The Department of Justice Filed an Emergency Appeal to Uphold the NDAA's Indefinite Detainment Powers, and The Washington Post Wishes Them Luck


Last Thursday, the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed an emergency appeal of U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest's permanent block on section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which may allow for indefinite detainment of American citizens. The DOJ is currently asking the Second Circuit Court of Appeals for a stay until they rule on Forrest's verdict, which argued that the NDAA is unconstitutional under the First and Fifth Amendments. 

Meanwhile, for the edification of media bias watchers, here's a marvelous example that the mainstream press is, as former Reasonoid Radley Balko posited, authoritarian, not liberal. Turns out the paper that (sort of) brought down Richard Nixon and opposes torture and is generally thought to be left-leaning, therefore half right from a libertarian point of view, well, The Washington Post editorial board is siding cozily with the Obama administration in the NDAA lawsuit. 

It's tempting to ask whether the Post would be so breezy about a potentially dystopian — more than Gitmo already is, mind — use of power by a Republican president. And maybe not. But, Media Matters argued in February, the paper is not exactly batting .300 for liberal — much less libertarian, even the civil variety —principles. They may be down on torture, but they're not keen on punishing Bush officials who let it happen and it seems that the ability to indefinitely detain even American citizens is not something that keeps the paper up at night. Yep,  the Post is taking the same view that the Obama administration does, the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force Act already allowed for the powers granted in the NDAA, therefore Judge Forrester's ruling "smacks of judicial activism." 

So in conclusion:

Judge Forrest's ruling, issued before any individual had been so much as threatened with detention, let alone actually detained, strikes us as an overreaction. May the administration's appeal of the judge's ruling prosper.

The stance of The Washington Post editorial board seems to be that the prudent, constitutional thing is to wait until an American is seriously threatened with detainment until the end of this unending war on terror. Then, and only then, but maybe not then, would it be reasonable to object to the powers granted. Forrest, writes the board, is to be scolded for "her uncritical acceptance of the plaintiffs' claims — and equally summary dismissal of the administration's protestations of good faith." Forget watchdog press, even if this is a lapdog press, the lapdog has been lulled to sleep. 

This attitude is not new, and it's not unique to the left or right; that the potential for overreaction or paranoia is more threatening than government action itself. Not to mention, The Washington Post also defended the nasty Kelo v. New London (2005) decision that allowed private developers to take property for eminent domain purposes. 

In a pleasant surprise, The New York Times editorial board, who have previously defended policies as nasty as Kelo applauded Forrest's decision as correct, blaming the government for not actually outlining their claimed right to detain and how far it goes. Still, this Post editorial demonstrates one more reason to eagerly await the downfall of some of the journalism standards. After all, The Christian Science-Monitor editorial board welcomes more and harsher crackdowns on marijuana usage, particularly the medical variety. Authoritarians have the right to free speech as well, but you have to wonder what motivates these writers in the morning when they sit down to yet again agree with government overreach and encourage it to impede even farther into all our lives. And hell, if the biggest newspapers aren't on the side of the First Amendment, what good are they?

NEXT: Judge Orders Woman to Delete Facebook Comments About Crash

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. If the biggest newspapers aren’t on the side of the First Amendment, what good are they?

    Fish-wrappers. Rabbit cage lining. Kindling for fire.

    That’s about it.

    1. Egg cartons are far superior kindling. The more you know.

      1. Bags for charcoal – EXCELLENT starter.

        1. Too much ink, typically, for my superstitious tastes. also my motivation for moving away from newsprint for starting cookfires. The bags share the eggcarton quality of being stiffer, which seems to help preserve air channels when you cram the kindling into the bottom of the chimney starter.

          1. I’ m all for a Better Life Through Chemistry?

            1. based on my current status, i will say … PREACH IT!!

