A.M. Links: Romney Ad Targets Obama's "Vicious Lies" About Bain, Allison Says Libertarians Have the "Moral High Ground," Leftist Refuses to Concede Election in Mexico

|

  • it's a close second

    World leaders want Syria's Bashar al-Assad out but they won't say so. In something like an international edition of attempting to use the passive voice as policy, world leaders signed an agreement on transition in Syria that sees no role for Assad in a "unity government," though the document doesn't explicitly call for Assad to step down.

  • The newest Romney ad, running in Ohio, calls the president out as a liar on the campaign trail, using footage of Hillary Clinton from the 2008 primary. The ad pushes back on Obama's mischaracterizations of Bain Capital and Mitt Romney's work at the private equity firm.
  • John Allison, the former chair of the bank BB&T, is ready for a fight as he takes the helm at the Cato Institute. "One of the things that I really want to do is make this a moral fight instead of a fight around the technical aspects of economics.  The libertarian vision is a moral vision and we own the moral high ground.  A free society is the only society in which people can think for themselves and pursue their rational self-interest," he said.
  • The state police in Vermont will work more closely with the state's department of mental health to respond to mental health crises after cops tased and killed a suicidal man two weeks ago.
  • The leftist candidate Lopez Obrador says he's not ready to concede Mexico's presidential election. Democracy only works when the left wins, otherwise obviously it's dead, right? Last time around, Obrador's refusal to admit defeat led to political turmoil throughout the five-month transition period.
  • Joe Paterno may have influenced the decision not to report Sandusky's then-alleged child rape to law enforcement authorities.

Don't forget to sign up for Reason's daily AM/PM updates for more content.

Reason.TV: "Bikini Banners and F**king Cops Cracking Down on Cuss Words (Nanny of the Month, June 2012)"

Advertisement

NEXT: Shikha Dalmia on Detroit's Fiscal Crisis

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. AWWW YEAH. Happy Red White and Boom!

    1. world leaders signed an agreement on transition in Syria that sees no role for Assad in a “unity government,” though the document don’t explicitly call for Assad to step down.

      Yer killin’ me smalls.

    2. Whatever happened to “take yer loot and flee to Switzerland or the Riviera”?

        1. Dictators used to just flee when it got too hot to stay (ie. Doc Duvalier and half the leadership of sub-Saharan Africa). Now we gotta go through all this?

      1. Congratulations on the new name. Welcome to the civvies.

        1. Thanks, now I can be a bit more outspoken, muhuhuwhahaha.

    3. COTA won’t be collecting its sales tax during the bus strike, right?

      1. Ha ha ha.

        COTA DELENDA EST.

        I hope that the board pulls a Reagan and tells them they are all fired, even though that would probably be illegal as hell.

        1. When Blundo’s column is coming down against the union, you know you got problems.

      2. COTA is going to strike? Will anyone notice?

          1. Nah, people can just ride their bikes instead. See, now we know why they spent millions to build bike paths even though the city was so broke that the income tax had to be raised by 25%. They saw the bus strike coming. Brilliant!

    4. So, what percentage of Hit and Runners live in the general Columbus area? 25%? 30%

  2. Video: Are you ready for BronyCon?
    To cleanse the palate, I’m as beta as males get outside of Japan and even I can’t believe this is now a thing. When I was a kid, if you were lonely and desperate for companionship, you did the manly thing: You put on a Chewbacca costume and you dragged your ass to a “Star Wars” convention. Dignity, damn it. Is that too much to ask?…

    1. I’m not sure I want to understand it. Just like a Furries convention. View it from a distance with a since of quizzical wonder and then forget about it.

    2. There has to be a safe space for people called Dale Fjordbotten to wear a fake phallus on their heads

    3. Yeah, I caught something about this yesterday on the local talk radio show. It’s not a lack of Alphaness, but of grow-upness. My daughters all outgrew MLP before second grade.

      1. I spotted a brony at the local Feeder’s Supply last weekend. The Brony pride shirt gave him away.

        And yes, he looked like he’d only recently moved out of his mother’s basement.

    4. Which is worse: a taste for animated bestiality or pedophilia? I’m trying to figure out if I should look down more on adult male fans of MLP or the Powerpuff Girls.

      Oh Lauren Faust, you vile succubus.

    5. My youngest son watches that show. He’s only six though, so I’m not worried. Much.

    6. The she-spawn is a Brony of sorts. She doesn’t watch the actual show, but is obsessed with the parodies and dubs of the show, which are numerous on Teh Youtubes.

    7. Damn all these people having fun in ways I don’t approve!!

  3. An online dating service said she was one of my matches. How should I respond?

    Their moral compass needs to be pointed in the same direction as mine. I will say right here, if you are not into what is happening in the world around you (politics, economics, environment),OK, that is fine. But, If you think you are and you are not a devout Obama supporter, it is best to close this match now.

    1. Challenge Accepted!

    2. so her moral compass points up her arse? How uncomfortable. Date her and remove it. Or replace it

      1. I am taking that as an anal joke, whether it was intended as such or not.

        1. Everything is an anal sex joke. Everything.

          1. A penetrating insight indeed.

            1. See what I mean?

              1. See what I mean?

                Sounds like a load of crap… Oh, never mind!

          2. I dunno, I think “everything” is a bit of a stretch.

    3. Pump and dump.

    4. Dear Match: I am choosing to close this match because of your troglodytic opinion that only those who politically agree with you (re: positive impression of Obama given world events) are informed members of society. Your closed-mindedness will ensure many happy years of echo-chamber conversations with any who happen to feel your exclusionary rules are acceptable, however, I am pleased to leave you to continue to luxuriate in your own aromas. Thank you for your candor in this matter.

      1. only those who politically agree with you

        An old friend who died a few weeks ago was like this about women all his life. His last girlfriend I knew of (good-looking woman, intelligent, good career) called me up desperate to know why, after the better part of a year of dating, he suddenly wouldn’t answer her calls. “We aren’t politically compatible.”

        Of course, this is the same guy who would rather die than give up sugar and slash his carbs. He was so big he was asymmetric.

        1. I have known people (progressive liberals, specifically) who were openly adamant that under no circumstances would they date a Republican. It really took me aback.

          1. Well, strictly religious people can be like that sometimes.

          2. The Left is utterly intolerant of opposing viewpoints. I think it has something to do with thier political views being dogma, much like a religion, but instead of it being spiritual it is all material.

    5. “No, I’m a libertarian. That’s why I’m so happy that Obama will legalize drugs in his second term.”

