legalize same-sex marriage at the national level. Meanwhile, Colorado lawmakers killed an effort to legalize same-sex civil unions.
  • Billionaire investor Jim Rogers sees the U.S. government continuing to shift blame to the private sector for politicians' fiscal mismanagement, and predicts a future of tighter regulations and higher taxes.
  • America's long-running war on some intoxicants has sent a first-offender grandmother to prison for life with no chance of parole, because she lacked information to trade like big-time drug dealers.
  • The European Court of Human Rights is hearing the case of Khaled El-Masri, a German citizen who was kidnapped by Macedonia and handed to the CIA, which subjected him to torture and held him without judicial proceedings for 149 days.
  • Europe isn't in recession! Well … Germany is doing well enough that, if you lump its figures in with its neighbors, the eurozone escapes economic invalid status.
  • Nine days after an inconclusive election, Greek political leaders are unable to cobble together a governing coalition. So back to the polls they go for another try.

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.

NEXT: Majority Tenuously Favors Same-Sex Marriage

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

  1. How many divisions does the European Court of Human Rights have?

  2. Saying marriage-equality should not be decided on a state-by-state basis, Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina vows to introduce a bill to legalize same-sex marriage at the national level. Meanwhile, Colorado lawmakers killed an effort to legalize same-sex civil unions.


    1. +economy

    2. every state that has had a referendum has seen gay marriage lose. A couple of states where the duly elected legislature pulled the trigger say it pass.

      If you run for office, have the balls to cast the tough votes, not just the ones to support apple pie and sunshine. Let voters then decide if you made the right call or not. The referendum is another word for political cowardice.

      1. And “Love” means never having to say you’re sorry.

        1. Initiatives and referenda bypass the legislature – initiatives take promosed laws directly to the voters and referenda challenge laws already passed by the legislature.

          In neither case has the legislature been cowardly – some people are justy trying to bypass it.

          1. of course, it has. Legislatures could introduce bills, debate them, then vote. Instead, they want the public to do the heavy lifting for them. Referenda do not always bypass legislatures; lawmakers are pretty often complicit in such initiatives occurring.

        2. That’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.

      2. Referenda are often part of amending state constitutions which can tie the hands of legislatures and courts. Considering that the pro-homosexual “marrige” side has been pursuing a court oriented strategy, complaining that their opponents are bypassing legislatures is amusing.

        I do not think you or others would be complaning about direct democracy if homosexual “marriage” was not consistantly losing in the only sort of polling that actually matters.

        1. Direct democracy is bullshit in every fucking sense of the term and we are ALWAYS complaining about it, even when it produces results we like.

          Fucking retard.

    1. Next you’ll tell me that bad things happen when people vote for communists.

      1. Depends on if you’re a party member or a regular prole.

      2. In Soviet Russia, bad things happen to YOU!

        Wait, that’s just a true statement.

    2. Heh. Sad to think the euro is going to be a relative store of value compared to the revived Drachma.

      1. I’d like to see the Euro collapse. Get those damn Italians making affordable high quality shoes again.

    3. I honestly have to ask how anyone could keep money IN a Greek bank.

      If you were a Greek depositor, wouldn’t you take all your money out? Hell, even if you were lazy and inattentive, wouldn’t your money already be out and in Germany?

      1. I think once they started talking about a bailout, I would have put the money under my mattress. But people are still buying bonds from Greece. So apparently, figuring this out is harder than it appears.

        1. Or gone down and bought all of the silver you could. Greeks will be taking their pay home in wheelbarrows soon…the few that are working, that is.

          1. Silver and gold are crashing as we speak, too. Probably only temporarily, but temporary things can last a long time.

            1. I wish the yen would finally drop. No matter how shitty the Jap economy gets their money just goes up. I gues that’s what they get for having a personal savings culture.

    4. Never fear. The central banking cartels of the world will not stand idly by while Greece falls. If one card falls, the whole house falls with it.