    2. You can make a pretty sweet sleeping bag from two drum liners and a shredded Sunday newspaper.

  2. Makes a lot of sense when you look at it like that! LOL


  3. What letter is under his hand?!? Is there a letter under his hand? Because if not, that’s gross.

    1. That’s a c – “cook it up”. Cause he’s black, so he’s that short order cook from “In Living Color”.

      “Chicken and biscuits – pick it up!”


      You’re WELCOME.

    2. It’s a “F”. He’s actually a cockney.

    3. I’m going with a “C”, and hoping NDAA is some tasty foreign dish I’ve never tried.

    4. Probably “L”.

  4. I just love the “Well, it says this, but the administration promises they won’t use it that way, so everyone should just take their word for it” attitude in there.

  5. thought to be left-leaning, therefore half right from a libertarian point of view


    You’re giving home schooling a bad name

    1. In theory, though Lords knows not in practice, the left are good on civil liberties and social freedoms, no?

        1. Would you not also say the same about conservatives on fiscal/economic issues?

          1. New here, aren’t you

      1. I wouldn’t give them that, Lucy. In fact, I don’t think that’s been true at all in quite some time.

        1. I’ll grnat that some pro-liberty folk have gravitated to the left at different times in history and in different parts of the World. If their “revolution” is even partially successful for a time they are usually betrayed or lined up and shot by the dominant faction.

          1. You just can’t promote unlimited government power on the one hand and expect to have civil liberties on the other. To take it to an extreme, it’s like promoting Nazism while stating that you believe Jews should have civil liberties.

            1. Do you know what we do to *responsible* Zeons?

            2. You just can’t promote unlimited government power on the one hand and expect to have civil liberties on the other

              Don’t even go there. I’ve been trotting that logic in front of my liberal friends for years… and what you get is the Hurlburt response:

              Libertarians believe in human nature, liberals say we can be smarter…

              1. Their delusions don’t matter. Make the government powerful enough, and undoing the damage will be insanely challenging.

                It’s as if history is something that never happened.

      2. In theory, though Lords knows not in practice, the left are good on civil liberties and social freedoms, no?

        Lucy! You got some splainin’ to do!

        1. the idea that the left is good on civil liberties is absurd

          they are good at portraying themselves as being good on same. huge difference

  6. as former Reasonoid Radley Balko posited, authoritarian, not liberal

    Those two things are one in the same.

    Although in defense of real liberals, I try to peg those brand of authoritarian liberals as “progressives” (They’re pro-intervention!). I think that the “liberal” moniker has gone off the rails. At some point after the 80s, “liberals” just became the Total Government Party and it’s been downhill ever since.

    1. Spot on. Vast segments of the left are authoritarian by definition. But of course the at-large narrative is that anyone who opposes big government (or even just pretends to) is tantamount to a Nazi.

      1. Whenever I get into an argument with a liberal/progressive, I end up asking them if they would be willing to just embrace the label “benign despot”, because that’s essentially what their philosophy is in practice, an authoritarian polity making decisions ostensibly for the greater good of society.

    2. There are conservative authoritarians too.

      And there are a lot of people who consider themselves liberal who sincerely don’t understand the authoritarian implications of their positions.

      1. But then they’re not really “conservatives”, that’s if these words are to have any meaning at all.

        And of course liberals have good intentions; they are moronic idealists who don’t understand human nature whatsoever.

        1. But then they’re not really “conservatives”, that’s if these words are to have any meaning at all.

          Depends on your understanding of “conservative”. Socially conservative? Economically conservative? Politically conservative? Personally conservative?

          The same goes for liberal.

          1. No, actually, it doesn’t if, as crazyfingers noted, the words are to have any meaning at all.

            Social conservatives tend to actually be theocratic authoritarians–their ‘fiscal conservatism’ only exists because the state and church are seperate. Merge the two and there will be no fiscal conservatism evident.