      1. My monitor hates coffee, and now it hates you.

        1. Tell your punk monitor he knows where he can find me.

    6. “I can tell you are fat and annoying.”

      1. This is the winner right here. I liked db’s answer, but it was a little too polite.

        1. I knew I should have gone with “smell your own farts” instead.

          1. I’m saving “luxuriate in your own aromas” in the memory banks, that was genius. However, I would have added something like “my moral compass points away from murder drones and armed raids of medicinal pot clinics”.

    7. I can understand people supporting Obama, since most people will pick one of the douche or turd sandwich in the election. But how can anyone be a “devout” supporter of him? What moral principles do you need to have to think that Obama is the perfect President?

      1. dain bramage

      2. no moral principles…either being uninformed or apathetic is all that is necessary for supporting The Obama. Keep in mind, followers of Jim Jones and David Koresh were devout, too.

        1. I guess I’m more cynical than many people. It seems obvious to me that no politician is worthy of devotion and certainly not one who is willing to do what it takes to be elected president.
          I just sort of take it as a given that followers of crazy religious leaders are fucked in the head to start with.

        2. Not sure it’s because they have no moral principles. They think they do. It sounds very principled, on its face, to house the poor, feed the hungry, save the environment, ensure medical care for all…

          The problem with the left, and I truly believe is’s physiological, is that they are incapable of predicting second (third, fourth…) order consequences. Taking money from a rich entrepreneur and giving it to a homeless man sounds like a great idea (very principled). They are incapable of grasping that the rich guy will stop producing his wares and society as a whole will be less for everyone (including they guy they were trying to help).

          Incapable, lazy or just plain stupid. Not sure which.

          1. I don’t think they’re incapable so much as they have an intentional blind spot. That mean ol’ entrepreneur who doesn’t continue to work for free is symptomatic of all that’s wrong with humanity. And they’re quite OK with the homeless guy going hungry if it also means the entrepreneur guy is punished to the point that he goes out of business.

      3. What moral principles do you need to have to think that Obama is the perfect President?

        Psychopaths don’t have moral principles

      4. What moral principles do you need to have to think that Obama is the perfect President?

        Completely unabashed power worship

      5. Paritanship.

        1. Parrot ‘n Shit

          Sort of works.

    8. “I’m a free spirit, unhampered by social conventions… except for politics…and everything else.”

      1. My favorite kind of girl in my college days. I could talk them into just about anything.

    9. Just try to figure out which part of her moral compass is down with the summary executions, persecution of whistleblowers, arms sales to drug cartels, crackdown on people selling medicine to cancer patients, lawless military assault on another country, etc. See if she can name how many Obama donors are in high office.

    10. devout Obama supporter…

      Such an apt adjective.

  4. A private German economics and business university is suing one of its students for lost income after he finished his Bachelors and Masters degrees in about a quarter of the normal time.

    http://www.thelocal.de/educati…..43517.html

    1. Where I went to college, they’d charge “acceleration fees” if you wanted to finish in less than 4 years.
      Which actually sort of made sense as such people would be taking more classes than usual and the basic tuition was a fixed price.

    2. Not close to that, but one semester I took 18 credit hours, and got 18 CLEP test hours. I went from Freshman to Junior. My university didn’t sue, but they did block my registration until I took a standardized test that was required after Sophomore year.

  5. Commentary: America’s taxpayers lost big in UAW bailout
    The Treasury Department estimates the taxpayers will lose enormous sums in the auto bailout ? more than $20 billion. That is more than Michigan spends on public education, more than the federal government spends on NASA, and more than America gives in foreign aid.

    None of these losses were necessary to keep General Motors and Chrysler in business. The entire net cost of the bailout came from subsidizing the United Auto Workers’ pay and benefits….

    1. Pfft. $20 billion is chump-change. Not that I think we should be bailing anybody out ever, mind, but the stimulus cost us 800bb and got us exactly jack and shit.

    2. out of curiosity, where was the Detroit News when the bailouts were first granted?

    3. …more than America gives in foreign aid

      Correction: More than the American government gives in foreign aid. Depending on how you count it, private charitable donations that go overseas are about $40 billion.

  6. Did a CIA Agent Work for the Mob? Excerpt from Evan Wright’s New Book
    In 2008, Jon Roberts, a convicted cocaine trafficker, made a startling claim to me: that more than three decades earlier he had participated in a murder with a man named Ricky Prado, who later entered the Central Intelligence Agency and became a top American spy. …

    1. The CIA needs to be closed and a new organization built from the ground up with the simple rule that no one who ever worked fro the CIA is allowed to work for the new agency.

      1. I concur. And as your President?, I commit to do just this!

        Almanian – 2012
        I’m Not Obama OR Romney!

        1. all hail the NOR Party candidate..not Obama or Romney.

          needz moar caffeine

    2. I wouldn’t be surprised. Isn’t their job basically to do illegal things that the government doesn’t want to admit to?

      1. Well technically according to the National Security act of 1947 the CIA has “no police or law enforcement functions, either at home or abroad”. That would mean most info obtained domestically that couldn’t legally be obtained by a private citizen would be illegal and globally, since espionage is a crime pretty much everywhere, their duties are by definition illegal. It’s okay though cause, brown people, borscht eaters, and the yellows do it too, and they’re scary.

        1. To amend this, I guess that would mean they can technically legally operate in a war zone. Which of course the their point of existence is so that espionage cannot be considered an act of war and if caught they would just be disavowed civilians.

          Here starts the circular logic though, we’re at war, with terror, everywhere, so everywhere there are terrorists is a war zone, but don’t worry the CIA will make sure they disappear before you realize they are somewhere, trust them, it’s not illegal, it’s a war on terror!!!!

    3. Huh, Gary Webb may have been somewhat right all along. Who knew? Guess it’ll give his widow some solace…

      The wiki of the CIA IG’s investigation after Dark Alliance is hilarious to read in retrospect. Let’s see, you have a guy working in the CIA department that is handling the Contras, who also admits being a bodyguard and friend of one of the largest coke dealers in S. Florida, but yet there’s no possible connection and Webb’s full of shit?

      Seriously, WTF? Between that and Aldrich Ames, whoever was handling internal security for the CIA made Helen Keller look like Argus.

