A.M. Links: Swing State Voters Trust Obama Over Romney With Medicare, Flight Attendant Detained For Carrying Concealed Weapon With Permit, Xkcd Has a Really Big Panel, Wang Lijun Sentenced to Prison, NJ State Trooper Suits Costing Taxpayers Millions

|

  • More swing state voters trust medicare in the hands of Obama over Romney. Of course, Ponzi schemers will be happy with either. 
  • A flight attendant with a concealed carry permit was detained and charged with disorderly conduct after trying to board a plane with a .38 revolver in her purse. A TSA employee discharged the weapon while trying to unload it. Don't you feel safer?
  • The family of a man who was shot by a policeman in Scottsdale, AZ while holding his grandson are filing a suit against the city. 
  • Wang Lijun, Bo Xilai's former police chief, has been sentenced to 15 years in prison for "bending the law for selfish ends, defection, abuse of power and bribe-taking." He does not plan to appeal his sentence. 
  • The webcomic xkcd is now home to to largest webcomic panel ever, measuring 1.3 terapixels.
  • Fourteen lawsuits by New Jersey State Troopers over lost promotions, infighting, and retaliations could cost New Jersey taxpayers more than $1.6 million in payouts alone.

Follow Reason on Twitter and like us on Facebook. You can also get the top stories mailed to you—sign up here.

NEXT: Libya Tackles Militias; Some to be Disbanded, Others Integrated

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. Well, I guess discharging a pistol is one way of unloading it.

    1. For someone that inept, I am surprised they didn’t shoot themselves.

      1. And charge her with the crime.

        1. Instead of sending her home to lock it up. Zero tolerance is idiotic.

          1. Problem is you have to discourage people from attempting to get through the security line with a firearm, because there’s a chance they’ll make it through.

      2. I blame Hollywood. Every pistol you see in the movies is an automatic with the mag in the grip. No one uses revolvers anymore!

        1. Walter White in Breaking Bad got some good advice and bought a revolver.

    2. You really have to be a fucking moron to accidentally discharge any weapon. But to do it with a revolver takes a special kind of stupid. I am having a hard time figuring out how you could even do it.

      1. There is the cylinder release on the top of the grips. You have to pull that back, then…

        1. I know. The first thing you do with a revolver is drop the cylinder to the side. Once you do that, it can’t fire. With an automatic, you can fuck up by clearing the chamber before you drop the magazine thus leaving a round in the chamber after you drop the magazine. But a revolver doesn’t have a chamber, just a cylinder. I still don’t see how you do that short of just pulling the trigger to see if it is loaded.

          1. John,

            I was being sarcastic, the only thing at the top of the grips on a revolver is the hammer. My guess is idiot pulled that back thinking it was the cylinder release. From there it is pretty easy to see what happened.

            1. I can’t imagine being so stupid you think the hammer is the cylinder release. That takes animal level intelligence.

              1. That takes animal level intelligence.

                I give you the TSA!

            2. Some revolvers have the cylinder release where the hammer normally would be. The SW Bodyguard does. You push it forward, though.

              It’s hammerless, and there’s no way you can fire it without pulling the trigger.

              1. Indeed, and this is the firearm she had.

                1. Article says she had an Airweight, which is not the same as a Bodyguard.

                  Those have a more traditional side-mounted button and are not made of polymer. They are just little J-frame revolvers.

      2. ‘fucking moron’

        ‘special kind of stupid’

        Both job qualifications for TSA agents. What’s so hard to figure out?

        “I’m jiggling the gun, but the bullets aren’t coming out. Must be a release of some sort somewhere. Probably this trigger shaped doo-hickey.”

        1. an airport police officer attempted to unload the gun, and it discharged into a wall.

          *** “thinking” to self ***
          “Damn. I ain’t messed with no non-automatic gun afore. No slide. Shit. Better clear the chamber, but how? Oh, well ….”

          *** BAM! ***

          1. Darn you, Restoras!

          2. I believe the proper enunciation is “Sheeeiit.”

            1. a pronunciation guide would be helpful

        2. According to the story it was a cop, not a TSA agent who discharged the revolver.

          1. That actually makes it worse.

            1. It was a Philly cop – who has probably never handled a gun other than his service pistol.

      3. Two hitmen for the DeCavalcante family sitting in a car trying to whack someone managed to shoot each other. If only the TSA had existed they could have put these talents to lawful use

    3. an airport police officer attempted to unload the gun, and it discharged into a wall.

      There were no injuries to passengers, employees or police, officials said.

      “The system worked.”
      /Janet Napolitano

  2. “Fourteen lawsuits by New Jersey State Troopers over lost promotions, infighting, and retaliations could cost New Jersey taxpayers more than $1.6 million in payouts alone.”

    Anything that happens to, or is done by the police ends up costing taxpayers.

    1. Wouldn’t happen if the police force was privatized. Just sayin’.

      1. Because the Kochporashunz would just buy off the courts because…Citizens UniteD!!!11!!

        THIS IS WHAT PEOPLE ACTUALLY BELIEVE

  3. American Academy of Pediatrics wants kids banned from using trampolines

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..z27OMOfe8D

    1. That seems stupid. Don’t they make a ton of money off of kids with broken limbs?

      If I was a member of the AAP I’d want the board censured and reviewed for qualification.

    2. How many kids are seriously injured playing soccer? I bet a lot. Do they want that banned too?

      1. At this point, a kid playing Association Rules Football (soccer) is at a greater risk of serious injury then a kid playing American Rules Football. American Football has really improved the safety equipment and the rules of play.

      2. Don’t give them any ideas, goddammit.

        1. Don’t worry. I asked a question I knew the answer too. Tarran provides the answer above. A lot. But they would never talk about banning soccer because nice upper class white people play it. They only go after sports the lower classes and races play like football and trampolines.

          1. I see a lot of trampolines around in my upper middle class whitebread gated community, John. Hell, my next door neighbor has one. But he’s Russian, so I’m not sure if he counts as white. Are Slavs in or out of the club these days?

            1. if they’re like my extended family .. out. because of the cabbage smell.

            2. Lots of the lower-income houses in my ‘hood have leaf- and stagnant water-covered trampolines rotting in their yards.

          2. The only kids I knew with a trampoline while I was growing up were rich. Maybe things have changed. Now they all have nets around them.

            1. Personally I prefer the 15-foot tall electrified metal cylinder around the perimeter of the trampoline. Far more effective.

            2. I live in the ghetto. Right now, one of my neighbors has a trampoline. Another neighbor used to have one, but their house was condemned and torn down.

          3. I think that trampolines are seen by some as a substitute for a swimming pool.

            1. My neighbor has a trampoline and a swimming pool. Fortunately for him, he has daughters and the net around the trampoline. When I was but a minuscule, that combination would have proved irrestible. Bounce off the trampoline into the pool? Oh, hell yeah.

              1. I don’t see how anyone could have a trampoline and a pool and not do that.

                1. Oh, I bought a trampoline with paper route money when I was 10. Of course we put it next to the pool.

                  This was well before pads on the springs or safety nets and no one ever got seriously hurt.

                  1. Every time I see a net around a trampoline it makes me want to go knock on the door and berate the parents there for being anti-fun.

                    Fuck those nets.

              2. I’m a girl and I would have immediately tried to jump from the trampoline into the pool. I don’t see having daughters as any sort of deterrent to injurious behavior.

                1. KK, I have a daughter. You are correct. This kid is a walking destructo bot…to herself and anything valuable. She is also, nearly constantly, covered in dirt. At the same time she like shoes, shopping, and dance, so she isn’t a tomboy.

              3. I coached at Woodward Camp out in central PA. We would take a full-sized tramp (not one of those piddly backyard kind), drag it to the Olympic sized pool (the deep end) and then put spotting blocks under the legs of the tramp on the side away from the pool. This created an incline towards the pool. We would bounce from the far end of the tramp to the middle, then another bounce almost at the end of the bed on the pool side and then do some flipping and twisting before hitting the water. It was teh awesome. The best part was doing what was known as “tuck and pray”, a contest to see who could pull off the must rotations before hitting the water.

                http://www.campwoodward.com/

      3. My seven-year-old twins are free rangers who are out the door after school and gone to the creek and woods on their own for a couple hours every day. But I’d never let them on one of those death machines.

        1. But hey, if you wanna let your kids play on a trampoline, I’m completely cool with that. You know, natural selection and all.

        2. I wouldn’t let that out or your likely to have a visit from the police.

          You know, because you aren’t hovering over them 24/7.

      4. They want to ban all physical activity, which can lead to injury. They also want to ban physical inactivity, which can lead to obesity.

        1. Sounds like a Catch-22. You could write a book, or something.

    3. And separately, occupational therapists for kids on the PDD spectrum tell parents to buy trampolines (the small, single-user ones with handles) to help with learning motor control and balance.

      Just to make sure that every time some public health group declares something harmful, there’s another group declaring it beneficial. We could call this Nader’s Law.

      1. Well, it’s probably OK to use a trampoline under proper medical supervision.

  4. I find the lack of alt-text…disturbing.

    1. Feeney needs to get some alt+text tips from Suderman. Maybe Suderman could actually run an internal alt+text training program, with a nice little stipend from teh KOCHS??