  7. power-worshiping lewinsky press

    so what’s new?

    just begin every reference to the toadying lickspittles at the washpost with the phrase “toadying lickspittles,” or power-worshiping lewinskies, if you prefer, or some other term of contempt

  8. Hey Lucy, here’s an upcoming movie for you.

    1. $$$

    2. They should have the actor who plays Jamie Lannister take the lead role.

  9. But, Media Matters argued in February, the paper is not exactly batting .300 for liberal ? much less libertarian, even the civil variety ?principles.

    Kudos on attmpting to drop in a baseball analogy, but .200 is actually considered the bare minimum for a hitter that isn’t a pitcher. Within the context of the WaPo being sufficiently liberal/libertarian on civil liberties, that would be a better analogy. I know, I’m being a serious pedant.

    1. I seriously asked twitter — Welch in particular — what number was correct. And I still failed. Awesome.

      1. It would have been great if you went with his suggestion of ‘6 WAR’. Could’ve punned it too (not that I recommend punning).

        1. I still don’t know what that means.

          Can you bat .500? Is that a thing?

          1. If you cheat a lot.

          2. Yes, it means you get a good* hit 50% of your time at bat. Ichiro was batting .500 this year for a while I think.

            * home run, on base, etc.

          3. WAR stands for “Wins above Replacement” and is an attempt to quantify a players total contribution to the success of his team. Sabermetricians are basically sports nerds that come up with the most obscure statistics to rate players.

            And usually the best hitter in baseball will hit between .350-.360 in a season. Last player to hit above .400 was Ted Williams back in 1941. So yeah, in baseball failing 70% of the time is considered outstanding hitting.

            1. The truly annoying thing about WAR is that there are several different ways of computing it. So you have to specify which sabermetrician’s version you’re using.

              1. I don’t fully understand it, and yet the Oakland A’s are rocketing towards the playoffs via Moneyball. So clearly there is something to sabermetrics, although as they say, the game is really played in the six inches between your ears.

                1. 500 slugging percentage is doable.

                  it’s a MUCH more robust metric as the measure of a hitter.
                  pujols , williams, ruth , gehrig all got well over .600 slugging percentage

                  however, imo the REAL robust hitting metric is “slugging percentage plus”

                  the thing about hitting stats is they start to get kind of recursive in the way other players react.

                  a player like ichiro is going to get far fewer “good pitches’ to hit… because he’s a better hitter, pitcher will be more willing to risk a walk and throw them stuff on the corners or try to get them to chase than to give them “hittable” pitches like they will with sucktastic batters

                  so, he is going to get more pitches off the plate and if he has any discipline, he lays off and gets more walks

                  and, for a leadoff (bases empty), there is no value added in a single vs. walk.

                  similarly, a single and then a steal is the functional equivalent of a double

                  Slugging percentage PLUS takes both of these base gaining methods into account. it’s all about gettign runs. and you get runs by getting bases. period

                  barry bonds in 2004 had a .891 spercentageplus!

                  A rod in 1998: .616

                  rickey henderson 130 steal season .754

                2. Moneyball isn’t necessarily about sabermetrics, it’s about finding market inefficiency in player compensation. The A’s had ton success on buying low on players that walked a ton. Unfortunately for them the Yankees had also employed this trick in their farm system when Steinbrenner was suspended. After the 90’s Yankee dynasty and the A’s small market success the walk is no longer cheap. Now A’s are trying to quantify defense, and that’s main part everyone fights about in determining WAR.

                  1. yea.

                    i am personally just a data queen/stats nerd, and always have been. i think it’s one major reason why i love baseball.

                    i always thought that batting average, homeruns, and RBI’s … the BIG THREE … listed under a batter’s name when he came to plate… in the games i watched as a kid were inadequate metrics that din’t truly show who the greats were.

                    now, there is much wider use of stuff like slugging precentage plus and etc.

                    plus, with the intertoobs, data is at our fingertips. before it was at our fingertips in our baseball cards or almanacs.