  7. deluded Melanie Griffiths impersonator reveals painkiller addiction and unnervingly lumpy shins

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs…..ction.html

    1. Antonio looks really put-upon in that pic.

  8. Slouching Toward Debt Union
    Germans commit more money for less economic reform.
    http://online.wsj.com/article/…..oveLEFTTop

    On Friday euro-zone leaders agreed?or rather, Angela Merkel conceded?that their joint bailout funds may now be used both to buy up sovereign bonds directly and to start bailing out banks with European funds. “[I]t is imperative to break the vicious circle between banks and sovereigns,” the euro group statement reads.

    That’s one way to put it. Another way is that the deal puts Europe’s remaining solvent states on the hook for more of the debts of the southern periphery. That may soon include France and its 90%-of-GDP sovereign debt.

    1. Who could have seen this coming?

      I seem to recall, when Europe was contemplating forming a union, that there was much debate about the possibility of poorer nations bankrupting the solvent ones. This was foo-fooed by the left.

    2. So, if Eurozone nations are members of the Bluth family, which is which? I mean, obvious Germany is Michael, but what about the others?

      1. Greece is Tobias because of his job, obviously

      2. Estonia is George Michael

        1. I bet you can’t even grow bananas there.

          1. you can but they’re frozen

  9. ObamaCare’s now a bigger mess
    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/o…..NZ9NpCIPnN

    If the new health care law wasn’t enough of a mess before last week’s Supreme Court decision, that ruling actually added another layer of cost, complexity and political contentiousness to the bill.

    By striking down part of the law that required states to expand their Medicaid programs, the court tossed a very hot potato into the laps of state lawmakers everywhere.

    1. shorter wingnutese – i prefer to have unreimbursed ER visits by the poor hidden in my hospital costs.

      1. Thanks for bringing your exceptional brand of stupid to the conversation, Urine! As always, you add nothing to the conversation! Thanks so much!

        1. shoter stupidese – herr derr derp burp

          1. Exhibit B

              1. You are not allowed to do that.

  10. Joe Paterno may have influenced the decision not to report Sandusky’s then-alleged child rape to law enforcement authorities.

    May have? Paterno was the most important and powerful man at Penn State. There is no way that he didn’t get the final say on what was done about the allegations against Sandusky.

    1. No, Saint JoePa was on the up and up.

      Mt department manager is a Penn State grad. I really want to ask him what he thinks about all this, but my desire to remain employed is stronger than my morbid curiosity.

      1. CSB:

        There is a guy who lives across the street from my in-laws who is a PSU grad. He has a PSU flag on his house, PSU stickers on his cars, a PSU license plate for his SUV, and a bunch of other PSU related stuff. By coincidence, I happened to be visiting when the Sandusky verdict was announced. The next day, all the PSU stuff was gone. I had a good chuckle. I count Holier-than-thou PSU fans among the most annoying of sports fans.

        1. Holier-than-thou Notre Dame fans are the worst. Wait…

          Holier-than-thou Notre Dame fans are the worst.

          Fixed it myself…

          1. At least ND fans are holier-than-thou because of most national titles and most Heismans, and a bunch of other shit that happened some time around the Battle of Agincourt. PSU fans were holier-than-thou because “We run the cleanest program in histroy. Durr. All our football players are actually student-athletes. Hurr. Paterno makes sure everyone has the right priorities. Durr.” Of course, everyone outside the State College bubble knew this was bullshit before Sandusky. There’s no such thing as a clean Division I football program, only ones that haven’t been caught.

            1. I agree. Notre Dame really was a big deal. Joe Pa won two national titles, one he literally stole from Nebraska on one of the worst calls in college football history and the other he lucked out and beat a wildly over confident Miami team. He never once produced an historically great team. He was mostly the master of playing an easy schedule as an independent and then getting his ass kicked in the national title game.

              1. But ND are inSUFFerable. In SUFF erable.

            2. At least ND fans are holier-than-thou because of most national titles

              Notre Dame 13 (all numbers from cfbdatawarehouse.com)
              Yale 18
              Princeton 26

              Interesting definition of “most” you have there.

      2. I am half convinced that St. Joe like little boys too. Why else would he have been so keen on covering up for Sandusky.

        1. Integrity of the oh-so-important football program, and his own ego?

          1. Both I am sure. It basically puts lie to everything he ever said to his players. All that crap about integrity and doing the right thing. He didn’t believe a word of it. When it came down to doing the right thing, he failed. And the irony is that he destroyed his legacy by doing so. Had he done the right thing with Sandusky, it would have been forgotten in a year and been a footnote to his career. Instead, his actions with Sandusky will define him.

            1. Disagree with the idea that doing the right thing with Sandusky would have only been a footnote to Paterno’s career. It would probably have ended it, especially as the public learned just how many years Sandusky had been raping kids. The perception would have been that Paterno was old, couldn’t keep track of things anymore (especially having gone 5-7 that year) and needed to go.

              Any takers on how long Paterno would’ve lived after being eased out at Penn State? Never mind being named as a potential co-defendant in any civil litigation from the molestations.

              But you know what? Too Goddamn bad. Sometimes the right thing is very hard to do. That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be done.

              He traded God knows how many kids’ innocence for the prospect of 10 more years coaching football. Wonder if his shade thinks it was worth it?

    2. “most important and powerful man at Penn State”

      Try 3rd most powerful man in PA.

      1. Kyle Brady and Kevin Bacon?

      2. And the other two did not work for Penn State. The President of Penn State would have been fired before Paterno. And I find it hard to believe that McQuery was the first guy to report this. Why did Sandusky mysteriously retire in 1999 while still in his 50s and at the height of his coaching powers?

        1. actually, the president was fired before Paterno, was he not? I think he was.

          1. He was. You are right.

        2. Well and another question came up between my husband and I about how in the hell could Sandusky work over 20 years under Paterno and never get poached for a Head Coach gig of his own? Our theory was that if any school came calling to ask permission to talk to the guy, Paterno quashed it because he knew the dude was toxic.

      3. Head of PA’s Liquor Control board is #2, who’s #1? Dick Vermiel?

        1. For mayhem purposes, I always count the mayor of Filthadelphia as #2.

          1. He comes into the restaurant from time to time. Always 10 minutes before close. People at work fawn over him and don’t understand why I wouldn’t kowtow to a pol. It’s like Goode set the bar so low here that if you don’t burn down several square block of the city with people inside you’re a paragon of virtue. Squandering of a huge surplus, stop and frisk, curfews, suppression of the right to assembly are glossed over.

    3. Is this really true, though? I mean, Tressel had a lot of pull at TOSU — remember Pres. Gee’s joke about Tress firing him? — but I would never believe that any coach, no matter how godlike TOSU fans view him, would really be the most important and powerful man on campus.
      Penn State is a big university, too.
      Not that Joe Pa wasn’t an asshole.