  3. …but a recent survey finds that Americans would be comfortable with trimming an average of 18 percent from military spending.

    Newsworthy if at least nine percent of it comes from the poll respondent’s own side.

    1. I thought this was a pretty weak article…

      Vague details of what was actually asked, or how anything was presented to the respondents.

    2. thinking people favor cuts period, and they get that the military cannot be treated as a sacred cow. It’s not like we don’t have enough defense as it is.


    The censored race war.

    1. Living where I do, I find this troublesome.

      1. I find it very troublesome. At some point the mob is going to run into someone who is armed and there is going to be a big shooting. The the shit will really hit the fan.

        1. That someone would be most of my white male neighbors who have concealed carry permits and spend a lot of time at the firing range in Robbinsdale.

          1. My nieces from Japan LOVE the range at Bill’s Gun Shop. Don’t be bad mouthing that place.

        2. It already did happen. He had a screwdriver on a subway train.

        3. And then the armed person will be charged with a federal hate crime for, uh, profiling. Or something.

          1. REMEMBER TRAYVON?!!

        4. I live near the Redneck Riviera. This could be the wrong place for thuggery, though it appears to have been swept into silence in Mobile. Folks here tend to be tolerant but stupidity for the sake of stupidity does not sell.

        5. My first thought was that the perps would be staring down the muzzle of at .357. Of course, my second thought was that I would be in a world of shit if I was carrying where this was going on.

          … Hobbit

      2. Living where I do, I find this troublesome.

        Not sure where that is, but I do too. I know this happens here in Chicago, although I don’t have any idea how much. Sometimes there is a rash of it and though it’s not necessarily reported on, it becomes community knowledge. But it’s not good and not something to sweep under the rug.

        Of course, “fortunately” for those of us here, John’s scenario will not play out. No one armed to run into.

        1. Minneapolis, Northside. Shootings every day.

            1. Blocked at work. Will look at home.

        2. It won’t happen in Chicago. But it will happen somewhere else.

  5. If you find a gun in the grass whatever you do, don’t touch it.

    “They said I did the right thing getting it off the street,” Chevilott told MyFoxDetroit.

    However, Chevilott’s superiors at the Department of Public Services had a much different opinion. His foreman, who had knowledge of the situation, was suspended for 30 days, and after 23 years on the job, Chevilott was fired for violating department policies.

    1. I guess you have to be pretty evil and stupid to get to the top of the Wayne County Department of Public Services.

      1. No, just corrupt as hell.

    2. How do we know he didn’t steal the gun and make up this story and turn it in because his bosses found out.

      1. Because his bosses are not claiming that?

    3. White guy wearing an iron cross pendant, he’s fucked. Wonder why nobody else seems to have noticed.

    4. Poor fool should have known that obedience to policy is more important than doing the right thing.

  6. Granted it was her first offense and the punishment is crazy, but smuggling a ton of cocaine is a pretty big deal.

    1. People are smuggling money and dope on buses going back and forth to Mexico! She must have known because she was the co-owner.

      Not exactly the most compelling case.

      1. Everyone in prison is innocent.

  7. Holy shit, did anyone click through to the Houston Chronicle article about the imprisoned grandma? The first person they quote on the subject (other than the woman herself) is a member of LEAP! Very nice. Maybe there’s hope.

    1. The article points out that she’ll be in jail longer than the Zetas founder and mass murderer Cardenas.

      1. Yeah, but he mostly killed Mexicans. i thought we’d pretty well established Americans don’t give a shit about killing brown people.

      2. She’ll also be in jail longer than Obama and Bush.

        1. ^^WINNER^^

  8. I haven’t seen anything on HR about Zimmerman being up for hate crime charges now.

    I don’t see any possible hope they would have for actually getting a conviction there, since (assuming an impartial jury) they have to prove that he murdered Martin specifically because he was black. In a sane world they wouldn’t even be able to get an indictment, but we know how that goes.

