Mitt's Solar Shenanigans, Secret Service Immune to Free Speech, Nutmeg State Digs Medical Pot: P.M. Links

|

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.

Advertisement

NEXT: If Liberals Think Striking Down ObamaCare Equals Judicial Activism, What About Striking Down the Defense of Marriage Act?

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

  1. Qualified impunity?

    1. The immunity (impunity) seems pretty unqualified to me.

      1. No, your thinking of “qualified futlity” which is our entitlement as citizens.

    2. Well, at least one of them was transferred to Guam; this is the closest thing the USG has to Siberia.

      1. Oh, no. We have this.

        1. That’s the program where you find an alien in the ice and it imitates some of the program’s members and you have to do a blood test, right? Right, Blair? Where I don’t know what the hell’s in there, but it’s weird and pissed off, whatever it is?

          1. No, it’s the program where you take your sled dogs to the mountain range and find a vast subterranean city buried under the ice with blind albino penguins and nameless horrors.

            1. Guillermo del Toro almost managed to make that (with James Cameron producing), but Universal pulled the plug, which was incredibly disappointing. del Toro is the perfect guy to do it.

              1. Yeah, he gets slapped down a bit more by the big studios, but Pan’s Labyrinth was fantastic.

        2. That doesn’t look like Michigan…

    3. Look pal, if you you aren’t qualified you’re little people.

    4. That makes no sense at all. If it was unconstitutional, then no government actor has the authority to so behave. Which means no immunity.

      1. This could set a quite insane precedent.

        1. I’m working completely from memory and may be wrong, but I could swear that immunity claims by government officials were totally negated if their action was outside the scope of their legal authority.

  2. For a second month in a row, orders to U.S. factories unexpectedly fell, in an apparent sign of a global economic slowdown.

    Seriously, who are these fucks? “I didn’t expect a slap when stating my honest opinion of her ass.” “I didn’t expect so much trouble flipping that Detroit property.” “I really didn’t expect my dick to itch so much after that trip to Thailand.” EXPECT BAD THINGS FROM BAD DECISION MAKING.

    1. Re:Thailand quip: spit take + new laptop = awkward conversation with IT.

    2. And yet, my auto-related plant – and all the others in my company – are on max production now and through at least 3Q12, based on our manufacturing plan. Which we just increased. AGAIN.

      The rest? Fuck ’em…

      WEIRD! Who’s buying the fucking cars and trucks?? I dunno, but keep ’em coming. We’re making tons o’ money in a shitty market – I can’t wait till it gets GOOD!

  3. Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said on Monday that he would support a proposal by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo to significantly curb the number of people who could be arrested for marijuana possession as a result of police stops.

    The NYPD says good luck with that.

    1. ZC’mon, Fist, it’s not like NYPD can’t find manufacture some other reason for arresting them.

  4. Update on that New Mexico case I’ve mentioned previously – the state Court of Appeals says wedding photographers can be forced to photograph same-sex “commitment ceremonies.”

    The NM government doesn’t afford equal status to gay weddings, but it’s forcing the private sector to do so.

    http://ow.ly/bm4Ss

    1. Does Gary Johnson have a position on this?

      1. Bottoms.

    2. I completely fail to see how this works. I say no, I won’t photograph your wedding, you go to court and sue me? And then what? I take a bunch of badly exposed blurry shots of people’s shoes and the backs of their heads?

      1. Then they can go back and sue you for failing to give them as good photos as if they were straight. If there’s a dispute about your motives, they engage in liberal discovery to look over your emails, tweets, etc. to say if you made comments about not serving gays.

      2. I’m assuming that it would be a suit for “damages”, not to ultimately force them to take shitty pictures. It’s force by threat of punishment.

        1. You would have to argue that you suffered damages because I am the only person qualified to take your wedding photos. I don’t see that argument flying unless I waited until the actual ceremony to bail out.

          1. I’m not saying it’s logical. There is no logic in forcing people to be “tolerant”.

            1. Homophobia is gay

              1. Harley drivers are a bunch of faggots.

                Big Gay Al is right. That definition makes so much more sense.

    3. This is ridiculous. Why would you want a photographer who hates people like you? Too easy for the photog to do a mediocre job to discourage gay clientele.

      Also, businesses should have the right to refuse services to anyone.

    4. Does New Mexico license wedding photographers?

    5. Refusing to photograph same-sex weddings is the same as refusing to let African-Americans stay in your hotel. Makes perfect sense.

      /sarcasm

    6. In IL a bed and breakfast got sued for not hosting a civil union ceremony. Although as a public accomodation that case has better standing under current precedent.