      1. Suderman makes me proud.

    2. Worst AM links ever.

  5. Paging Kevin Bacon and Kenny Loggins…

    Swedes hit streets in fight for right to dance

    1. “If owners lack this licence and their guests start spontaneously moving to music, they can be slapped with a fine.”

      Somewhere, Mayor Bloomberg just snapped awake with an idea.

      1. Seems ripe for “industrial” espionage. Quietly contract troupes of dancers to go to competing bars and ‘start spontaneously moving to the music’.

        I call it the Breakin’ Windows fallacy.

        1. Break Dancing Windows fallacy?

        2. I call it the Breakin’ Windows II: Electric Boogaloo fallacy.

          FIFY

        3. “Pop’n’Lock-Em-Up”

        4. The “Pop’n’Lock-Em-Up” Law.

      2. Color me shocked. I was going to post about the fact that NYC already requires a special license to dance in a bar, as I discovered after being asked to stop shaking my groove thang several years ago, then having the absurd reason explained to me.

        But it turns out that law no longer exists, and it was Bloomie who repealed it:
        http://articles.nydailynews.co…..ew-yorkers

        1. Well, I should read my own links closer before I comment. Seems all Bloomie did was talk about studying a repeal of the law, but didn’t actually do it. So check your bar’s license before you start gettin jiggy in NYC.

          http://blogs.villagevoice.com/…..y_laws.php

          1. Jeebus Pete – I can’t even parody these things anymore!

    2. “If you want to organize a party in the woods and you expect people to dance there, you have to have a license, too.”

      There can be no spontaneous action, only what is pre-approved.

      1. Yet for some reason or another, liberals point to Sweden ALL OF THE FUCKING TIME as a political model we should follow.

        Between this and the party trying to outlaw peeing while standing, anyone who invokes Sweden as a viable model should be shot.

        1. Yet for some reason or another, liberals point to Sweden ALL OF THE FUCKING TIME as a political model we should follow.

          And as I point out to them, the reason Scandanavian socialism seems to work is because it’s run by, and for the the benefit of, Scandanavian socialists.

          Apply the same model to our highly balkanized population demographic and you’d get something akin to socialistic feudalism.

          1. I don’t know about pan-Scandanavian socialism, but I do know that there is no way in fucking hell that Norwegian socialism wouldn’t have a fucking prayer were it not for their massive oil fund. As soon as the market for oil starts to soften (whenever that may be and for whatever reason), their little house of cards crumbles.

            Don’t get me wrong, I like Norwegians. They’re good people as far as I’ve been able to tell (I spent a couple of weeks there this year). But when it comes to economics, they’re fucking retarded. Taxes are already astronomically high on EVERYTHING, and that’s with the vast majority of their little utopia being paid for with a fund that has dick to do with taxes.

    1. The story doesn’t say that. It says he ran away and then pointed a gun at them. Not that he was doing both at the same time. Perfectly consistent with the plausible scenario of him realizing he’s about to be caught, stopping and turning around, and pointing the gun.

      If the forensics show he was shot in the back you’ll have a case.

      1. OK, the PoliceOne story doesn’t give any details of what happened. Here’s the New York Post story that chronicles what happened. I’m still trying to figure out how the guy could be being subdued by two officers and still get his hand on his gun and point it at an officer…that then shoots him in the back of the head.

        Oh, and check out this. FTA: Police said Operation Losing Proposition has made 1000 arrests this year, and seized 220 cars.

        Cars are trolling for ho’s now? Or is this just about revenue?

        1. Asset forfeiture is always about revenue.

        2. It doesn’t seem likely that the cars driven by johns would be the results of proceeds of crime (at least nothing to do with what they got arrested for). Isn’t that supposed to be the standard for forfeiture? Or are they pimp cars or something.

          1. I think NYC allows forfeiture of vehicles used in the commission of a crime, or something. I remember several years ago seeing lots of billboards about how you could lose your car if you got a DUI.

        3. The story says he had the gun in his hand already when the seargent tried to pull the arm behind his back. The shot being in the back of his head is a bit problematic as it implies the suspect wasn’t facing the officer at the time, so he’d have to be a contortionist to shoot the officer behind his back.

        4. I’m still trying to figure out how the guy could be being subdued by two officers and still get his hand on his gun and point it at an officer…that then shoots him in the back of the head.

          He was committing suicide, you silly man.

    2. I mean, there are many cases of cops being shot by criminals in this country every year; it’s kind of bizarre that the basic assumption people here so often make is that no one would ever point a gun at a cop. It’s not true.

      1. there are many cases of cops being shot by criminals in this country every year;

        The NYT tells me there were 72 cops shot last year.

        http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04…..-rise.html

        I don’t know if anybody tallies nationwide shootings by police, but I recall reason telling us that in LA County alone nearly that number were killed by cops.

    3. That was a prostitution sting, by the way. The whole story from the PD sounds fishy from the scant few details contained:
      1) Why was a car filled with 4 men stopped in a prostitution sting? Do people usually carpool when they go whoring?
      2) Again, the guy ran away from the cop after the cop saw his gun? C’mon NYPD, why would he run? How would he get out of the car to start running without being stopped?
      3) He was running away, yet pointed the gun at the officer? Yeah, that’s common practice.
      4) Where was the point of impact (front, back, side of head)?

      1. prostitution stings are their own kind of stupid. I don’t really care if two consenting grownups make a business deal for any product, particularly one which the state should have absolutely zero control over.

  6. That webcomic has to be one of the highest ratios of pixel to funny ever.

  7. “He does not plan to appeal his sentence.”

    I can’t imagine why?

    “Appeal denied. Shoot him. Shoot him, now.”

    BANG!

    “Judge, we have mailed a bill for the bullet to his family, as is SOP!”

    1. You forgot the organ harvesting part.

      1. “And his kidneys sold to a business man in Singapore! Here is you cut of the proceeds, your honor!”

  8. xkcd still loads faster than Hit + Run.

    1. It’s been a while since I tried H*squirrel*R on my phone. Maybe I should give them another chance.

      1. My android doesn’t fare too well, but at least it no longer automatically redirects to the mobile site.

        1. That is a slight improvement.

        2. I can’t comment using the android OS, though.

          1. Interesting. The original xkcd comment was done from my Droid.

            1. Have you tried the mobile version since the changes? Comments finally display and the text usually wraps to the screen width.

              1. I actually find the desktop version works better in Chrome for Android.

  9. Old story, and I realize it’s Hot Air, but the cop ball-sucking is just unbelievable.

    Do the police have rights too?

    I hope there is a judge out there with the common sense to toss this notion out to the curb. Yes, many people were inconvenienced, and the police have already offered an apology. But the cops were in the process of quickly apprehending a violent, heavily armed felon right in their midst. And as to the suspect’s claims of some sort of illegal search? how high does that bar have to be? If you can narrow down the location of the evidence to a group of twenty or so cars, is that not “probably cause” enough?

    1. If you can narrow down the location of the evidence to a group of twenty or so cars, is that not “probably cause” enough?

      so let’s wander down the proverbial slippery slope: if you narrow down the possible culprits to 20 houses, is that enough? How about 20 persons?

      That it’s 20 cars in a sea of hundreds is just a matter of degree. At some point, the universe expands to 50 or so cars, then a hundred or so, then the whole damn town.

    2. Cops have the same rights as every other citizen. No more.

      1. Should have the same rights. Seems they frequently have extra rights.

  10. The family of a man who was shot by a policeman in Scottsdale, AZ while holding his grandson are filing a suit against the city.

    Typical knee-jerk Reason reaction. That baby could have been loaded, for God’s sake

    1. If I remember correctly the officer had a half a dozen fatal shootings under his belt.

      1. His aim is better than most. Why isn’t he on the sniper team?

        Or am I missing the fact that he is?

      2. If I remember correctly the officer had a half a dozen fatal successful shootings under his belt.

        hth

  11. That rainbow-wigged ‘John 3:16’ guy from all the 80’s sporting events is serving consecutive life sentences for kidnapping:

    http://www.straightdope.com/co…..ose-john-3

    1. He seemed so stable. I’m shocked.

  12. Those goddamn Christian-hating socialists at Apple sold 5 million I-phones over the weekend:

    http://appleinsider.com/articl…..st_weekend

    1. Not enough Christfag.

    2. They’re about to become the first company to be worth a trillion dollars. Slavery gets shit done!

      1. I hope they have a backup plan, for if/when China goes into the shite (again).

        1. they need a plan for when their workers riot more urgently

          Foxconn halts production at plant after mass brawl

          1. China is still adjusting to capitalism. Next phase is when a plant burns up with 3000 girls working in it and they organize to request fire escapes.

          2. But wait, are you telling me that Communism is NOT the workers paradise that T o n y tells us it is? I am disappoint.

            1. Kruggie and Freidman hardest hit?

  13. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09…..emityn.www

    We are just awakening to the need for some scrutiny or oversight or public attention to the decisions of the most powerful private speech controllers…
    … lawprof Tim Wu told the NYT, which has an article that seems to be searching for a way to legitimate making private companies like Google suppress free speech.