      1. TOSU was a big deal in football long before Tressel ever got there. Places like Nebraska and Ohio State and Alabama are different than Penn State because those places have a sense of identity and tradition that goes beyond one coach. Penn State in contrast was nothing before Paterno. He was Penn State football. He thus had power there that no other coach had. Think about it, the guy was covering up for a child molester and half the damn campus still didn’t want him fired. That is power.

        1. remove bama from your list. Its sense of tradition is tied up almost exclusively with the Bear. The school still sells paraphernalia with the hounds tooth pattern. UA had success before him and after, but for a lot of folks, Bryant did not just walk on water, the water acted like a moving sidewalk when he was upon it.

          1. “did not just walk on water, the water acted like a moving sidewalk when he was upon it.”

            Yes, yes I am indeed stealing that.

          2. Bama was quite good in the 1930s. And they had some talent in the 50s (Bart Star for one). They just had a couple of bad coaches. And Bama fans are the most noxious in a country of noxious fans. My father still smiles when he talks about working with a couple of Bama fans in the early 1970s when an undefeated Nebraska team just layed the wood on an undefeated Alabama team in the Orange Bowl. He said the shock and horror and anger on their faces the next made their months of noxiousness all worth it.

            1. I was a HUGE Nebraska fan in the early 70’s. Why? I don’t know – I just was. They has some incredible teams back then. Just fucking machines.

              1. I love the running game. I love to watch one team just run over another one. The old Nebraska OU rivalry was great. That was a rivalry. Both teams were huge, physical and would just beat the living hell out of each other. I love football like that. I can’t stand the run and shoot passing game.

                1. ^^this^^, John. My brother was a HUGE Oklahoma fan (why? I DON’T KNOW!) I had a Nebraska helmet, he had an OK helmet – we’d play on opposite teams in the sandlot games in our neighborhood. It was epic fun.

                  1. My dad grew up in Nebraska. My mother was a huge KU fan. Every year he would torture her as Nebraska destroyed KU. It was never a happy weekend in our household. I played it neutral by pulling for Nebraska in football and KU in basketball.

                    1. I played it neutral by pulling for Nebraska in football and KU in basketball.

                      Were you neutral, or do you just know how to bet?

                    2. Even as a child, I knew that it was no fun rooting for a losing team.

                    3. You are wrong.

                    4. Being a Tech fan, you should know Rob.

              2. I was a HUGE Nebraska fan in the early 70’s. Why? I don’t know – I just was.

                Because you grew up in that stinking filth-hole known as Michigan. Even at an early age, you realized that the maize and blue was an abomination.

        2. What does the T in TOSU stand for?

          1. Tressel’s?.

            Think they’re going to have to change the name 🙁

            1. Yeah — But (UM)OSU will never cut it around here.

              1. Actually, I9, the “T” stands for “The”.
                True story.
                Where’d you grow up, in a barn?

                1. Close. Farm country – but I was a city boy. Big Ten country, actually. Even used to pay a bit of attention to FB. Swear to god I’ve never seen (noticed?) that before. So why “The”?

                  1. Insecurity was the prevailing theory among the faculty. The research foundation once jumped on me for not using the “The” in a big research grant proposal. Which I got, by the way. So there.

                  2. It literally started with an NFL player saying, “THE Ohio State University” during an intro. And it caught on.

                    1. I thought it was the other way around.

                    2. I still want to go to “Ball So Hard University” like its alum, Sizzle.

                2. You accusing him of being from Ohio?

            1. Dumbest scandal ever. I get that it’s all laundry, but you’d figure libertarians to be a bit more supportive of college kids trying to leverage their fleeting fame for beer and weed money. FFS, Posey was suspended five games over $730.

              1. You know, there are all these students from OSU who have opinions about the university. It’s like someone going to McDonald’s for breakfast for four years having an opinion on the corporation’s equity structure. I worked there. Tainted goes deeper than the scandal du jour. Fortunately for you, most other large universities are also tainted and should have a “t” in front of their names.

                1. No arguments about that; I just find the whole spectacle of what happened to be absurd. It’s like sentencing John Gotti to life in prison for soliciting a prostitute.

                  1. I think the rules for the students are idiotic, but I do think the university has to play by the rules it has agreed to.

                    The kids should be paid.

                    1. I could go either way on the schools themselves paying the students, especially the public ones, but the kids should get a cut of the NCAA licensing revenue while they’re still in school and even more if their specific image is used (I hoped O’Bannon’s suit was successful, haven’t heard anything on it recently though).

                      I don’t see the problem with any outside earnings though, be it through endorsements, booster payments, or plain old getting a job. If a bunch of Dallas oilmen want to sink their fortunes into the SMU football program, have at it.

                    2. Why not at least endorsements? Why can’t Tim Tebow makes millions while in school?

      2. I graduated from Penn State, and when I was there, the general feeling was that Paterno was highly respectable and held much sway given the football program, but “most powerful man” at the University? Hardly. Even back in the ’90s there was talk about how he was antiquated and should step aside. The sick irony is that would have put Sandusky in charge of the program, most likely.

        I think a lot of people here have a strange opinion of Penn State, in that they think PSU claimed some moral high ground in general based on Paterno’s supposed insistence on integrity and academic performance from his players. It’s a football program, for fuck’s sake. Drop it and there’s still a large institution of learning and research that dwarfs the sports program.

        I have never claimed moral high ground based on who I paid to teach me engineering. There may be some out there but I would agree they are deluded. Of my acquaintances and friendsfrom PSU, I cannot think of a single one who claims some special moral status based on having attended that school.

        1. If the Dean of the Engineering school had been molesting kids, I am sure Paterno would have held no sway. So yeah he didn’t run the school.

          But he sure as hell ran the football program. In that he had pretty much carte blanche. He made the final decision on what to do with Sandusky. And even if he didn’t, he certainly had a say and still could have turned Sandusky in had he chose to. People are kidding themselves if they think that he wasn’t responsible for that decision and cover up.

          1. I agree Paterno took the easy and cowardly way out of assuming he had done his duty by passing information up the chain. This is not the mark of true leadership.

    4. “Paterno was the most important and powerful man at Penn State.”

      You are confusing power and importance with popularity.