          4. On a mean hot streak, yes. Or in LL.

      2. Well don’t feel too bad, this year’s Washintgon Nationals are the first DC baseball team in 90 yeras to have a legitimate shot at winning the World Series. I can’t imagine anyone there knows squat about baseball.

        1. Also, before this I was in Pittsburgh, so, uh, various Pirates jokes there.

          1. Just remember Welch is an Angels fan, so you’re drawing from a shallow well for baseball knowledge with the likes of him.

            1. I feel like he would be really, really enraged if he ever read that comment.

              1. Probably, but if he’s been a fan of the Angels since before 2002 and can name players from the 70s and 80s then he’s alright with me.

                My beef is with the bandwagoners, which OC is full of. And I say this as a long-suffering Dodger fan.

          2. The Pirates have a shot at their first winning season since 1992 this year. Maybe your residence were a curse.

            1. That must be it.

            2. The Phillies won the WS the year I left town. Though my childhood, the Pirates always won the division.

  10. I’m just glad that the Obama administrations attempts to restore this power firmly puts to rest any argument from his supporters that singing the bill and then having it struck down was all an elaborate ruse from the superior intellect that is President Obama. That had to be worst example of willful delusion I’ve ever seen from any group of politicos.

    1. It’s like a game of Twister in their heads.

    2. No, you see, Obama wants SCOTUS precedent striking it down so eeeeeeeevil Mitt can’t use it to jail corporate watchdogs. If SCOTUS doesn’t address it now, they’ll do it during Mitt’s term, when the eeeeeeevil right wing of the court will rubber stamp it to support their TEAM.

    3. Holy shit. I discussed this very thing with a lefty acquaintance today. I mentioned the NYT headline ” Court strikes down parts of NDAA that Romney agrees with” and got a long rant on how despicable Romney is for supporting such obvious tyranny.

      When I said in a dead, flat voice that the NDAA was signed into law by Obama, and he is now appealing the decision, her attitude and demeanor changed so rapidly and completely that I thought for a minute she was being possessed by some other person. According to her that is ok cuz he like promised and stuff.

      I made tiny little fake slapping motions with my hand twice and clicked my tounge each time. She just laughed and said ” WHAT? hahaha WHAT?”

      It just takes the breath away. It is not possible to reason with these people.

      1. That sums up beautifully the essence of the Democratic party: they aren’t opposed to a massive police and surveillacne state, they’re opposed to a REPUBLICAN police and surveillance state.

        Their whole political and governing philosophy is enlightened despotism. It’s okay for Obama to have the power to assassinate and indefinitely detain on a whim because he’s smart and liberal.

  11. here’s a marvelous example that the mainstream press is, as former Reasonoid Radley Balko posited, authoritarian, not liberal.

    This, coming from the same people who try to convince us Obama is not a socialist. That’s funny. Also. Not. True. Unless the idea is that Obama is a socialist politician, therefore at moments he compromises like every politician must. Now that story I’d buy.

    The MSM may side with the Right, if the Right is more overtly and outrageously authoritative. Nonetheless, “liberal” remains the default MSM position. And liberals are — you know, those dicks that brought us ObamaCare whether we want it or not — are very authoritative. At this stage in the game, the Right has to genuinely work at it to beat the liberals in the “Who’s the Biggest Authoritative Dick?” contest.

  12. Sorry i missed the PM Links, but this needs to be brought up.

    Remember when captain shithead said the report on King County’s evasive and questionable self-investigations was “actually pretty good” and that the department just needed to modify a few things?

    Well, I guess one of the things they need to modify is to not deliberately hide pertinent evidence from the plaintiffs in an excessive force case where the officer was known to the department to have a violent past. Judges tend to frown on that, even if they don’t actually hold the responsible parties in contempt or have charges brought. In this case, the taxpayers will be on the hook for an additional $300k, which is chump change compared to the $10M already agreed-to in a settlement…which the judge said doesn’t preclude the plaintiffs from seeking more now that the sneaky fucks at the King County Sheriff’s Department have been exposed.