    Mr. Wu offered some unsolicited advice: Why not set up an oversight board of regional experts or serious YouTube users from around the world to make the especially tough decisions?

    Top Men.

    1. the phrase “private speech controllers” should send shivers up every spine, from the most liberal to most conservative.

      1. It gives liberals a hard on. I am sure Shreek is about orgasmic right now after reading it.

        1. T o n y will certainly love the extra state coercion, to get those icky poor people out of his field of view.

      2. Despite being a moron, he’s not proposing anything coercive.

        1. Despite being a moron, he’s not proposing anything coercive.

          Yet.

    2. But he said the public deserved to know more about how private firms made those decisions in the first place, every day, all over the world. After all, he added, they are setting case law, just as courts do in sovereign countries.

      What a fucking moron. If I don’t like YouTube’s “case law”, I can start using a different video hosting site with no side effect on my life. Not so much with a court system’s case law.

      1. Sounds like the public needs to know how you make these decisions on what video hosting site you use, too. You’re settling your own personal case law, after all.

    3. I guess its a good thing that NYT and WashPo are in such decline they’ll never again be among the “most powerful private speech controllers”.

    4. I’m a serious YouTube user.

      Can I be on the panel?

      1. IIRC, that automatically disqualifies, you for failing to reach the minimum IQ for garbage scow scrubber.

    5. Tim Wu is truly repulsive. I think it’s time to pass a law banning men with monosyllabic Asian names from practicing or dealing with Constitutional law.

      1. How about men with Kenyan sounding names?

  14. The webcomic xkcd is now home to to largest webcomic panel ever, measuring 1.3 terapixels.

    A bit late on this topic, reason.

    Now, onto football. Holy shit, are the replacement refs actually getting worse as time goes on?

    1. Do not even get me started on this after last night Auric.

    2. I don’t watch a ton of football…ok, I watch alot at the beginning of the season until I am knocked out of my survivor pool (FUCKING STEELERS!!) and my Creator has it been bad. I think it is getting worse because the replacement guys are getting ridden hard by everybody. Collingsworth and Michaels were especially condescending last night, I thought, and with reason.

      On the other hand, if there were no refs at all there wouldn’t be any football at all. I actually think the theater of the absurd is a little more entertaining than straight up regular season football.

      1. My thought is that calls are blown left and right no matter who the refs are, but they are so scrutinized right now because we have “replacement” refs. I see some god-awful calls from Hochuli and the gang every year (Denver/San Diego 4-5 years ago?), but not this amount of uproar.

        1. No, it’s far more frequent now. I was having this conversation with a Steelers fan last night who was claiming the same thing, and his justification was citing 3-4 terrible calls in the past 10 years of Steelers history. There were 3-4 terrible calls just in last night’s game! Yes the regular officials make mistakes, but nowhere near as frequently.

          1. The problem is the same reason replacement players dont work in baseball, but did in football.

            Football players dont have a real minor league (Canada and Arena dont count) so a player just out of NFL range is very close in talent to an NFL player.

            In baseball, however, there were the entire minors providing a buffer. They werent technically on strike, but, in most cases, they werent going to screw up a good thing, they could wait their turn.

            Same thing for the refs. They couldnt get the top NCAA refs, who while not as good as NFL refs, are at least used to something close to similar speed. But, they had to dip to D3 and NAIA refs to find someone willing to give up their current job for something probably temporary.

          2. A lower % of reviews and challenges are being overturned than last year and the number f challenges itself is actually down.

            The “replacement refs suck” is being pushed by ESPN and the Team Blue cheerleaders that run it. It’s union solidarity pure and simple and it flies in the face of all data recorded. Yes, there are bad calls, but that happens every week of every year. This year is no exception and it’s no worse than normal.

            1. I do have to say that there are mistakes every week, but some of the replacement ref mistakes are embarrassingly basic – like how many yards to mark off a penalty, for example.

              I have never seen teams given 20 yards for a 15 yard penalty before, or 14 yards for a 15. Basic math failures don’t seem to have ever been an issue before.

              I’ve also never seen officials give extra timeouts, or take timeouts that have been called off the board.

            2. Are you serious?

              Also: fuck the refs even more than this spam filter.

            3. Exactly my feeling as well. It is always especially bad when a call is blown and the game seems to turn on that, but let’s not kid ourselves that this wouldn’t happen if the regular refs were back.

              1. The regular refs wouldn’t be conferencing for 2 minutes and then still misapplying the rules.

            4. A lot of the blown calls are unreviewable. If you loosened up the restrictions on what can be reviewed by the replay officials — something I think the NFL really should consider doing, so that penalties or non-penalties can be reviewed — the challenge success rate would skyrocket.

              And some of the administrative mistakes (not judgement calls which are reviewable) are just mind-boggling. Like last night when the ref was asking Harbaugh whether he wanted to just back up the 5 yards from the return after the offsides penalty, which even I as a fan knew they can’t do since the penalty occurred before the kick. How can 5 of these guys not know that fact?

              1. How can 5 of these guys not know that fact?

                They recently changed that in the college game. Thats how they dont know that.

                Why the NFL didnt buy them the Rosetta Stone disks for College-NFL translation this off-season, I dont understand.

      2. I admit it was a pretty entertaining game until there got to be about 2:30 left when I said “we are going to lose this game”. Given this was an echo of something I said with the same time remaining last January, it made the game much less entertaining.

        1. I’m still not sure if that kick was good or not. That they don’t have a vertical angle with replay is ridiculous.

          1. Camera placement would be a pain. Can’t have it on the ground because players could run into it from the end zone. It would be very difficult to calibrate if it’s suspended from above the field, and you’d have four very expensive setups (two at each goalpost) that would almost never be useful.

            1. Can always put it on the top of/inside the uprights. Or extend the uprights. Or have two perpendicular cameras and sync them up side by side so you get depth, width, and height all at once.

              1. Two words: Laser Beams.

                Shoot them from the top of the goalposts into fucking space. It’s not that difficult.

                1. Another Hollywood misperception. Lasers are invisible from outside the beam until they make contact with something. So you’d need a fog machine or something.

                  1. Which is perfect. If the ball doesn’t show the beam, it didn’t hit the line.

      3. Here’s the thing–Steve Young was totally right about this. The NFL–Goodell and the owners–don’t have to give a shit as long as people keep watching the games and buying the merchandise. If the refs’ shitty calls aren’t impacting the customer buy-in to any great degree, what incentive do they have to come to a quick agreement with the regulars?

        What the league and the owners DON’T want, however, is season-altering contraversy. What I suspect will happen is an agreement will be hammered out right around the end of the season–maybe 4-6 games before the playoffs start–so that both sides can save face and the pros are in place with a little time to get back up to speed. I’ll be pretty damn surprised if the replacements are left in place for when the games REALLY start to count, because owners are going to want to make sure their team doesn’t get screwed out of the chance at a ring.

    3. NFL fans are a cheap date who will watch it no matter how crappy the product. So the owners rationally just don’t give a shit. The old refs will come back when they completely fold and work on the owner’s terms and not a moment before. That is what happens when your service doesn’t really contribute to the bottom line.

      1. A big complaint has been the pace of play – so why not just revert back to the pre-challenge and review days? The call on the field stands. Suck it up and move on.

        1. So the solution to substandard refs is to make their calls final?

          1. That’s the trouble with humans and with human creations – they aren’t perfect and you will always have blown calls.

            Even with replay/review calls get blown.

            The refs are taking so long because veryone is riding them – coaches, players, journalists, etc., and I’m sure the NFL doesn’t give two shits because the TV revenue is flowing.

        2. Most of the delay isn’t from actual reviews. It’s from the refs taking forever to decide what the call on the field is. Also from stopping the clock for a measurement when the ball is over a yard short.

          1. The six minute increase in game length is mostly due to the fact that all scoring plays are reviewed this year, whereas they were only subject to challenge and auto-review in the last two minutes up till now. Those are 6 minutes I’m glad are being added because they ensure the scores are actually, you know, scores.

            1. Uh, most of the scores have no delay for review (or technically, the review is finished before the extra point team is ready and on the field). Most of those they do have a delay for would have been reviewed under the old system anyway.

              1. Yeah, when they first went to this and people were complaining about how much it would slow down the game to have a review every play my response was “You realize almost all of those reviews will involve watching a 5 second replay, once, while the kicking team runs out, right?”

      2. I didn’t say I thought the owners are going to cave. But that doesn’t mean the refs should be getting worse with more experience.

      3. I say this as an NFL fan: We are watching the next boxing.

        If you had told a boxing fan in 1970 that the sport would be dead in 30 years, they would have said you were crazy. It was inconceivable, what with Ali and Foreman and Frazier all in the sport.

        But then Don King came along. And Tyson. And then Ali lit the Olympic Torch shaking so bad from Parkinsons he was an Aspen leaf.

        The problem for football isn’t concussions. The worst sufferers of CTE are linemen, due to the constant, low-grade head trauma. And without some dramatic rules changes, there isn’t a way to solve that.