  11. A court of, by and for the 1%
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..story.html

    Americans for Prosperity, the shadowy conservative super PAC, announced that it would run $8.2 million worth of attack ads to slam health-care reform in nearly a dozen key swing states. No doubt many more of the GOP’s secretive sugar daddies will soon follow suit.

    It’s a reminder that Roberts and his conservative colleagues have not shied away from empowering malignant, moneyed interests who undermine our democracy. Thursday’s decision notwithstanding, this is still a court of, by and for the 1 percent.

    1. Oh for fuck’s sake. Why are free speech and free press such difficult concepts to understand?
      Of all of the stupid crap from the left, the opposition to Citizens United is one of the more irritating to me. How is it not fucking obvious that the first amendment means you can say or publish whatever you want to? Not to mention that political speech is the most important to protect.

      1. Zeb, it is their most glaring example of intellectual dishonesty. It isnt irritating at all. I love it.

      2. “Why are free speech and free press such difficult concepts to understand?”

        Because WaPo isn’t expecting to lose them? If they have press rights and no one else does, no one challenges their view of events, which makes their ideas so much more powerful. All mainstream media institutions have an innate bias against true freedom of the press.

        1. Yeah. And most people seem to think that “the press” means established news companies rather than any form of mass communication, which is how it should be interpreted.

      3. Zeb, the Left largely agrees that political speech must be protected.

        However, as unequal wealth allows those who exploit middle-class workers to hold disproportionate sway in funding ads, we have to limit what can be contributed by each person and in what manner. That way, only the best ideas can come out on top. Think of it like Perfect Competition: the firms (contributions) are the same size, there is a large number of producers, and the products (ideas) would be indistinguishable; that’s how you get fair prices and acceptable goods, and that’s how we’ll finally get virtuous and incorruptible politicians.

        You Rightards are so short-sighted sometimes.

        1. [/Obama supporter]

          1. You had me going there for a minute.

            1. I aim to please.

    2. “the shadowy conservative super PAC”

      So shadowy that I will probably be abducted and “disappeared’ for even writing about them! if you find a top hat near the scene, dust it for prints!

      1. Conservative, not libertarian. Substitute “Flag pin and bible verse” for “top hat”.

        1. I think I need to have an artist friend of mine make a lapel pin that looks like a roll of toilet paper in red, white and blue.

  12. Roberts the coward
    Chief justice’s pathetic flip
    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/o…..i8KrIXXAmL

    In her concurring opinion, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg heaps scorn upon it. The dissent by the four conservatives whom Roberts abandoned “deliberately ignored Roberts’ decision,” according to Crawford’s reporting, “as if they were no longer even willing to engage with him in debate.”

    And the White House, whose signature piece of legislation Roberts saved, spent the weekend feverishly denying that the mandate to buy insurance is a “tax” ? even though that’s the sole ground on which Roberts agreed to allow the mandate to stand constitutionally.

    The Roberts opinion is nothing less than an intellectual, political and moral scandal.

    1. shorter roberts – “if it walks like a duck…”

      1. True, but first you should know what a duck is before pronouncing a thing as such.

  13. Greens largely to blame for wildfires. Great racket they have. You sue and prevent anyone from doing any forest management creating huge forest fires. Then you blame the fires on global warming.

    1. http://www.dnainfo.com/new-yor…..z1zUbp1sQS

      Harlem Couple Branded ‘Professional Agitators’ in NYPD ‘Wanted’ Poster

      I am sure I disagree with those people about nearly everything. But man do they have balls. Those people are real no kidding heroes.

      1. “Subjects purpose is to portray officers in a negative way and too deter officers from conducting there responsibilities.”

        Eighteen words, three fuckups. Wow. Me spell good.

        1. In their defense, I do have a flier business on the side.

          1. Now that was funny.

          2. Awesome. You made me smile. A lot.

        2. Three spelling fuckups. Misrepresenting the purpose of the videos for propaganda reasons is pretty fucked up as well.

          1. Intimidating citizens is pretty fucked up, but around here I assumed everyone would think that so decided to take the piss instead

            1. They probably have an unsecured wifi router and deserve whatever they get.

              1. Accessories! Contributin’ to the Deliquency! Aiding and Abetting!

                ANIMALS!

        3. Are you sure they weren’t just spelling in Australian?

  14. Washington Post Fact Checker: I Don’t Fact Check Our Own Writers
    http://washingtonexaminer.com/…..le/2501189

    In your meta moment of the day, Glenn Kessler, the Washington Post’s Fact Checker, announced today that he will not grade comments made by political candidates about stories reported in the Washington Post, largely because he refuses to fact check stories published in his newspaper.

    Kessler has announced he is not going to issue any Pinocchios based on claims that President Obama’s campaign has made based on a disputed Washington Post story ? although he says the Obama campaign misquotes the WaPo story.

    1. He has to work with those people. He might not get invited to the next flash mob pillow fight or get any of the honey from Ezra Klein’s urban bee hive.

      1. “honey from Ezra Klein’s urban bee hive”

        Is that what they’re calling it these days? Those lefties sure come up with some interesting euphemisms these days.

        1. They do. See also “licking the clams from Paul Krugman’s beard”

          1. ifh, the image that gave me was worse than anything I’ve ever read from SugarFree.

            1. “I’d like to thank my agent, the director, the Academy, Satan…”

          2. This works on several levels, ifh.

  15. HARLEM ? The NYPD has created a “wanted” poster for a Harlem couple who film cops conducting stop-and-frisks and post the videos on YouTube ? branding them “professional agitators” who portray cops in a bad light and listing their home address, DNAinfo.com New York has learned.
    The flyer featured side-by-side mugshots of Matthew Swaye, 35, and his partner Christina Gonzalez, 25, and warned officers to be on guard against them. It was spotted by multiple people, including the couple, when it was taped to a podium outside a public hearing room in the 30th Precinct house last Thursday, where residents met for precinct council meeting.
    “Be aware that above subjects are known professional agitators,” read the flyer, which bears the NYPD shield and a seal of the NYPD’s Intelligence Division. It also gave the home address of the couple.
    “Above subjects MO is that they video tape officers performing routine stops and post on YouTube,” the sign said. “Subjects purpose is to portray officers in a negative way and too deter officers from conducting there [sic] responsibilities.”

    http://www.dnainfo.com/new-yor…..z1zZ5ZWxfM

    1. It’s good to have the real Pip back.

      1. Is that some kind of anal reference?

        1. Only in the sense that the other one is a pain in the ass.

        2. Everything’s an…but you knew this

          1. Knew it? He lived it

            1. His life is a come from behind win.

              1. +#2

            2. Rectum? Damn near killed him.

    2. The flyer also listed the name and cellphone number of a Sgt. Nicholson in the 30th Precinct, and implored cops to “not feed into above subjects propaganda.”