    But there’s no real problem in King County, WA, right? I mean, they don’t have drunk in public laws and have a loose concealed carry law on the books. It’s a veritable Eden, right?

    1. Not to be outdone, officers in Everett taze a mentally ill man and stick him in a cell alone. Three hours later, he’s dead. Nobody at the station is talking.

      1. Obviously he was a crazed drug abuser who was already exhibiting all the signs of classic excited delirium. It’s impossible that the taser is what killed him. After all, every medical professional who says that has been sued into silence, and we all know that means it can’t be true.

    2. sloopy, how would you like it if someone were going to your favorite blog and leaving comments that denigrated your chosen profession every day?

      1. Yeah? Read an education thread to see how some of the HyRsters feel about us academics.

        1. (retune sarcasometer)

        2. I do read them, and am driven to tears by their bigorati behavior.

      2. You mean like how they treat me, a professional sperm doner, at touchingyourselfisevil.com? You’re right, those guys are jerks.

        1. I told you to stop going there and start visiting wankingforcash.com. You’ll feel a lot better about yourself.

          1. But the authors there have no passion!!! Plus, the commenting went downhill after they instituted threading.

      3. I guess I’d feel shame if they were as true as the shit we post here.

        Lots and lots of shame.

        Besides, who’s going to denigrate auctioneering? We’re the most libertarian of businesses.

        1. Auctioneers? A few years ago they were pushing for laws requiring people selling things on eBay to pay a licensed auctioneer to certify the results of the bidding.

            1. Show me where auctioneers had pushed for anything, dipshit. In the PA case, the law was on the books and the state went after her. There’s not a single mention of auctioneers pushing anything.

              On the Ohio case, it just talks about a recently passed law. Where in the hell did you get that auctioneers had pushed for the law? Oh, I know. You pulled it clean out of your enormous asshole.

              1. It’s the best I could do on 10 minutes notice. Auctioneer sins don’t draw eyeballs like cop sins do.

                1. Yeah, especially when they don’t exist.

                  You can apologize now for making the mistake or you can spend loads of time scouring the internet looking for an auctioneer group that was rent-seeking IRT the ebay thing.

                  Which way are you gonna go, pal?

                  1. I know they did it. Not everything that happens has Internet records left behind years later.

                    1. You “know” it? On the entire internet, I can’t find a single quote from the NAA or the ASA, but you “know” it.

                      Oh, I meant to ask you about this the other day. I “know” that 1 in 5 mathematicians are pederasts and/or sheep-fuckers because I read it on the internet. It was years ago and the records are gone, but I know they are.

                      Why are you part of a profession that condones pederasty and sheep-fucking?

              2. Where in the hell did you get that auctioneers had pushed for the law?

                Cui bono

                1. Cui bono

                  You don’t spend enough time on a site that regularly points out the fact that government regulates as much as they can because they can to know that there isn’t always a puppet-master pulling their strings?

                  I don’t want to come across as a dick, but there’s no delicate way to put this: Are you retarded?

                  1. I’m unaware of Reason pointing that out. In most stories there is a clearly idenfiable Cui who’s Bonoing.

                  2. I should emphasize that I don’t think you personally are a rent-seeker, but neither is dunphy a sociopath who tazes everything that walks upon the earth.

                    1. I never accused dunphy of being anything of the sort, but you accused my industry of rent-seeking and cannot provide anything supporting the assertion.

                      When I make statements about corrupt, evil or idiotic policemen, I post links. I would expect you to do the same if you’re gonna denigrate my profession.

                    2. No, you just use guilt by association to tar him with the misdeeds of the bottom of the barrel of his profession.

                    3. When have I done that, asshole? When? I always pose questions or point out corrupt, evil or idiot cops. I may accuse dunphy of being an enabler or a dickhead, but that’s always after he explains his position.