        Oh, we’ll still have football, just as we still have football. But unless there is a coordinated effort, at all levels, to fix it… goodbye football as a major sport.

        Actually, this ref thing has been good for one reason: Journalists have finally grown the balls to take on the NFL, something that has needed doing for a while. Previously, they have been too scared over their affiliates TV contracts, but now even Goodell (who will cause a major labor stoppage, mark my words, cuz he’s a prick) is taking heat. If this ref strike empowers journalists and the public to finally do what needs to be done (boycott the NFL till they clean up their shit) it was good.

        Cont…

      4. The ref strike won’t, but the NFL is approaching a tipping point. One of these days, something will happen: A death on the field, the CTE evidence buidling up (I mean, did you see the Jim McMahon interview where he admitted his short term memory was so blown he wouldn’t remember the interview as he was giving it?)… something, but football will take a major hit, one that it may never recover from.

        It seems inconceivable and unamerican and so on… but so did the death of boxing in 1970.

        1. I wonder if they’ll try weight limits? Or maybe evolve into a fewer players, or maybe more?

          1. A simple change would be to begin with all linemen standing, so they don’t plunge forward headfirst. It would hurt the running game and the rush, though, but when has the NFL ever cared about anything other than passing?

            1. An even simpler change would be single platoon football.

              If you sub out, you cant come back in until the next quarter.

              1. if you want to attack injuries, how about this: a guy who gets flagged for a hit that knocks out an opponent cannot return to play until the guy he hit can.

                1. But, wareagle, concussions themselves aren’t the problem. They contribute, but they don’t do brain damage alone.

                  Most linemen don’t get concussed, but on every lunge forward, their brains suffer minor trauma. Compound that over hundreds of snaps over many years, and their brains look as bad as a punch drunk boxer’s.

                  Concussions have been held up as the big evil, but its a distraction in a lot of ways. Any number of things produce brain trauama not bad enough for a concussion, but bad enough to eventually cause permanent damage.

                  To put it in boxing terms: One jab doesn’t do it. But 1000s will fuck you up.

                  1. I was trying to come up with a lighter, faster, more running and scoring oriented football in my head the other day.

                    Perhaps reducing the number of players from 11 to 7 on a side, which opens up a lot of gaps and would naturally reduce weight size (because you can only put, at best, 2-3 on the line if that).

                    1. Like 7’s in rugby.

                    2. Single platoon.

                      The fat men cant go both ways.

                    3. I like the 7s idea better, but then I am biased.

                  2. AuH2O,
                    you’re right but no one is talking about your point; they focus on the big hits because it’s easier to induce pearl-clutching that way. The point is, the game has always been violent. Just look at films from the 50s – 70s; a lot more head shots, clothesline tackles, etc than you see now. I don’t see a bona fide solution..

                2. a guy who gets flagged for a hit that knocks out an opponent cannot return to play until the guy he hit can.

                  So if Troy Polamalu hits the Ravens’ #6 WR, he can fake an injury and then “be held out for safety” for the rest of the season and Troy will be out for the season too?

                  1. no, not fake injury, real injury and real injury resulting from plays that draw penalties. A random injury in the flow of play does not count.

                    1. Why not do the hockey thing. If you get hit with a personal foul, you sit out one play. No substitution allowed for the position.

                    2. That’s basically automatic points for the offense.

                    3. That’s basically automatic points for the offense.

                      Maybe, but not absolute. It would cut down on the flagrant fouls.

        2. As much as I see the signs, I just don’t know if I agree with you. The public needs football and the government needs the public to have football as a distraction from all the shit they are doing to us on a daily basis.

          Maybe it’s because I just read Fahrenheit 451 (first time, surprisingly), but the book was incredibly applicable to today’s culture. Very few people care about what is going on in the world, so long as their football, Jersey Shore or Twilight are unaffected.

          1. First time? For shame. One of my favorite books, from my all time favorite author.

            I agree that football fill the circuses requirement of our current system. But couldn’t lacrosse or basketball or hockey do that just as well (I exclude rugby because having played it, there are a lot of concussions)?

            1. First time? For shame. One of my favorite books, from my all time favorite author.

              It basically comes down to, if a teacher assigns me the book to read, I have no interest in it. So there are some “Great American Classics” which I ignored in high school that I am now coming back to.

              Certainly something else could fill the void, if there even is one. The way the seasons are set up for sports could be changed so that basketball starts a little bit earlier than it does, and then we just become a baseball/basketball country, with a little hockey. But my point stands that the public really doesn’t care what is happening in the world as long as they get a steady stream of this entertainment. Cases in point, my girlfriend and roommate.

              1. In some ways, true. But, the public cared enough to kill boxing, although UFC has replaced it, though not anywhere close to boxing’s heyday.

                I agree that the public hates to think, and despises thinking, as well as cleverness or intellectualism. I just think that it will be hard to avoid it on some subjects very soon (people are going to get very fiscally educated when the government goes broke or hyper inflates)

                1. The public didn’t kill boxing; moving boxing to pay-per-view and HBO/Showtime from the networks and all the fight fixing killed boxing viewership. Boxing is still around, but people don’t care as much since they didn’t grow up watching it on the networks every Saturday like people used to.

                2. I agree that the public hates to think,…

                  Who is this ‘public’ of whom you speak? I do not think I have met him/her. Or is someone other than yourself?

            2. But couldn’t lacrosse or basketball or hockey do that just as well

              Maybe, but I don’t know how soon that would happen. It used to be that cities lived and died by how well their baseball team performed; football has taken over that role at both the college and pro level because the TV money is almost stupid-huge.

              Basketball might have a shot at taking over, but from a talent perspective, the league is about maxed-out at where teams can be placed without making a horribly diluted product. Baseball is already a watered-down game talent-wise in many respects, and I’d say the NFL could contract by four teams and the quality of play would improve significantly.

              Hockey and lacrosse, however, are regional sports that fit within certain cultural niches–the former, outside of Canada and the northeast, is considered little more than a pleasant distraction around basketball, and the latter is still viewed as an activity that appeals primarily to white suburban preppy kids. And I say this as someone who loves pro lacrosse and would love to see its audience grow.

              1. So I take it water polo and badminton are right out.

          2. Very few people care about what is going on in the world, so long as their football, Jersey Shore or Twilight are unaffected.

            Stuff that elitist bullshit where the sun don’t shine, dude.

            1. He’s overstating the case a bit; once problems are brought to their attention people care, but they aren’t terribly interested in finding out about those problems on their own.

              1. No. I can’t begin to tell you how tired I am of the “conventional wisdom” that just because people choose entertainment over the grind of serious issues, that somehow represents a deep flaw in the collective American psyche.

                In other words “people don’t value what I value, ergo they are all fucked up”

                1. really? Give me a break. A large segment of the population can’t tell you their Senators are or answer other basic questions. But they were all over the last episode of The Voice. It’s not that they’re fucked up; it’s that they are ignorant but their votes have the ability to fuck up the rest of us.

                  I can live with someone who disagrees with me on principle, but have a lot of difficulty with the massively uninformed.

                  1. I think I would rather be ruled by The Voice than the 536 clowns in DC.

                    1. that’s not the point. It’s a matter of would you rather be ruled by folks who pay more attention to reality tv than to reality?

                    2. and what part of reality do you not have a doctorate in? I’m sure someone, somewhere could suggest that your ignorance in some aspect of reality (e.g., quantum physics, plumbling, baking???) is equally worthy of derision.

                    3. It’s a matter of would you rather be ruled by folks who pay more attention to reality tv than to reality?

                      We already are.

                  2. A large segment of the population can’t tell you their Senators are or answer other basic questions. But they were all over the last episode of The Voice.

                    So what?

                    Politics is miserable and it makes other people around you miserable. You think you’re “informed” and that makes you, what, a better, more responsible citizen or something? Regular people have fucking jobs, and kids, and houses, and hobbies, and every once in a while, they want to see something light and entertaining.

                    Just because someone doesn’t share your interests doesn’t make them beneath you.

                    1. Hear hear. The less attention I pay to politics, the happier I am. Nothing wrong with that.

                    2. Everyone should experience the feeling of satisfaction that I experienced when I kicked a political candidate off my yard and tore up his flyer – unread – in front of his anguished eyes.

                      It’ll suck if he wins and has the power to kill our plans to remodel the house, but I don’t care.

                    3. *shrug*

                      No reason to be a dick about it. I have very little doubt that most people running for office have great intentions and are decent people in that they take care of their pets, children, clean their yards, and are nice at block parties.

                    4. If they aren’t interested in politics enough to know who their senators and representatives are, or what the different offices they’re voting for do, etc…. then why the FUCK are we letting them vote about something they have no clue about?

                      I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. We need to require voters to pass basic civics knowledge tests before allowing them to register, preferably every four years afterward. Knowledge requirements got a bad name because the Jim Crow South abused them by forcing blacks to pass bar exams while allowing whites to be grandfathered in to the rolls, but there’s nothing wrong with a basic knowledge test imho.