    1. Are they still using that doctored 9-1-1 tape that NBC used to make Zimmerman sound racist?

      1. It was fake but accurate.

    2. It’d get really interesting if Z’s attorney could bring *counter* hate crime charges against someone.

      1. He should sue the fucking media outlets that knowingly altered tapes to smear him as a racist.

  9. Canadian Finance Minister:The only bad job is no job…..le2432675/

  10. “Saying marriage-equality should not be decided on a state-by-state basis, Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina vows to introduce a bill to legalize same-sex marriage at the national level.”

    How would he do this? Certainly the feds can’t just order the states to change their laws. Is he going to threaten them with federal funding cut-offs? Or allow for a federal marriage certicate (what enumerated power does that fall under)?

    1. Reason only cares about the Constitution when it’s not in the way of a socially leftist crusade.

      1. I’m not sure I read the post as endorsement of Clyburn’s proposal. What makes you think it is?

        1. Because he’s Tulpa, and he already made one reasonable post today.

        2. “marriage-equality” isn’t exactly a neutral description of the content of Herr Clyburn’s proposal.

    2. They could attempt to do it on Equal Protection grounds. Not saying that’s necessarily a winning argument, but it is a basis for federal preemption.

      Oh, and Commerce Clause.

      1. 14th Am, Section 5? That would be interesting. I still wonder if that can overcome the rule in Printz and New York v US.

      2. Commerce Clause looms LARGE.

        Also, necessary and proper, general welfare, Executive Privlege and….FABULOUS!

        1. Don’t forget my personal favorite, the Preamble.

    3. Abolish marriage as a civil institution. Anybody can call anybody else they want to their husband or wife.

  11. Saying marriage-equality should not be decided on a state-by-state basis

    “Federalism for me but not for thee” strikes again. How does Reason feel about keeping communities drug-free being decided on a state-by-state basis?

    Also nice to see Reason repeating lawmakers’ talking points for them, something they’re constantly criticizing leftist reporters for doing.

    1. Federalism is a means, not an end.

      I’m not saying I necessarily agree with what’s going on in this exact instance, but just making a larger point. Federalism, like democracy, is merely a tool to achieve liberty. Most often it works better than top-down solutions. Occasionally it doesn’t (i.e. Jim Crow).

      States don’t get a pass to act like tyrants just because they’re a smaller locality than the feds. Where the feds are in the wrong (which is the vast majority of the time), then I’ll cheer on federalism. When states are in the wrong, then I want the feds to step in. It’s simple; the guiding principal is not a system of control (federalism, democracy, etc.) but rather always liberty.

      1. No Jim. Federalism is an end. Sorry but if we let you use the government to forcibly create your Utopia, we then have a hard time telling liberals and SoCons they can’t do the same thing.

        1. No, the green monster is right when he states:

          . Where the feds are in the wrong (which is the vast majority of the time), then I’ll cheer on federalism. When states are in the wrong, then I want the feds to step in.

          Federalism works both ways. The end is the protection of individual liberty.

          1. The problem is that he’s just saying what he personally wants. He’s not prescribing a rule in an effort to convince others who may disagree with his positions on the issues should follow, he’s just saying what he would do if he were dictator.

            Whereas John is saying that whatever your position is you should always respect federalism.

            1. And I disagree. You should only respect federalism when it results in the correct outcomes, i.e. that of liberty. Intentions don’t matter; only results.

              There is no rule. Whatever increased liberty is good, whatever decreases it is bad, period, the end, full stop. Most of the time, federalism is a boon to freedom. Once in a great while, it isn’t. That’s what I mean about it being a means, and not an end. In the instances where it is not conducive to liberty, then it is meaningless.

              1. Intentions don’t matter; only results.

                And the result of libertarians demanding everything they want at the national level without compromise has been the advancement of statism on nearly every front. You think gay marriage is a triumph of liberty? Think again. Even if some liberty-minded folks favor it, the impetus is coming from rank statists of the worst variety.