                      You’re way off base here, Tulpy-poo. You better fire up the internet box and find some links to support what you’re saying about me.

                    4. Who made you the boss of me? Screw you, I’m getting another chocolate long john.

                    5. chocolate long johns are anabolic as hell!

                      i am just going to ask mom for some weightgainer 4000

                      post surgery, and 30 lbs underweight? i need drastic measures




                    6. When a naked man is chasing a woman through an alley with a butcher’s knife and a hard-on, I figure he isn’t out collecting for the Red Cross!

                      So I taze him!
                      (engages clint squint)

                    7. When a naked man is chasing a woman through an alley with a butcher’s knife and a hard-on, I figure he isn’t out collecting for the Red Cross!

                      So what you’re telling me is that I’ve been going about my community service incorrectly. That’s easy for you to say. I can lose the butcher knife, but what am I supposed to do about the hard-on?

                      And honestly, I think it’s that hard-on that’s primarily been responsible for my high cash flow. I’ve gotten “volunteer of the month” three times now.

                      Of course, maybe that’s just wishful thinking. The knife is a Wusthof.

          1. Who was? That was the states trying to impose regulatory schemes on ebay, not the auctioneers.

            We don’t give a shit what ebay does. They’re not our competition, and they’re not an auctioneer in the sense we are. And I like ebay, but there’s too little control by the auctioneer for my tastes. It leads to a lot of shady stuff that gives us a bad name.

            A real auctioneer takes possession of the equipment or verifies its condition and description prior to sale, and he verifies the title is clear and in the same name as the seller.

            You get what you pay for, which is why my default rate is below 2%, and almost all of it is the buyer being unable to pay. Ebay’s default rate is over 20%, with a lot of fraud on both sides of the transaction. Comparing me to ebay would be like me comparing you to a kindergarten teacher in Madagascar.

            1. It’s called rent-seeking, sloopy. Ordinary hairdressers don’t compete with African Hair Braiders either, but they’re totally on board with forcing them to pay established hairdressers for training.

            2. ie, you could make a good living forcing everyone who sells stuff on eBay to pay you $1 to certify their auction.

              1. OK, fine. But that still doesn’t explain how you conclude that auctioneers are actually rent-seeking in this case. You provide two links and neither one say a single thing about the auctioneers from those states asking for the regulation and/or even giving any opinion at all.

                If this is what passes for deductive reasoning at your university, I weep for our future mathematicians.

                1. I don’t bring my work home with me.

                  1. Obviously you leave your logic at the office as well.

                    Are we safe in assuming you do most of your posting from the house then? It’s all starting to make sense.

                    1. No, Dunkin Donuts.

                    2. posting from dunkin donuts can lead to cop empathy, man

                      granted, we don’t have DD out here in WA


                      it’s all soy mocha bla bla bla with a twist

                      and pumpkin scones

                      sometimes a man just needs a cup of coffee and something sweet

                      (engages clint squint)

                    3. I’ll take DD over Starbucks any friggin day of the week.

                    4. hell, ya

                      i think i’ve been to one less than 1/2 dozen times in the 15 yrs i’ve been there

                      given that, i have huge respect for them as a corporation in that they bitchslapped the anti-gunners who were pressuring them to ban gunz in their stores, especially open carry in states where same was “allowed”

                      starbux, too thei credit,told the statists to sod off and said if it’s legal outside the store, we respect your right to carry openly inside

                      so, i don’t drink their coffee,but they got cred with me!

                    5. So they’re basically like the Twilight of coffee shops then?

      4. “…to your favorite blog and leaving comments that denigrated your chosen profession every day?”

        Wow. I..uh…um…just fucking Wow.

        Did you really type that or did you fall face first onto your keyboard after passing out on vodka and by bizarre chance those are the keys your face pushed?

        1. It’s Tulpa Dumb, dude. Saying the stupidest shit possible is his super power. He gained this power after being bitten by a radioactive mongoloid.

          1. wait.
            was it MNG?