                  3. But they were all over the last episode of The Voice. It’s not that they’re fucked up; it’s that they are ignorant but their votes have the ability to fuck up the rest of us.

                    How about we force everyone to choose between having a vote for American Idol and having a vote for the actual government elections.

        3. McMahon’s issues are probably due to that Charles Martin bodyslam which was certainly not part of the game.

      5. we’re talking degrees here. Fans have bitched about refs for as long as there have been refs. And the loudest bitching tends to come from fans of the losing team.

      6. One would think no one ever bitched about the calls made by the regular refs.

    4. I don’t think the replacement refs have really been worse than the regular guys at all

      1. Have you watched any football this year? Last night’s SNF game was awful. Yesterday a Cowboy’s receiver got tripped in the endzone by a hat a ref threw in for no reason. The 49er’s got 5 timeouts in a half.

        1. Beats getting blinded by a regular ref, imo.

          1. This one actually affected a possible scoring play while it was still going on.

    5. I think the problem is not that they are making bad calls. Most of the penalties I saw called were, in fact, penalties. The problem is that the players and coaches haven’t adjusted to having hand-checking down field called.

      1. The offensive linesmen on both sides do seem to have adjusted to the complete lack of (offensive) holding calls.

        1. Actually, what I’ve seen is that anytime a defender gets turned around, the refs call holding. The rest of the time, you might be right, but if a defender’s back is toward the QB on a pass play and he’s engaged with a blocker, the flag flies.

          1. Now that you mention that, that’s sort of true. What I’m thinking of is every time a defender gets by an Olinemen he can get dragged down from behind or held in place via an arm wrapped around.

      2. and a lot of players are pushing the proverbial envelope to see what they can get away with. The replacement guys are college refs, where the hand fighting between DBs and wideouts is far more limited. The refs are calling the same penalties but they’re doing it on guys who are now flagged for things they got away with before.

        One disclaimer: the personal foul on Reed late in the game was a bad bad call, though I think the regular refs would have made it, too.

    6. I don’t follow football…

      …but I’m not gay.

    7. No.

      But the media is pushing their agenda that they are getting worse even harder.

      They are no worse than the regular refs; they’re simply having every call critiqued to no end in a way that the regular refs don’t.

      1. Exactly. Jason Whitlock has this subject nailed: the replacement refs are the perfect target of opportunity for all the pussies in the media to look tough.

        1. His article on Thursday night football was spot-on, as well. If you’re that concerned about player safety, what the fuck are you doing making these guys play a game just four days after completing one on Sunday?

          I wouldn’t be surprised to see another player walkout within five years, just based on health reasons alone.

      2. When was the last time a coach got 5 timeouts in a half from a regular official? When was the last time a regular official tripped a player during a play in the endzone with his hat (which was thrown for no reason)? When was the last time that there were over 11 first downs via penalty in a game?

        1. The hat was thrown to mark a player stepping out of bounds, but it shouldn’t have been thrown into the end-zone.

          1. No one stepped out of bounds.

        2. When was the last time a replacement ref fucked an entire game a la Hochuli did in Denver a couple of years ago?

          The replacement refs are no worse. They’re just being critiqued much more harshly.

    8. Yesterday I saw a holding call take 10 minutes to adjudicate, with an NFL auxiliary official involved. Fucking ridiculous.

  15. US beaten into second place by Estonia in internet freedom rankings. Scarily, Australia is fourth

    http://www.freedomhouse.org/ar…..fight-back

    1. Well, don’t you kick people in the ass with boot for mocking you?

    2. How can Australia possibly be fourth when the whole country is subjected to government-controlled filters?

      Is Iran fifth?

  16. Why does it matter that the flight attendant has CCW? They don’t apply in flerking airport security checkpoints. Pretty sure she doesn’t have the CCW anymore, anyway.

    It also wasn’t a TSA person who discharged it, it was a police officer, who was attempting to “secure” it, not necessarily unload it. (yes, I know you have to unload to secure, but there are other steps in the process too)

    I know it’s a long article and stuff, almost 200 words. But try to get it right next time.

    1. yes, I know you have to unload to secure, but there are other steps in the process too)

      One of those steps involves pulling the trigger? I am surprised that cop can tie is shoes. Or more likely, he was playing with the thing.

      1. It’s also possible he tried to lock the trigger with cable ties or something before unloading it. Whenever you’re doing something awkward inside the trigger guard you’re supposed to make sure it’s unloaded, of course.

        Then again, it’s a SW Airweight double action. That would require quite a trigger pull to discharge.

        1. It’s also possible he tried to lock the trigger with cable ties or something before unloading it.

          Then he is a fucking moron who was effectively playing with the trigger. Why would you secure the trigger before unloading it? That makes no sense. Unload the damn weapon and then it doesn’t matter if you pull the trigger.

      2. You pull the trigger to take the Glock apart. Maybe he thought the revolver needed the slide taken off…

        1. Hopefully you unload the Glock first….

          1. Really, it is hard to imagine what that guy was thinking.

            1. Or “if”

  17. could cost New Jersey taxpayers more than $1.6 million in payouts alone

    Who needs a law to stop New Jerseyians from smiling?

  18. Today’s links seem to be law enforcement heavy. Feeney is really playing to the crowd.

    1. but ironically, no comment on:

      Wang Lijun, Bo Xilai’s former police chief, has been sentenced to 15 years in prison for “bending the law for selfish ends, defection, abuse of power and bribe-taking.”

      When China is leading the way re: police integrity, it makes you wonder if the Mayans knew something.

      1. “Forget it, Jake. It’s Americatown.”

    1. She’s really extraordinarily unattractive.

      People actually purposefully watch a show on HBO to see her naked?

      I don’t get it.

      1. In my defense I watched the show with the slim hopes that any of her three friends on the show would get naked. Alas… HBO fucked me again.

        1. Three of the four chicks from ‘Sex and the City’ stripped down for that show.

          The brunette is actually attractive and Kim Catrell is very fuckable. Sarah J-P is too prudish though.

          (my wife loved that show so I consented to watch it along with Ally McBeal)

          1. Cool story bro.

          2. Sarah J-P is too prudish though.

            If by prudish, you mean looks like fucking horse, then I agree.

      2. What the hell kind of a show is it? And boy does its existence make feel better about my decision never to get HBO. WTF? Why would you have a show dedicated some homely fat broad with bad tattoos taking her clothes off?

        1. It has become a running joke at the AV Club how defensive TV critics get about that show. Not only do critics like the show, they write long diatribes like how girls challenges the masculine ways of evaluating TV. I wish I were joking:

          http://www.avclub.com/articles…..-of,81266/

          1. AVClub’s obsession with that show is absolutely tiresome.

            1. It’s mostly Todd, and TV does weird things to the man (see: His reviews of Ryan Murphy shows, which are Heart of Darkness style madness).

          2. It is okay to have homely people in TV shows as long as they can act. It makes the show seem less artificial. But it is not okay to have said homely people take their clothes off. That is just bad taste.

          3. That show sucks. Absolutely horrid. Mental masturbation for the chronically entitled.

          4. The only thing I got out of that article was the mewlings of a pozzed-out nerd trying WAY too hard to show how much of a feminist he is so he can get laid.

            My favorite line, which encapsulates how much of a figurative eunuch he is:

            But the quality of the backlash against Girls and many other shows with female creators or protagonists?including New Girl, Suburgatory, Enlightened, 2 Broke Girls, Whitney, and yes, even Homeland?is at best uncharitable and at worst disturbingly sexist.

            Right, because pointing out that these shows are intellectually brain-dead trash that pander to the inherent narcissism and emotional triggers of the modern American feminist.?

            THAT’S SEXIST!! :librage:

            10-1 odds this dork likes getting pegged by bull dykes on the weekend lesbian bar crawl.

        2. It’s the TV show equivalent of a Jezebel screed about how 20-something urban white women need to take control of their sexuality.

        3. Lena has been praised not just for her writing, acting and directing talents, but also for her willingness to openly parade her larger figure in front of the camera, in defiance of the Hollywood pressure on women to be thin.

          Ugly people. It’s not just for the mall, any more.

          1. Yeah, until she comes down with diabetes or high blood pressure, and then it’s “lose the weight, fattie!”

            Possibly the most pathetic left-wing cultural slapfight going on right now is the “fat-positive” movement vs. the “put down the burger and eat a salad” movement. Primarily because it allows them to hector society to eat better while promoting grotesque people as “warm, funny, attractive” human beings.

            1. “How dare you be repulsed by unattractive people!”

  19. Joe Biden has a huge penis!
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..sband.html

    1. It was nice of the Daily Mail to give Drudge his go-to picture for Biden for the foreseeable future (picture #3).

    2. Joe Biden is a huge penis!

      FTFY

  20. So, I am starting to think that if both Obama and Warren lose, Jezebel is gonna go straight up Valerie Solanas on someone’s ass.

    Seriously, they are at full on, hate everyone who is even remotely a Republican. I mean, they are hating Ann Romney every freaking chance they get. ANN ROMNEY!

    To put it in Simpson terms, they’ve gone from regular old villianry to comic supervillianry.