                Federalism allows the statists to enact their perfect society in one area while liberty-minded people can enact theirs in another. And then lets them compete. If the rule is that whoever is currently dominant gets to dictate policy for the whole country we’re ALWAYS going to lose, because the statists are much better at this game than we are, and statism is very intuitive to human nature and thus will always be more popular.

        2. I think we’ll have to agree to disagree. If you think that any particular system of government is itself the end and not the means, then we’re too far apart to have a meaningful conversation about it.

          And I needn’t point out the difference between liberals creating Utopia at the point of a gun, and advocating for a severe reduction in gov’t (one of the few legitimate functions of which would be to preserve liberty, even down to the smallest level).

          1. How does gay marriage result in a reduction of government?

          2. And in any case, the point is that federalism allows people who believe different things about the role of govt to peacefully coexist in different states. It may not be an end in itself, but barring the complete extermination of statists throughout the country, it’s a necessary component in any plan to increase liberty.

            1. It doesn’t really matter what you believe the role of government is if you believe it should have the power to fuck some people in the ass but not others. Federalism is bullshit if Mississippi passes a law that whites and blacks can’t marry or blacks are chattel property again.

      2. We’re not talking about anything near the severity of Jim Crow laws here. Gay marriage is, even if you agree with it, just a matter of symbolism.

        Given the choice between federalism and minor liberty issues (and I’m not convinced gay marriage is a liberty issue at all) I’ll side with federalism. Otherwise you’ve got to be storming the barricades over NYS banning fireworks or St. Louis banning ferrets.

        1. As I stated originally, I was interested in disagreeing with your take on federalism, not this issue in the particular.

          Federalism for me but not for thee is perfectly find if the end result of all actions is increased liberty.

          1. But that only works if you’re dominant. Which libertarians aren’t and probably never will be.

            Federalism is an excellent COMPRO*ISE. (asterisked out because it’s a dirty word in libertarian circles)

  12. We just opened our first pale ale’s the other day and they came out fucking great. It honestly was the best pale ale I’ve ever had. The batc of nut brown ale is in bottles for a week now. And of you brewers think you know when we should pop one of them?

    Also, we have two batches going as we speak. The Hefeweizen and Kolsch will both be ready to bottle by the weekend and we’ve had to buy a second fridge just for our beermaking.

    Second question: does anybody have any experience brewing Kolsch? It is so damn cloudy halfway through fermentation with an almost muddy look to it. Is this common?

    Third question: Our Hefeweizen is a lot redder than what I’m used to seeing from American breweries. Is this typical?

    1. Mine was not red. and my Kolsch was not particularly cloudy.

      1. It’s not red-red. But it’s not golden. Maybe a shade darker than this. Meh. I’m sure it will be fine.

        As far as the Kolsch is concerned, I’ll resolve it going to secondary, but I’ve never seen a beer so muddy looking in the carboy.

    2. You added too much blood as a flavoring agent. Try to balance it out with a little mother’s milk next time.

      1. You’re supposed to use orphan blood, not regular blood.

      2. Bitch on the cover of Time set me up.

      3. And a Mother’s Milk Stout might be really good, eh?

        1. Mother’s Milk Stout would go excellent with this:

      4. Doc says blood-based alcoholic beverages are feasible.

        1. Wouldn’t blood break down at a boil? Or would you steep in the blood prior to boil? Maybe add post-boil?

          Anybody know what the likelihood is you could make a pus-based drink? I’ve got a buddy laid up with a blown knee and he’s had some drainage since the surgery. I’m not seriously considering it, but it is a thought.

          1. Again, that is fictional. We’re talking true blood brew. Possibly the hard stuff, depending on our ability to filter out coagulants while simultaneously raising the blood sugar level to a fermentation-worthy point.

            I’d be remiss in not mentioning SF’s alternative if the coagulants can’t be removed–blood cheese. Or my counter-alternative of blood Jell-O.