  5. Connecticut is the the 17th U.S. state to legalize the medical use of marijuana. The measure requires registration with the state and a doctor’s certification. California is also moving toward a licensing regime.

    The USDOJ says good luck with that.

  6. Prop 29 is just the kind of wasteful utterly useless Big Government shit that Californians usually will swallow up. I’ll see its defeat as a positive sign if it happens since we are getting hammered with these bullshit pro-29 ads that want us to “think of the children and the sick cancer patients” and do not dispute any of the claims made by newspapers and other groups about its many flaws.

  7. Has reason covered or have you guys discussed Wenzel’s interview of Garry Johnson? I can’t say I’m surprised about his ignorance of Austrian Economics, but his almost complete unfamiliarity with libertarian philosophy was disappointing.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTch7InkZjo

    Also, is it just me or is reasonable preventing hitnrun from loading?

    1. It’s not reasonable because it’s goofed up on mine too and I’m not running it.

    2. Reason knows how to spell Gary Johnson’s name, so there’s that.

      1. I blame Garry’s Mod.

        Have anything to say about the interview?

        1. I read about it earlier but haven’t listened to it. It’s disappointing that he does not seem to know much about the intellectual/philosophical underpinnings of libertarianism.

  8. Pedophile terrorist gets mad about being kicked out of Barnes and Noble kids’ section.

    Omar Amin claimed a store worker told him a female shopper had complained he was in the children’s area in the store in Scottsdale, The Arizona Republic reported.

    1. “A man who, for all we know, is a Holocaust denying, 9/11 pedophile.”

      “Objection!”

      “Withdrawn.”

      1. nice

    2. When I worked at Borders(RIP) I regularly kicked creepy fucks like that out of the kid’s section. Half the time in the pile of books they’d leave behind I’d find a heavily browsed copy of a Jock Sturges book.

      1. Anybody complain?

        1. nope they knew they were wrong

    3. I guess if you wanna buy a kid a book, shop at Amazon.

      No, wait, you should just shop at Amazon anyway. Suck-it bookstores.

  9. New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg signed on to Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo’s plan to decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana in public view so that cops can’t so easily escalate citable offenses to misdemeanors. Just don’t wet your smoke-parched whistle with a giant-sized soda.

    Without the non-coercion principle, it is impossible to be consistent if you are not a sociopath. Even tyrants make exceptions for those loyal to them. Excepting Ivan the Terrible, who was likely a serial killer before he even became tsar.

  10. Some promising news from the Golden State.

    Are people finally extricating their heads from their anuses? Get this on the ballot and we’ll find out.

  11. In Conn.: “The measure requires registration with the state..”

    Hey, what could possibly go wrong?

  12. Mitt Romney has one more similarity to Barack Obama: as governor of Massachusetts, he delivered state money to a solar energy firm, which has now gone belly-up.

    WTF. Reason itself debunked this supposed “similarity” in an earlier article, and yet Tucille is still running with it.

    There are some significant differences between Romney’s solar subsidy sins and the Obama administration’s besides just the comparative dollar amount:

    * The loan was actually approved before Romney took office as governor
    * Even if Romney had been in office, the program that approved the loans was not under the governor’s control
    * The company actually paid the loan back

    These are Shackford’s words, not mine, so all the fuckwads who inevitably will call me “contrarian” can have a warm cup of FOAD.

    1. And anyone accusing me of “pedantry” can have a cup from the same spout. Tucille clearly crafted that sentence to leave out several relevant facts so as to make Romney look worse.

      1. I don’t think you are pedantic, just intellectually dishonest.

        Speaking of being pedantic, I believe this is the article you wanted to link to.

        1. I keep losing track of the baseless accusations against my character that some use to convince themselves and others that they can dismiss my arguments without having one of their own.

          1. I’m not trying to dismiss your arguments I’m just stating my opinion and fixing the link you fucked up.

            You’re welcome.

            We did discuss Penrose once and that was what helped to decide me.

            1. That was you? I feel better.

            2. BTW, sometimes I actually agree with you, but I still find your knee-jerk contrarianism to be intellectually dishonest.

              1. You left out “fucking idiot”. You have a lot to learn from Epi and Warty.

                Now, to me it looks like you’re playing Mad Libs with a bunch of insults because it makes no sense, but what do I know.

      2. Being right in this instance means you have been consistently right previously? Please, elaborate, I think you may pull something epic here if you do so.

        1. No it doesn’t, but I’m vasectomizing anticipated future attacks.

    2. * Even if Romney had been in office, the program that approved the loans was not under the governor’s control

      I’m not arguing with you, Tulpa. This question is for everybody here: What kind of fucking state program anywhere is not “under the governor’s control”? Isn’t that the point of having a damn governor in the first place? Somewhere for the buck to stop.