    1. The whole left is like that. They are just nuts with hate. If they were not so pathetic, it would be disturbing.

      1. Well, its not like they can support what Obama has actually done, so instead they just hate everything that isn’t him, in the hope that that will be enough to keep their base from going Green.

        1. Obama is horrible and can’t be defended. So all they can do is tell themselves that the other side is worse.

      2. How you project. I tripped onto this wingnut hate site called Ace of Spades and they actually let me post there (no registration required).

        It is a truly vile site so I enjoyed mixing it up as Dickless Cheney and Rush Limpcock before I got IP banned.

        I should have been shrike to tip off some of you.

        1. Shreek you are a retarded sock puppet. There isn’t a site outside of Reason that wouldn’t ban you. Reason only doesn’t because they are desperate for hits and feel sorry for you.

        2. Ace of Spades is pretty bad.

          But then again so is HotAir. And RedState.

          Jezebel is notable only because of its silliness. The hate quotient is pretty constant across the board on all sites. They just have bizarre, absurdist feminist reasons for hating their opponents, so it sticks out more.

          1. I visit all those sites. I agree with them on some things, but not with others, at least not anymore. That’s how I ended up here. Got tired of the knee-jerk right wing world view.

          2. I don’t notice them particularly full of hate. I would imagine you object to them because they have bad things to say about the Iranians. But in their defense there are not a lot of pro Mullah sites out there on either side.

            1. The Ace of Spades guy is maybe one or two baby steps above Stormfront, dude.

              1. I don’t read his blog regularly. But I have never seen anything like that. I would be curious as to what you consider to be two steps above storm front.

              2. http://ace.mu.nu/

                There is is blog. There is a long thread running down it. I don’t see anything that would justify that conclusion. Is talking about the Presidential Polls now one step above Storm Front? I am not seeing anything. Granted, he doesn’t think 5% of the tax payers should pay for the entire government and he doesn’t like the Islamists. But that doesn’t make him storm front just someone who disagrees with you.

                1. I only ever read him when his blog would come up as a Ron Paul news link, and I assume that Paul hate posts probably make him froth at the mouth more than random posts about tracking polls.

                  1. A lot of people besides Storm Front hate Paul Fluffy.

                    1. That’s very true, but Ace of Spades guy, when freaking out with Paul hate, turns into “We must exterminate all Muslims and re-educate all dissenters and civil liberties mean nut-thing, azzolutely nut-thing!” guy.

                    2. Fluff, I doubt very much that AoS would endorse and actual extermination. Does he/they hate them and view them single-mindedly as the enemy? Yes, sure. If given the opportunity would they actually, you know, carry out what they claim to want? I doubt it. We’re talking about the confluence of the internet and the First Amendment, after all, where you can vent whatever you want without fear of reprisal (mostly).

            2. I don’t notice them particularly full of hate.

              Dondero posts on RedState (or at least used to, back when I went there), so I saw lots of hate.

              1. Rob,

                I was talking about Ace of Spades. I never read Red State. So I really can’t say. Bad choice of words on my part.

                1. Honestly, he’s a Northeastern Republican. Very neocon, very uncaring up social issues. He has a bunch of cobloggers, and last December they did a series that was “The Conservative Case for _________”. It was actually really good stuff. Even Santorum and Newt had their advocate, and they made some good points.

                  So I wrote him asking if he would publish “The Conservative Case for Ron Paul” if I wrote it. He refused, basically went full retard talking about how Ron Paul needed to convince the Republican Party and Republican voters about his foreign policy, but no he was not interested in reading or publishing arguments on the topic.

                  He finally admitted that Afghanistan was a fools errand last week or two weeks ago. I really wanted to just post in the comments that finally he was coming around to the Paul side of things.

                  Ron Paul really makes him foam at the mouth. He’s fully bought into the “Paul is a racist anti-Semite 9/11 conspiracy believer.” line that the neocons hammer.

        3. Shreek you ignorant slut, it is not my job to pay for your birth control.

  21. How sad is the movie My Life? Super sad, super underrated.

    1. Is it a choose-your-own-adventure?

      1. Michael Keaton, cancer, home movies for his unborn son? No one has seen this?

        1. I read the news to get depressed. I watch movies to be entertained. Fictional pathos doesn’t entertain me much anymore. I’ve seen too much of the real kind.

          1. Well, also, in her prime Nicole Kidman. But yeah, most depressing movie as a guy maybe ever.

        2. Too many years ago to say whether it was underrated, but definitely super sad.

        3. wow, that was a ways back, when Keaton seemed to get regular work. It was sad but I thought it was a pretty good film with a guy who knew he would not be around to watch his kid grow up but did not want to be forgotten.

          1. Keaton has swung around to being underrated. Everyone remembers Beetlejuice, but what about the movie where he was a nut with Christopher Loyd, or his whole mid-80s to early 90s body of work?

            1. stretch that to mid-to-late-90s please so we can include Jackie Brown

              1. Keaton not getting more movie roles is part of my evidence of why Hollywood is retarded.

                Also, he would have been Jack on Lost if the role had been more limited.

                1. Well the plan was to have him be Jack and then kill Jack in the first episode.

                  Which, Jack sucking hard, would have been a good idea.

  22. http://althouse.blogspot.com/2…..obama.html

    Great Althouse post

    “‘I am not particularly happy with Obama,’ the retired auto-parts storeowner said of the man he supported in 2008.”
    “His wife, walking beside him on the Military Ridge state trail, overheard him voicing doubt. ‘What about my reproductive rights?’ she asked, clearly upset. ‘No, we are voting for Obama!'”

    Auto-parts… lady parts… somewhere in Wisconsin.

    Discussing his uncertainty, the retired couple walked off along the popular recreational trail in this small town…

    How old does a woman have to be before she stops thinking first and above all about her reproductive rights? Well, at least they are still “discussing his uncertainty” as they walk away, even though she made a declarative statement about how the 2 of them are voting. Maybe he needed to work through his feelings to understand why he is so fuzzy about his reasons for doing what he is going to do.

    1. Assuming that story is true (it seems a bit too convenient) it’s very possible the guy has no intention of voting for Obama, he just doesn’t want to engage in a fight with his wife in public. Althouse has less understanding, apparently, of how married couples behave than I do and I’m not married.

      1. Yeah because husbands just love picking fights with their shrew wives in public no less. I often wonder what fucking planet you live on Tulpa.

        1. You seem to be agreeing with me then insulting me. I don’t get it.

          1. The first part was sarcastic.

            1. We got that… Which is why we are confused.

              1. precisely

          2. I had the same confusion. I think he meant the guy wouldn’t have said anything on the subject at all?

          3. John…well, we’re working with him, but these things take time, you understand.

        2. John- I understand the sense of loss you feel in MNG’s absence and that you see Tulpa as a replacement. But it would help if you would comprenend what he writes instead of instantly assuming that he hold the opposite opinion as you. In this case, it appears that you are in agreement. Now why don’t you kiss and make up and try to play nice in the future.

          1. Now why don’t you kiss and make up and try to play nice in the future.

            Really? Cm’ on, dude. It’s TULPA!

            1. Liked the bit on NPR the other day, by the way.

                1. What bit? Is there a link?

                  If you’re going to be on NPR, get on these boards and promote it hard. Don’t be shy.

                  1. EDG: it was local to Columbus, but here is the link to the Podcast.

                    1. Thank you.

            2. Somewhere right now there’s a red light camera holding a ticket for you. I’m here to make sure you don’t die of old age before it finds you.

              1. Oh, yes, that was directed at John. One of the maladies of typing as one would speak aloud is that the message gets garbled.

          2. And Randian is basically exercising the same reflex.

              1. I sensed you were denigrating me. Maybe you were denigrating John.

          3. Kissing and making up is fine but NO TONGUES!!!!!!

      2. Althouse has less understanding, apparently, of how married couples behave than I do and I’m not married.

        Add that to the long list of common social interactions that baffle Althouse.

    2. Should have bolded the “retired” part.

    3. The dems actually have most women believing that Mitt Romney (of all people) sincerely wants to overturn Roe V. Wade. Also that Rush Limbaugh and Todd Akin actually have political influence.

      In my anecdotal experience even being female does not eviscerate oneself from the supposed “war on women”, as judging by Linda McMahon’s chilly reception among that target group.

      1. “War on Women” by the GOP is a misnomer.

        ‘War on Modern Women’ is more apt.

        1. Only democrats could create a victimized group out of 51% of the population.

          1. Being possibly slightly limited in something the other 49% can’t do.

          2. Give the Republicans some credit here. Have you never heard of the War on Christmas/Christians?

        2. the party that brought you serial politicians who actually abused women – the Kennedys, Edwards, Clinton – seems poorly positioned to accuse anyone of declaring war on ladies.

          1. But those brave men believed in the right that their mistress have the ability to get an immediate abortion were they to become pregnant.

            1. Or, you know, maybe if they want to wait eight months to get that abortion, because they’re busy or something, they should have that “right”, too.