    3. If you’re brewing with malt extract, expect all your beers to be a lot darker than what you can buy in the store. You can only get the really light coloring if you go all grain. The K?lsch being cloudy could be influenced by the yeast you used; it may settle out eventually. I think you could still add a clarifying agent to help with that, although normally Irish Moss is added during the boil. For bottles, you should wait at least three weeks for optimal carbonation and aging.

      1. That’s the time frame I was thinking, but the guy who owns the store I buy ingredients at said the Hefe and Kolsch will be ready to bottle in 7-10 days and will be ready to drink 10 days after that. I’m going to wait an extra week to be safe.

        And we are doing extract. I’ll bear that in mind going forward.

        1. You still in Fresno? I’ll be driving from L.A. to Sac on one of the weekends around Memorial Day (woe is he who can’t take teh awesome high speed railz up there), and I may very well stop by and steal some of your beer, or just drink one with you.

          1. Just south of Fresno in Visalia. If you’re coming down the 99, you’re welcome to stop by. If you’re taking the 5, let me know and I’ll meet you and leave some with you.

            Either way, email me.

    1. Slate always delivers.

      George Tazberik
      He also inspired many people to look at libertarianism and realize that a civilization without centralized proactive coordination can’t exist.

      It’s centralized proacive corrdination now, is it?

      1. These people didn’t even know what a toilet was until Uncle Sam showed them.

        1. Now if only someone could show them how to use it, so they’d stop crapping all over themselves.

        2. Yeah the comments are priceless.

          And despairing.

          1. slightlycrazy
            in ron paul’s world we would not have gone to the moon, built the internet and the interstates, hoover dam, the panama canal. we wouldn’t have won world war ii. we wouldn’t have created the huge middle class whose work and values support the country now. we would be living on subsistence farms, leaving school in the second grade to hoe and weed, knowing little of the wider world, which would be in the hands of people like hitler and tojo and stalin.

            Government is all, all is government. Submit.

            1. who is this we this scribe speaks of? Seriously, it is staggering that folks like him believe their own bullshit. Try building the Hoover Dam today and watch how many Slate readers/writers show up to protest. The Panama Canal would be deemed corporate welfare and whole Internet canard is nuclear stupid. I am reasonably sure the people behind ARPAnet had no idea what it would morph into.

              1. Also, there were plenty of privately developed networks in the works before the Internet boomed. FideNet, for example, which I used twenty years ago, when the hippest geeks were all on BBSes.

                1. Not to mention the Intranet developed at Xerox Parc. In the early 1970’s.

      2. proacive corrdination

        joe’z law.

        Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.

      3. Statism: Centralized Proactive Coordination
        Waste: Economic Recovery Stimulation
        Torture: Extraordinary Physical Manipulation
        War: Kinetic Military Action
        Pork: Local Infrastructure Investment
        Taxation: Revenue Collection
        Free Markets: Unfettered Greed and Exploitation
        Liberty: Mass Anarchy and Moral Depravity
        Immigration: Foreign Infiltration and Invasion
        The War on Drugs: Anti-Canine Adolescence Fortification

    2. *I worked at the magazine for two and a half years and remain a contributing editor.

      Weigel’s still on the masthead? Cancel my fucking subscription!

      1. You have to subscribe to fuck?

        1. Yes, if you want a date with Lobster Girl.

  13. Obama Has Over $500,000 with JPMORGAN……..45021.html

    1. It is a jointly held account, presumably with First Lady Michelle Obama.

      Or with that composite girlfriend, eh?

    2. and it bears repeating – it was not his money or that of any other individual that was invested in the money loser. JPM has its fund for investment, made up of money earned over the years. Besides, it turned a 4Bil profit in the quarter. Govt cannot legislate risk out of business.

  14. There’s no need to have a national level law that recognizes same-sex marriages as having the same civil rights as different-sex marriages.

    The constitution already does that, in the requirement that states recognize marriages performed in other states as being valid.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.