      1. He was a governor, not a czar. Though Tucille has in previous articles claimed that Romney “passed” MassCare, so maybe this is a more fundamental misunderstanding of separation of powers than I suspected at first.

        1. Any state program falls under the auspices of the chief executive. Sorry, but if it happened on his watch and he didn’t support it, he had plenty of time to disassociate himself from it while he was there. Otherwise, he owns it.

          We need more accountability from politicians, not less.

          1. I’m not sure of the details in this case, but there are definitely govt programs that the executive can’t simply kill by his executive powers. If a program is required by law there’s not much he or she can do.

            1. I know that, but his silent approval of them is deafening.

              I, for one, know that if I was a governor and there was a program I disapproved of, I’d let the citizens know on record that I opposed it.

              1. That’s why you’re not governor, Mr Bigmouth.

                Well, that and your scandalous underground lawn dart trade.

      2. The governor of Texas is basically just a figurehead. Kinda like the Queen. Or the mayor of Dallas. So I could see there being things that weren’t under Mittens control.

        1. See my comment above. If I were in office, I’d make it a point to state on record the programs I opposed.

          Rule 1 of governing: If you don’t voice your opposition to something on your watch, you own it.

          1. The closest thing you have to governing experience is that fling you had with a governess back in the days before you became a one-woman man.

            1. Mark my words: that will change in 2 years or less.

      3. What kind of fucking state program anywhere is not “under the governor’s control”

        About 80% of them in CA.

  13. Dallas cop shoots man in back. Says he was going for a weapon. Witnesses say that is not true.

    FTA: “According to the police statement, Officer Limbaugh’s squad car was among the 8 percent of patrol vehicles not equipped with a video camera.”

    How convenient.

    1. BTW, he was pulling him over for failing to signal a right turn into an apartment complex.

      How many of you made a turn without signaling today? Is that little bit of revenue for the city worth taking a fucking life for?

      1. Is that little bit of revenue for the city worth taking a fucking life for?

        Similar question: is avoiding that fine worth becoming a cop-killer?

        But yeah, I’m sure the guy was pulling a weapon to avoid a ticket. Yet another front in the War On Cops.

        1. According to the two witnesses, the guy wasn’t pulling a gun at all. And see my comment below. If the cop saw the gun, the last thing he would have done is order the guy out of the car. And based on the rest of the report, he had both hands on the guy, which means he saw a gun and didn’t pull his own but instead ordered the man out of the car.

          The cop’s story flies in the face of common sense and/or any smart policework. Take his obvious bullshit with the witnesses stories, and they tend to make me believe the guy ran and the cop shot him in the back.

          1. brought myself to read the link. so, it wasn’t just the traffic ticket, the kid was gettin busted for weed.

            Still. I could see him trying to escape, but killing someone? Trading in the possibility of some jailtime for a near certainty of life imprisonment? Then again, drug-addled coloreds aren’t know for their common sense, Reefer Madness told me so.

            1. FTA (emphasis mine): “The police statement ? issued nearly two full days after the incident in the 3600 block of Folklore Trail in Oak Cliff ? said a car driven by Husband was pulled over by Officer Leland Limbaugh for failing to signal a turn. The officer “smelled the odor of marijuana coming from the car” as he approached the vehicle.”

              Never let it be said that the Dallas Police Department isn’t deliberate in dotting their i’s and crossing their t’s on those police reports.

      2. Finally. Maybe people will start using their turn signals as a result. I’m guessing over 50% of people don’t use them at all anymore. The reason, I assume? They feel they don’t need to let anyone else know where they are going, they are too important,who cares about those other fucks?

        If I see one more asshole make an unsignaled left turn in front of oncoming heavy traffic, causing near-accidents in several directions, I might just go for the weapon myself.

    2. So you expect cops to risk having a suspect shoot them without looking with a firearm stuffed in their buttcrack?

      1. I think if the cop really saw a gun before the man exited the vehicle, the last thing he would have done is order the man out. The story stinks of cover-up.

        1. You can’t see a gun stuffed in a buttcrack. Some of the people I see in Walmart could probably fit an SKS in there.

      2. That does sound incredibly risky.

        1. this comment was probably based on a misreading of Tulpa’s post.

          the way I read it: the suspect is shooting the cop without looking at him, as the suspect is facing the other way. which [sarc] sounds incredibly risky indeed [/sarc].