    4. She’s retired and she’s worried about getting pregnant? How old is she?

      1. Annoyingly, it doesn’t give any indication. And only he is necessarily retired, I think.

        1. she could just have retired young to pop out babies

        2. Plus, for all the talk about “reproductive rights is just code for killing babies,” it’s actually gone far beyond that now–it’s all about “free” care/other stuff. I’m sure older women are just as on board about getting the rest of their OB/GYN visits, mammogram screenings and menopause meds for free as younger women are to get free birth control.

  23. The Rise of the Praetorian Class

    The Praetorian Class includes members of the Armed Services, federal, state and local law enforcement personnel as well as numerous militarized officials including agents from the DEA, Immigrations, Customs Enforcement, Air Marshalls, US Marshalls, and more. It also includes, although to a lesser extent, various stage actors in the expanding security theater such as TSA personnel. The main mission of the Praetorian Class is to keep the order of the day. This requires displaying an intimidating presence in their interactions with the Economic Class.

    1. Interesting point except the military rarely has any interaction with the American public. In fact they are prohibited by law from doing any kind of law enforcement in the US. So he kind of kills his argument by lumping them in with LEOs.

      1. They can do law enforcement upon request of the governor of the state in question.

        1. During an insurrection. But those are pretty rare last I looked.

          1. But Newsweek told me that we’re ripe for an insurrection just as soon as O’LimCoulitty give us our marching orders.

        2. I really wouldn’t lump in the military with the Federal Alphabet agencies. Your average Marine NCO is far more familiar with the Constitution than anyone in the TSA, DEA, or ATF.

        3. You can list military law enforcement actions in a very small pamphlet.

          My interactions with the public have been kowtowing to local levy commissioners, mayors and such during floods, serving as a sort of scounting service for the NOLA PD after Katrina and generally staying out of the way – as it should be.

          1. We had a little more contact with the public when I was in the National Guard. Snow Storms, floods, etc… Always unarmed except for guarding the airport immediately after 911.

            1. I never got to do the couple of snow/ice emergencies – I remember we did send a 60KW set and some operators to a hospital once. The funny part was last winter when the IL Stae cops all were stuck or unable to leave some area stations, so we had to give them rides in our HMMWVs. Heh.

      2. Yeah, but they started whittling away at Posse Comitatus with the drug war. As long as the .mil isn’t directly engaged in aressting people, they can provide support to the cops.

        And I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had to point out to dumbasses that Posse Comitatus is legislative, not constitutional. If Congress wants to remove that prohibition tomorrow, they can. Of course, this is usually the same kind of dumbass that thinks the military is prohibited from conducting operations in the US for some arcane reason.

      3. Interesting point except the military rarely has any interaction with the American public

        Except for the lavish benefits received from the public till, and the permeated attitude that the military is entitled to First Class on airplanes, comped checks and deep discounts, etc.

        Why did DoD change the airline travel regs from “wear civilian clothes and fly under the radar” to “must dress in full uniform to travel”?

        1. You used to always be able to travel in uniform, you just had to wear a Class B, which most people didn’t want to wear. What they did was allow people to travel in fatigues, which frankly drives me nuts. It is demeaning as hell to the uniform and the service. In fact that is kind of counter pretorian guard in a way. A pretorian guard at least dresses sharp.

          1. Part of was simple necessity. They were shipping people around so much for deployments it became impossible to enforce the Class B and up rule because nobody had their class Bs. You don’t pack dress uniforms for a combat deployment.

          2. When I was in the Marines, we never traveled in fatigues except to combat deployments. If traveling to a new duty station, it was class A’s all the way.

        2. The fact that there aren’t lines stretching around the block at Army recruiting centers would seem to indicate there are tradeoffs involved in obtaining those bennies. You yourself have commented before that they’ve drastically lowered standards to meet recruitment goals.

          1. What’s your point here?

        3. I would like some details on those “lavish benefits”. I must have forgot to sign up for them when I was in the Marines then the National Guard.

          1. You must have.

            The Post 9/11 GI Bill is probably worth $100,000 all by itself.

            When you’re deployed, you make quite a bit of money, all tax free.

            1. I think combat pay is $225 a month now. If you are single, that’s a nice bonus waiting when you get home and can actually use it. If have kids, and / or are a Reservist losing your civilian pay, it might be the difference between breaking even and going bankrupt. “Lavish” is a stretch.

              1. You mean you might actually have the opportunity to get an extra $2700 a year as a trade off for being in some 3rd world shithole warzone? Where the fuck do I sign?

            2. I seem to have missed out on them too. The times when I deployed, I left a really good job, so it was sort of a push as far as $ goes. I don’t think anyone paying for Tricare Select (Reserve) is going to consider it “lavish”, and the pension I may get someday is not going to break the bank either.

              Post 9/11 GI bill is contingent on deployed time – do one deployment as a Guard or Reservist, and you might get 20%.

              I am not complaining about what I got – I was a volunteer and not in it for the money (I think those folks are called “mercenaries”). But don’t try to stack up the GS vs DoD in benefits earned.

              1. The Reservists / Guardsmen who loved getting deployed were the ones with government jobs. They got all their government job pay AND their military pay. Those guys would hop up and down when volunteers were needed.

              2. Post 9/11 GI bill is contingent on deployed time – do one deployment as a Guard or Reservist, and you might get 20%.

                You get at least 50% a whack.

            3. I took a hell of a pay cut the first time I deployed in 04. The tax waiver kept my ass out of hock.

              2 years deployed post-911 has earned me 80% of the GI bill. I’d have to do another year overseas to get 100%.

              1. You should be at 100% given that they now count Basic/AIT.

      4. A much larger ex-military Merc class seems to exist now than in the past. I think they become honorary praetorians once they go Merc.

        1. But that is really more of the LEO class. And yeah, LEOs are a real fucking problem mainly because they won’t hold each other to any sort of accountability.

          1. But can we really call what Blackwater does an LEO mission?

            They’re mercs, dude.

            1. they are XE now, the “Blackwater” name got too muddied.

              XE are a mix or merc and bodyguard. Meh.

            2. The protection services they offer are basically the same thing the Secret Service does or any state police force does for their Governor. Sometimes they are armed up more because they are in a dangerous shithole.

    2. The evil of militarism is not that it shows certain men to be fierce and haughty and excessively warlike. The evil of militarism is that it shows most men to be tame and timid and excessively peaceable. The professional soldier gains more and more power as the general courage of a community declines. Thus the Pretorian guard became more and more important in Rome as Rome became more and more luxurious and feeble. The military man gains the civil power in proportion as the civilian loses the military virtues. And as it was in ancient Rome so it is in contemporary Europe. There never was a time when nations were more militarist. There never was a time when men were less brave.

      G.K. Chesterton

  24. Alabama ABC seizes homebrewing equipment and BOOKS

    The former at least involves them semi-enforcing a stupid law. But the latter is inexplicable.

    Semi-enforcing because there are at least 5 other homebrew shops operating in the state of Alabama. None of the others have applied for a liquor license too, so they dont fall under ABC jurisdiction.

    1. Yeah, I was kind of flabbergasted to read that homebrewing was illegal in Alabam. But then, they just legalized beer over 6% two years ago or so. Texas has some odd labeling laws, but nothing as bad as all that.

  25. And the Best Dressed award goes to…Kat Dennings!

    She should wear that all the time. Going to the store, hanging out at home…jogging, too, of course.

    1. You just know that to sarcasmic she’s morbidly obese; her breasts are bigger than raisins.

    2. She really does have amazingly wonderful breasts.

    3. She’s on my female fuckable list, but girlfriend can’t act her way out of a paper bag.

  26. So the talk this morning is around the lobby shop is that Obama’s internals are crap. like down 8-10 nationally and comparable in the swing states. but, of course, nobody is willing to share sources. it’s all dick measuring to see who knows what, but this seems to be the rumor today. so i’m spreading it.

    1. I would be curious to see the actual internals. The media sure is playing up the “the election is over nothing to see here” story a lot. They usually do the opposite and try to make every race more competitive than it is because that is what gets ratings.

      Suppose for a moment that Obama really is down ten points. What would happen if that actually got out? What kind of a meltdown would the media and the left be having right now?

      1. The Creepy Ginger all but confirms your suspicions:

        “In all the battleground states, we continue to see all our pathways there,” he told the White House pool at an Obama fundraiser in Milwaukee. “We’re either tied or in the lead in every battleground state 45 days out.”

        “Pathways” means,that victory is not in sight, if you ask me.

        1. That is an interesting choice of words. “Pathways” to me means “we still see ways to pull this out” not “we have this in the bag”.

          1. The five battleground states, by my own personal assessment, are Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Colorado, and Wisconsin.

            In all of the traditional polls, the President has a modest lead in each.

            Yet Creepy Ginger felt the need to say they were at least “tied” in those states. Which, to me, is a reveal.

            1. I think IA, NV, NC, and NH are in play too.

              Funny year.

              1. Sure, but even then, The One has a modest lead in all of them except for NC, and Creepy Ginger still said “tied”.

                Something’s off, if you ask me.

            2. on the one hand, a modest lead; on the other, growing skepticism – that is voiced out loud – about the makeup of the people being polled. I’m sensing Bradley effect but could be wrong. Still cannot wrap my head around the notion that Obama is competitive, regardless of who the opponent is.