      Could also be stated, “Conduct yourselves in a professional manner.”

  16. The libertarian vision is a moral vision and we own the moral high ground.

    Sing it, sister!

  17. Ultravox has a new album out:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umi9pNZdzsY

    though I gotta say I’ve always been a bigger John Foxx fan, his Utravox years were punk-fueled synth madness.

    and my most “commercial” piece:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMf8ZLm34KY

    created using all iPad apps: ReBirth and Alchemy (though the latter had a MIDI interface to my keyboard)

    1. I loved Ultravox back in the day; thanks for the link.

    2. I am a total sucker for Midge Ure-era Ultravox… the latest incarnation doesn’t really do anything for me however.

    1. My favorite part is the first line

      Mockery gets you nowhere.

      I would say it got them a lot of places or the Sun Times wouldn’t be having a case of the vapors about it. Evil can’t take mockery. Progressives because they are generally demonic are thus particularly susceptible to mockery.

    2. Yeah…intentions count more than results, unless of course the results put leftist idiocy in the spotlight. And….what John says about mockery above.

  18. A pizza so healthy you could eat it three times a day, everyday

    I think life just got better!

    Then again, it’s healthy… so it probably tastes like shit. Nevermind.

    1. Science, bitches!

    2. I stopped reading at ‘seaweed’.

      1. I’m not big on seaweed (mostly whatever that crap they put on sushi is), but I could see it working as a flavor enhancer.

    3. @#$%ing scientists – I survived on stuffed pizza – sausage and spinach (with gin to wash it down)- all throughout grad school.

      1. I lived on Papa Johns stolen from free food events. Once even a “Women and Minorities in Engineering” speech.

        1. I hated being a part of the only socio-gender-ethnic group that didn’t get our own Engineering society. It meant I was limited to only one free pizza event a week.

          1. Incorrect. It meant that you were limited to only one free pizza event a week without sneaking in.

            1. Somehow the SWE people caught me every time.

              1. I’m about as white and male as you can get. I fear you are underestimating the sneakiness, sir.

        2. You, sir, are a hero.

        3. “Women and Minorities in Engineering” speech.

          There must have been a ton of extra pizza.

          1. It wasn’t a “Women and Minorities who got into Engineering based on Academics” speech.

  19. The newest Romney ad, running in Ohio, calls the president out as a liar on the campaign trail, using footage of Hillary Clinton from the 2008 primary.

    Hillary is glad to help.

    1. Bill probably sent them the video tape.

    2. Hillary was big in eastern Ohio and Western PA. Once the racist unionists who supported her realized she had lost to Obama, the total number of Democratic political yard signs dropped significantly. Many kept up their Hillary signs all the way through the general election.

  20. Moral high ground? If you dont have an iron fist, moral high ground is worth zip, zilch, nada. You are up against people who couldnt care less about morality, for them winning is all that counts and fear is all they understand.

    1. So many who claim the moral high ground seem perfectly willing to ignore the real-world consequences of their beliefs. Would more people die in your society than they do in a welfare state? Obviously yes. So what moral high ground?

      1. It is not so obvious. Welfare programs have side effects that negatively affect people and society as well. I won’t claim to know for certain one way or the other, but I think it is far from obvious.

        1. If government doesn’t provide charity, no one will!

          You see, people like Tony absolutely refuse to voluntarily help anyone unless government forces others to go along.

          That is what makes him morally superior to libertarians. He won’t lift a damn finger on his own while libertarians will.

          See how that makes him better than us?

          1. Who Really Cares

            …those who support the idea that government should redistribute income are among the least likely to dig into their own wallets to help others…

          2. It really is an ugly, ugly philosophy. If the government doesn’t force A, at gunpoint, to help B (and keep a little vigorish for the right people C, D, and E), then A will undoubtedly let B die.
            Also, fuck you, that’s why.
            Yes. An ugly, ugly, philosophy. Yet every night, Tony and his ilk tuck themselves in with a keen sense of moral superiority.

            1. George ought to help:

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

              {never gets old}

        2. Take away public education, healthcare, sanitation, pollution regulations, just to name a few things, and do you think more or fewer people would die and die younger?

          The magical market, until it demonstrates its magical abilities, is no different from any other fantastical lie.

          “Moooom, leave me aloooone” is not an expression of the moral high ground.

          1. “Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.”

            ? Fr?d?ric Bastiat, The Law

          2. Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.

            Bastiat, The Law

            1. Always a winner.

          3. Like I said — an ugly, ugly philosophy.

            1. Given that this is the same Tony who thinks poor people are repulsive his squawking is amusing, as I imagine he flees at the sight of anyone in off brand clothing.

            2. But, but… moral compass!

          4. Yes, only a streamlined, efficient, and corruption-free organization like government can provide those services.

            “Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.”
            ? Fr?d?ric Bastiat, The Law

          5. If you took those things away overnight and nothing else changed, you might be right. But you seem to assume that everything else about society will be exactly the same, just missing those government programs. People can and do create institutions independently of government that accomplish many of the things done by the state now. In addition the deregulation of business and decreased burdens of taxation would make it much easier for people to get ahead on their own. Can you imagine a poor person with little education being able to start a business under the current rules and regulations?

            I think that pollution (I mean real pollution that hurts people, not CO2) and sanitation regulations are probably an appropriate thing as clean air and water are among the few true public goods (I’m sure there is some anarchist theory that disagrees with me, but we are going to have some sort of government, so one has to be a bit pragmatic).

            1. You can’t have your cake and eat it here… libertarians advocate for a much riskier society, and you can’t really deny that.

              1. Which is why I say I am not certain that fewer people would die (if there is even a way that could be measured). I just think it is far from obvious as all government programs involve incentives and tradeoffs which also cause harm.

              2. $

              3. I’d say libertarians generally advocate for a society where the costs and risks are more in line with one another. That means there’d be more demand for ratings agencies and third-party regulation/inspection firms than currently exists, and I’m okay with with that. Pricing risk and knowledge is one of the most important aspects of a market economy.

                1. This is why nobody takes libertarians seriously.

              4. Know what comes from risk? Innovation. Life-saving medical devices. Cheaper, more-efficient means of producing and delivering clean water. Huge crop yields. Etc.