          1. I think you read my sarcasm correctly.

    3. See, he probably *was* going for a weapon. It just happened to be in his dresser drawer in his apartment.

      Procedures were followed, administrative leave, blah fucking blah…

      1. Nevermind…snark fail.

        FTA: But Hedden noted that officers only have a split second to decide what to do. “You are seeing someone grasp for what you believe is a weapon after you told them they are under arrest,” he said. “The only conclusion you can draw is that they want to use that weapon on you ? and if you hesitate, you are dead.”

        Except he didn’t tell him he was under arrest. He grabbed his hands when he got out of the vehicle and when he struggled he shot him.

        Why?

        Fuck you, that’s why.

        1. I wonder where the Reverend Al Sharpton has been? Is there some kind of weather delay keeping all flights out of the DWF metroplex?

          1. The reverend didn’t say shit about about the 80 yo veteran murdered by Boston cops either.

    4. GOD DAMNIT DALLAS!!!!!!!

      Seroiusly, what the fuck?

  14. CNN is all over this Queen Lizzy shit. Didn’t you guys fight a war to get away from them?

    1. Are they getting on her hypocrisy for the home-flipping and loan-sharking to relatives? Or her plagiarism?

      Oh, wrong Lizzy. I should have known it when you said “CNN” and “All over this” in the same sentence.

      1. At least this one never claimed to be 1/32 Anglo-Saxon.

    2. The next war is to get away from CNN.

      1. No, we’ll just have Kirk destroy the CNN simulators and it will all be over.

        1. Too few people voluntarily walk into CNN’s disintegration booth any given night, anyway. Jimmy Boy doesn’t need to bother.

    3. If we’d known that single-payer healthcare was down the road, we might never have left.

    1. No Gary Numan?

  15. This story just gets stranger
    Magnotta arrested in Berlin caf? while viewing porn and articles about himself
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..ested.html

    1. hile viewing porn and articles about himself

      Isn’t that redundant?

    2. Is it really that strange? The victim didn’t just disappear, his body parts were mailed off and a video of the dismemberment was posted online. The crime was as much about the attention as about the killing.

  16. The irony is so strong I can’t even make a pithy comment.

    FTA: An acting Seattle police captain helping lead the city’s response to Justice Department findings of excessive force was booked into King County Jail after being arrested in a domestic-violence incident.

    1. Toe the line or you become one of the little people. And subject to arrest.

      1. It seems he was towing the lion.

        1. If by “tow” you mean “slapping around” and by “lion” you mean “his wife,” then yes, he was towing the lion.

  17. Audio and juicy excerpts from hearing where a judge convicted a blogger for criticizing convicted bomber Brett Kimberlin and ordered blogger not to talk about Kimberlin for 6 months:

    http://ow.ly/bmdLn

    1. Just . . Is this shit going to stand?

      THE COURT: ?Help me along. How do you see it ending?

      WALKER: Well, I’m going to tell you [inaudible]?

      THE COURT: ?I make all my money by predicting the future, okay?

      WALKER: Okay.

      THE COURT: And that’s how I do it. See, I bet on something, and bang (ph), I make a lot of money.

      WALKER: See, this is my?

      THE COURT: ?Yeah, that’s the way I do it.

      WALKER: Ok, you might ? you might [inaudible]?.

      THE COURT: ? How do you see this ending? You two guys put swords to each other’s throats? Hmm? How do you see it ending? You two guys going outside, drawing swords and shooting (ph) each other?

      WALKER: No, I will never ? I would never resort to violence.

      THE COURT: So then, it’s going to ? it’s going to be a non-violent ruination of an individual.

      1. Do judges have any immunity if they basically drop any pretense of giving a shit about the law? I’m guess that, insofar he basically flipped off SCOTUS, a higher court might find they do not.

  18. Washington State liquor sales are finally privatized! But the state can’t keep from fucking people out of more money than before.

    FTA: “”Booyah!” said Albert Matriotti as he held up a 1.75-liter bottle of vodka on sale at Costco for $29. “It’s way cheaper than we thought it would be.””

    “After reading an explanatory sign posted nearby, he figured he’d have to pay an additional $12 at checkout ? $5.94 for Washington’s 20.5 percent spirits sales tax and $6.60 for a liter tax.

    “That’s not so great after all,” he said. “There might be more trips to California in my future.””

    Filthy, greedy bastards.

    1. Yes, I bought a bottle of high-end gin on Saturday at Metropolitan to celebrate and learned to my chagrin about that “special” tax. Fuckers.

      But there’s going to be an outcry, I would think; this tax is so in your fucking face and painful that there almost has to be.

  19. Balko tweeted this story earlier… you know, procedures followed, chief’s account vs. witnesses

    http://www.kvue.com/news/Flore…..28225.html

  20. lol, typical bought and paid for politician I think. Wow.

    http://www.Anon-not.tk

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.