            1. Actually, I think it was.

      5. Is his chosen profession mostly scum, in this hypothetical?

  13. You guys just don’t understand. Obama would never want this power. This is all the Republican’s fault. He’s playing 9th dimensional chess.

    Leave Obama alone!!!

    -runs off sobbing-

  14. Protip: If you’ve been caught stealing things, all you have to do is quit your job and the charges disappear.

    Well, that’s what happens if you’re a Youngstown, OH Police Officer. No word if the guy working at 7-11 who got caught stealing will get the same treatment.

  15. Police checks routinely violate privacy, report says
    Canada has ‘patchwork’ of policies that may contravene Charter rights
    In Alberta alone, the report estimates that police run about 160,000 background checks every year. The information released contained not only information about convictions, but also about charges or contact with police which were either withdrawn or did not involve criminal activity.

    1. charter rights aint worth the paper they are printed on. see: parliamentary override

      1. Funny how Dunphy shows up in this particular section of the comment thread but not the two or three immediately above.

      2. Still no reason for Cops to keep convictions that have been overturned or charges that have been dropped on your record.

        1. cops don’t

          at last in the US, that is

          NCIC, NICS etc are run entirely by civilians and they control both “civilian” (e.g. gun stores) and cop access to same

          and there is damn good reason to keep ALL court records, especially those that evidence screwup on the part of the state. wouldn’t want that dissapearing down the memoryhole.

          however, that should be exceptionally well protected from disclosure.

          in WA, if you are a first time offender, and especially if its a misdemeanor, if you have ANY game whatsoever, you can get a deferred type deal

          that means plead nolo contondre, pay your fine, complete your probation (check to see if toy can use da intertoobs. 🙂 chances are you can), and it gets “wiped” from your record

          that means if an employer asks about convictions, it never happened

          but there should still be, and WILL be a record. just with limited access for limited purposes


          and that is how it works


  16. lol, the Feds have no shortage of Spare time on their hands thats for sure.


  17. “here’s a marvelous example that the mainstream press is, as former Reasonoid Radley Balko posited, authoritarian, not libera”

    Balko is a treasure . that being said, these are complementary not contradictory. sadly

    iow, saying somebody/thing is auhoritarian is entirely consistent with saying they are liberal authoritarian.

    can we roll some DD characters please?

    i think that embodies my point

    1. Hey shithead, what was that you were saying about King County the other day? Why don’t you look upthread and comment on what the fuck bullshit this is, because it’s part of the systematic cover-up that’s been going on there forever.

      Or does the story not count because “the adults” didn’t bring it up?

      It’s your profession, scumbag, and they’re dirty as the day is long up in Washington. Whether it’s tazing people and leaving them to die or covering up misdeeds when an officer smashes an innocent man’s head into a wall and turns his brain to mush (and is not held accountable in any way, shape or form).

      Are you going to condemn this, or are you going to say the process was followed?

      1. Like an auctioneer never tazed anyone.

        1. going once, going twice…



          works for me. certainly would make auctions more fun

  18. LA Sheriff’s Deputy sentenced to 90 days and will have to undergo 52 weeks of sex offender counseling.

    He is still on the taxpayer-funded LASD payroll, folks. God Bless the union contract!

  19. Well, since this seems to have turned into another open thread, here’s something for sugarfree, on the off chance he hasn’t seen it yet:

    Hail to the slash: A political slashfic site.

    (it’s possible that he created the damn thing)

    1. What the fuck is “housing food”?

      1. The horrific result of an ampersandectomy, methinks.

    2. I watched the video, anxiously awaiting Mitt to show his fangs, to see the monster inside exposed. I kept listening and saying to myself…yeah…thats right…yeah….yeah….

      The guy is right on the money, and that what mother jones thinks is bad? There is a lot wrong with Mitt, but none of it is in that video.

  20. Manning picked 3 times in 1st Quarter.
    The dream is over.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.