          6. You’re right. If we allow gay sex, then more people will die. Therefore, I propose we throw Tony in jail for having gay sex. And I also claim the moral high ground for telling him what to do.

            1. If there weren’t laws mandating gay sex, then there would be no gay sex.
              Therefor we need laws requiring gay sex, or Tony would never have sex.

      2. Give it up ‘Tony”. We know you are paid to troll here.

        You certainly do have a knack for turning the truth upside down. My favorites are how you make assumptions, build fantastic straw men and agree on our behalf with your bullshit premises.

        1. My only assumption is that a claim with absolutely no evidence for it (the market will take care of all the things social welfare programs do now) is suspect.

          1. the market will take care of all the things social welfare programs do now

            Only your straw man is making that claim.

            There is a difference between voluntary charity providing help for those is desperate need, and social welfare programs rewarding sloth.

        2. You know, logic.

          1. The older I get, the more I suspect that Tony and his ilk don’t even see the use of force as a necessary evil of the system they espouse, but as a really cool feature.

          2. We get it, Tony, you don’t believe in freedom, only authoritarianism. So tomorrow, you’ll be doing something to help those less fortunate than you, right? While the rest of us are celebrating the Fourth?

            1. I will be hosting a fabulous party, literally looking down on the poor folks who don’t have an air-conditioned high-rise view of the city fireworks display.

              Yes there is only [insert specific set of libertarian social policies] and authoritarianism. No middle ground. Only your taxes and tax-funded programs are good. Mine are evil. Ayn Rand, peace be upon her, says so.

              1. We have limits. You do not.

                The logical conclusion of unlimited government is authoritarianism.

                Therefore you support authoritarianism, whether you realize it or not.

              2. Yeah, didn’t think you walked your talk. Just another moocher.

      3. You never have met a strawman you didn’t like, have you?

      4. $

      5. No? As RAL pointed out some time ago, the difference between a welfare state and a safety net is that everyone gets aid in the former, rather than just the very poor. But only the desperately poor risk death from material deprivation, so a welfare state and safety net should be equal in that regard. And most libertarians (perhaps not Objectivists, if they count) believe in a social safety net, they just don’t want a state-controlled safety net.

        1. You don’t understand!
          There are things called basic rights!
          Things that people have a right to enjoy without actually paying out of pocket!
          These things include, but are not limited to:
          Food, shelter (with heat, electricity, hot water, cable, and internet), clothing, transportation, communication (a computer for the internet and a smart phone with unlimited data plan), health care (free, not that shit that working people pay for), education, daycare, cash for drugs…
          And those are just the basics.

          Government can provide those things because it can plunder tax the evil rich who only have their ill gotten gains by stealing from poor people.

        2. A state-run safety net is guaranteed to be distributed more equally than any private-sector version. Charity is by definition not profitable, so the claim that it could take care of all social needs is equally fantastical.

          1. T o n y|7.3.12 @ 11:41AM|#
            “A state-run safety net is guaranteed to be distributed more equally than any private-sector version.”

            Bull
            .
            .
            .
            .
            .
            .
            shit.

          2. the claim that it could take care of all social needs is equally fantastical.

            The only one making that claim is the straw man you argue against.

      6. “Not so obvious” is a huge understatement. I am fairly certain that fewer people would die, especially if you took into account the lack of foreign wars, SWAT raids, routine police killings, Drug war-related killings and government inflation of healthcare, food, transportation and transaction costs.

    2. The Enemy might be people like that, but the arena is the hearts and minds of the remaining portion of the populace (frankly, the vast majority) that are more or less decent, but squishy and directionless.

      I think looking at early Christianity would be instructive. They started off as a hated, persecuted, internally divided branch of a separate religious tradition. Over the next few centuries they came to be the primary religious over an entire continent. If libertarians thought of themselves as missionaries (with the resulting obligations to avoid repelling others through their conduct), they might have more success.

      1. Very interesting analogy, sir. Thank you.

  21. CW bikini babes are still hot!

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs…..Beach.html

  22. Tornado map. Are you safe?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci…..years.html

    1. Nah, I am not safe. But when I moved here and saw an entire trailer park flying overhead, I knew what I was getting in to…

      1. So you live in Lima, OH?

        1. No, I am in Hell…er, Illinois.

    2. Have they tracked the path of every tomato as well?

    3. I live on the San Andreas Fault – I’m tornado-safe as hell, bitches.

  23. As Jeremy Clarkson said “She looks like a bobblehead, but it works!”

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs…..-film.html

    1. She is very pretty. Her fiance sets off the gaydar though.

      1. But at least he’s a spiffy dresser.

        1. Gay men often are.

      2. Hollywood couples are 99% PR arranged, and yes there are a lot of gay dudes hooked up with actresses. But then, most of the actresses are gay too, so……

      3. He’s a hipster db at the very least.

    1. divorced dad Konecki, a 38-year-old nonprofit CEO, is in the market for a ring

      So that’s what a male gold-digger looks like.

      1. I think he’ll end up earning every penny.

        1. But the “Rolling in the Deep” singer

          So was that referring to what she does or to what he does??

        2. There is a Mojo Nixon song about that, something about “Honey Move Your Big Leg Off of My Throat” or something like that.

          1. Skid Roper and Mojo Nixon – college background music

  24. YO, REASON, WAKE UP!!!

    How come you haven’t covered the LIBOR manipulation story yet? I shouldn’t have to hear about this stuff from NPR.

    1. Private banks illegally manipulating interest rates are OK.

      1. There are rumors of government connivance:

        Mr. Diamond and various anonymous bankers quoted in the press suggest that regulators at the very least knew and condoned banks’ practice of submitting Libor quotes below where they were actually willing to trade and perhaps were encouraging the practice.

        Which, if true, could shake confidence in the financial system from retail branches right up to the Bank of England.

        http://blogs.wsj.com/source/20…..andal-run/

        1. There are rumors of government connivance

          Oh noooes! Whoda thunk it?!

          What we need is MOAR REGYOULAYSHUN!!11!

          1. Don’t play the fool. Exactly the opposite is what I had in mind.

        2. A Libertarian regulator would look away – see Alan Greenspan and his “markets always self correct” philosophy.

          1. Which libertarians are these who are OK with fraud?

            1. the ones in Palin’s Buttplug’s mind made from lovely dry straw

            2. libertarians are ideologically forced to deny fraud even exists. bad behavior is *ALWAYS* incentivized by the eevil govt…even when the participants say it was poor judgement like jamie dimon testified.

              1. thankyou for telling me what I think.

              2. That’s just dumb, orin. No one says that. There is always something potentially to be gained from fraud, with or without government regulation, same as theft. Most of the libertarians I encounter are pretty clear on fraud being one of the few things that should be criminalized.

              3. o3|7.3.12 @ 10:44AM|#
                “libertarians are ideologically forced to deny fraud even exists.”

                Not bad, but if you’re trying to beat shithead at lying, you have a tough row to hoe.

          2. On the one hand, shrike wants more libertarian presence in government… but on the other, he wants Obama to be president for another term.

            Logic. How do it work?

      2. “Self regulation”? Hah!

        Failure of the existing web of ridiculous regulations is a failure, so – clearly – what we need is MOAR REGYOULAYSHUN!!!

        We’re just ONE MORE REGULATION away from perfection, aren’t we, Shriek?

        1. I know, regulations are SOOOSSHALLLISSMM!

          1. Regulations are a way to adjudicate use of shared resources (or risk to those resources). Socialism without regulation wouldn’t really fly, unless you can reasonably expect to change people’s attitudes. I’d say they’re concurrent phenomena, but not inextricably linked.

            From what I can tell from your comments here, you favor (some) regulation as a politically viable alternative to actual market reforms, or to shield people from risk that they shouldn’t be bearing (eg, banking/investment laws to prevent taxpayer bailouts through the FDIC).

            1. Good regulations protect private property.

              1. Palin’s Buttplug|7.3.12 @ 11:04AM|#
                “Good regulations protect private property.”

                Purple unicorns can fly.

                1. Purple unicorns can fly.

                  The MLP discussion is upthread, pervert.

    2. It’s also on ZeroHedge. I don’t think it’s much of a story, since it’s manipulation is limited by the amount of money banks can create anyways, not?

  25. Two Men Who Reportedly Tried To Hijack A Chinese Plane Were Beaten To Death By Passengers

    Two men who reportedly tried to hijack a plane in the Chinese region of Xinjiang on Friday have died in hospital, the Global Times reports.

    The two died from “injuries received in a fight with passengers and crew during the attempted hijacking of a Tianjin Airlines’ flight”, the state newspaper reported Sunday. Two other hijackers are in hospital after apparently mutilating themselves.

    A total of six men reportedly attempted to hijack the plane after it left from the Xinjiang city of Hotan on Friday, AFP reports. The men attempted to use a crutch to gain access to the cockpit, but were beaten back by passengers and crew.

    1. For some reason, this reminds me of Richard Pryor’s sketch about the Chinese restaurant….”YOU ORDER SHIT, YOU EAT SHIT!”

    2. …after apparently mutilating themselves.

      The Flight of the Bath Salts.

    3. Protip: Don’t try to hijack a plane with Jet Li on board.

      1. Unless you are Steven Segal.

    4. The passengers merely saved the Chinese government two 9mm rounds.

  26. A family has been operating a boat launch on a small lake in Sunny Minnesota since 1933. Currently it is the only public access left on the lake and is run by a family member who is mentally handicapped and does it mostly for the social interaction and exercise.

    Of course, some “anonymous” person complained to the city that the launch didn’t have the right permitting and had it closed down.

    The city said the guy needed to get a $1500 license.

    Suspiciously the only person they could find to bad mouth they guy (since the original complainer was anonymous) was a lake owner and city council woman.

    1. But without regulatory enforcemetn actions like that we’d be just like Somalia.

      just ask Tony.

    2. I also get confused about the council woman being urinated off by the fact that fisherman will catch lots of sunnies off her dock but keep throwing them back.

      Huh? I applaud fisherman who restrain themselves and throw back smaller fish. It is good management to keep the nice ones and throw back “next year’s models”.

      I am sure she went to the end of her dock and tried to shoo some uncouth fisherman away from her dock and they told her in so many terms (maybe including that favorite of libertarians the dreaded c-word) that the lake is public.

      1. “Fuck off, slaver!”

  27. I detect a sense of desperation here lately based on the fact that Romney will probably lose.

    1. I would think it’s more the growing acceptance that the best-case scenario in 2012 is that Romney wins. That’s depressing as shit.

      1. We’ll just get Jeff Goldblum to upload a virus into Romney. That’s why the VP pick is so critical.

    2. http://nation.foxnews.com/pres…..ds-his-law

      Obama’s poll numbers are dropping thanks to the Obamacare decision. Again, when Obama loses do you please promise to kill yourself?

      1. faux huh? comedy central is moar entertaining

        1. The truth rarely is as entertaining as fantasy Orin.

    3. Palin’s Buttplug|7.3.12 @ 10:06AM|#
      “I detect a sense of desperation here…”

      The only way you’d ‘detect’ anything is if someone got your attention with a 2X4.

    4. Uh-huh. So Obama’s Bain Capital ads, which are running every ten minutes here in PA, are a sign of….?

  28. “The newest Romney ad, running in Ohio, calls the president out as a liar on the campaign trail”

    Hypocrisy! Romney’s first ad attacking Obama took the President completely out of context. And Romney vigorous defended his out-of-context quote:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..10884.html

    1. Politicians lie! Outrageous!

    2. That is Obama’s problem, everyone just takes things out of context. He didn’t meant o call everyone bitter clingers. It was just out of context.

  29. Oh noes, America’s Sheriff is dead.

    Must watch “A Face in the Crowd” tonight.

    1. you’ve SF’d the link Brett

      1. Trying again. I think at this point I’ve taken ownership of this phenomena.

        1. Fuck! I thought you meant Arpaio.

        2. Bastard!

          I thought Joe Arpaio had finally died (drowning in a golden-shower water-boarding fantasy that went gloriously wrong, one can hope).

          Instead it’s Andy Griffith! Talk about dahsed hopes. 🙁

          1. Does this mean you are admitting to not having seen “A Face in the Crowd”? Because I will hold you up to scorn and ridicule for missing some of the best acting of the 50s, or indeed ever.

          2. “drowning in a golden-shower water-boarding fantasy that went gloriously wrong”

            Sounds more like the fate of a 1990s Conservative MP in Britain.

            1. Squirrels?

  30. CA Legislature decides to make mortgages harder to get:
    “Calif. Legislature OKs homeowners’ bill of rights”
    http://www.sfgate.com/news/art…..679674.php

  31. The state police in Vermont will work more closely with the state’s department of mental health to respond to mental health crises after cops tased and killed a suicidal man two weeks ago.

    So the cops were actually helping him with what he wanted to do. Prob?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.