        2. the fact that he’s even in WI is interesting.

      2. I hope this is true. Because the published tracking polls show some Romney softness based on this trumped-up 47% bullshit.

        1. i think the real numbers at play are 8%+ unemployment and 16 trillion.

          1. the only rationale I hear from anyone who supports POTUS’ re-election is partisan. No one defends his record except for a very few. It’s all Romney/Repub hate.

            1. Bullshit. I listed ten solid reasons here several times.

              Dumping the silly idea of Star Wars missile shields in Poland and signing START is one of them.

              And all of them are from a smaller govt perspective (so Obamacare is a demerit).

              1. Leaving eastern Europe out to dry is not a positive. They’re some of our most loyal allies and you can’t seriously trust Putin.

                I’m curious what the other 9 are. If that weak sauce is the highlight, it is pretty awful.

                1. What would Ron Paul say about building missile shields in Poland?

                  I have to remind myself where I am posting sometimes when I see LP positions maligned.

                  1. BO didn’t do that because he agrees with the LP, he did it because he’s a weak negotiator who just wants to make bad news go away regardless of the cost. The “concession” that Russia made in exchange was completely unverifiable and unenforceable.

                    If BO embraces RP’s foreign policy across the board, we’ll have a different discussion.

          2. That most voters correctly remember were the consequence of events that happened during Bush’s presidency.

            Only FOX News viewers think the economic crisis began in Jan. 2009.

            That’s why Obama is polling so well despite the economic issues. People actually remember it’s not all his fault.

            1. Too much time has passed for that to be the case any longer.

              Afghanistan’s not his fault either, but he’s had almost 4 years to fix it or get out.

              4 years is longer than our involvement in WWII. If you can’t deliver results in 4 years, you never will.

            2. When will it be his fault, Tony? If bare majorities in both houses are sufficient to make everything that happened during Bush’s terms his fault, how are supermajorities in both houses not sufficient to make what happened in 2009-10 Obama’s fault?

              1. You tell me a presidential pathway to full employment and a balanced budget and I’ll tell you how much fault is Obama’s for those two metrics. (It would be to whatever extent he failed to take opportunities available to improve them.)

                1. If there’s nothing BO can do about the situation maybe he needs to find a new job and let someone else take over who can get the job done. Tell me what will change to allow BO to work his magic if he gets reelected.

                  And if he were willing to balance the budget it would be done. Assuming the Senate Democrats didn’t get in the way, which is your side’s problem.

                  1. It depends on the makeup of Congress. Why is it that Congress is only at fault for things when its controlled by Democrats?

                    The Tea Party House and the Republican Senate filibuster have made this Congress possibly the least productive ever. What is a president supposed to do if there are no bills to sign? And shouldn’t you be happy about Congress not doing things? Or do you agree with me that in order to get things turned around we’ll need a LOT of government action?

                    1. A “do nothing” Congress that still managed to spend 3.6 trillion (with a “t”) dollars this year.

                      That’s a pretty big “nothing”

                2. You tell me a presidential pathway to … a balanced budget

                  Veto any non-balanced budget.

                3. You tell me a presidential pathway to full employment and a balanced budget and I’ll tell you how much fault is Obama’s for those two metrics.

                  Well, the President IS supposed to submit the latter to Congress for their consideration–and in that sense, Obama’s failed miserably to produce a budget that’s even close to tax revenues.

                  And considering you’ve been defending his deficit spending on here for ages, you’re hardly in a position to be crying for an explanation on how a balanced budget could be produced.

              2. Obama only had a voting supermajority for 24 days. Franked wasn’t seated until July 2009 then other Dem Senators went away.

                Nevertheless, the financial crisis was skillfully hosed down to just a bad recession when banks were righted by Obama policy.

                When was the last failure of a commercial bank?

                1. Wrong again, PB. Which Dem senators are you talking about? Kennedy was replaced by Paul Kirk (via a MA legislature end-run) in September 2009. Obamacare passed with 60 votes in December 2009.

                2. Why did we prop up commercial banks that should have failed? That’s not exactly a selling point, spanky.

                  1. does Obama ever take responsibility for anything among his toadies? He’s been on the job nearly four years but it’s always some outside force that is to blame.

                  2. No prop up. He made them raise capital to cushion future losses and protect against bank runs.

                    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S…..nt_Program

                    It was coercive but used private capital.

                    And on the Senate Franken was sworn in July 09 and Scott Brown sworn in soon after Obamacare was passed by the Senate.

                    Byrd was dying and unavailable to break filibusters.

                    24 days.

                    1. No prop up. He made them raise capital get funny money from the Fed to cushion future losses and protect against bank runs.

                      Fixed that for you.

                3. Nevertheless, the financial crisis was skillfully hosed down to just a bad recession when banks were righted by Obama policy.

                  When was the last failure of a commercial bank?

                  When the bank was forced to actually mark their assets to market instead of hiding it off the books.

                  Claiming that Obama “righted” the banks is astoundingly ignorant, even for you. If they were “righted,” Bernanke wouldn’t be buying $40 BILLION in MBS purchases every month, you moron.

      3. The media sure is playing up the “the election is over nothing to see here” story a lot. They usually do the opposite and try to make every race more competitive than it is because that is what gets ratings.

        The media has a more pressing mission than simply making money this time, John.

        There you have it. No need to thank me, Mr. President. Sometimes determining the outcome of an election is just the media’s civic duty. Think of Operation Video as this year’s October Surprise. And the beauty part is that there’s nothing remotely dirty or sneaky about it.

    2. An investment op for you then since Intrade has Obama at 70%. Soros made a fortune off market disequalibriamism (usage + sp) like this.

      The fuckers at Intrade use Nate Silver a lot though. They invest with their minds – not emotion.

      1. Inatrade is a lagging indicator. And they don’t have access to the internal polls either. All they are is an expression of conventional wisdom.

        1. Nate Silver is the premier election/poll analyst alive. He lives internals and has Obama at 91%.

          1. He has Obama at 77%. I have the page open right now. Where are you getting the 91% number?

            1. I read it on the Intrade forum from one of the long-term investors last week.

              If Silver’s rating is that dynamic then so be it. Good for him.

              1. If it was ever 91% I’ll vote for Elizabeth Warren for President.

              2. I read it on the Intrade forum from one of the long-term investors last week.

                So one of the people who “invest with their minds, not emotion” quoted an incorrect and implausible figure.

            2. You are right – his chart peaks Obama at 80.8% – not 91%

          2. Anyone who has either candidate at 91% is stupid or lying. My guess with Silver is the latter. He is paid to lie to the retarded like you.

      2. By your logic, if you’re not buying or shorting Apple stock right now, you must believe it is correctly valued right now.

    3. I can’t find any such talk outside of rightwing rumor mills. Drudge linked to such places implying that the Obamas were already making Hawaiian retirement plans for next year, convinced they’ll lose.

      The question then becomes why are Obama’s internal polls only available to rightwing rumor mills?

      1. I just posted a concerned quote from OFA’s campaign manager, Tony.

        1. I think you’re misreading him. Tied or leading in every battleground state means “in a very good position to win.” Obama has multiple pathways through the swing states. Romney basically has to win them all. Ohio in particular is looking bad for him, and if Romney can’t win Ohio it’s hard to see how he wins Pennsylvania (which he’ll need to).

          1. Romney basically has to win them all. Ohio in particular is looking bad for him, and if Romney can’t win Ohio it’s hard to see how he wins Pennsylvania (which he’ll need to).

            Go run your maps again. Based on the battleground states, Romney can lose Ohio (he isn’t going to win Pennsylvania) and still win the election.

            1. You’re right, but if he loses Ohio he’s got to win nearly every other swing state, with maybe room to lose 2. With Ohio Obama can afford to lose around 6 swing states and still win.

              1. No, there are by my count 11 swing states.

                Romney can win by taking just six (FL, VA, NC, NV, WI, IA), lose the other 5, and land at 270.

                1. Yeah but he’s not gonna win NV or WI, and VA and IA are looking pretty bad too.

                  1. OK, Tony – it’s all so sewn up we may as well call the whole thing off and stop campaigning.

                    There’s reality and then there’s the ‘reality based community’, and ne’er the twain shall meet.

                    1. I think Romney could pull it off and I wouldn’t be too surprised–but only because of voter suppression efforts, the potential results of which we don’t have data for. Not to sound like I’m making excuses. Voter suppression, unlike voter fraud, is something in reality.

                    2. Not to sound like I’m making excuses. Voter suppression, unlike voter fraud, is something in reality.

                      Right. So the rightwing’s built-in excuse is media bias and yours is voter ‘suppression’.

                      The Lokai and Bele-ification of the United States political class continues apace.

                    3. Voter ID laws, early voting rollbacks, etc. are real and nobody is seriously disputing their purpose is to suppress Democratic votes.

                    4. The river of tears and hand-wringing on that Wednesday morning will be amazing. Thanks for reminding me.

                    5. Much preferable to the rightwing hand-wringing, which won’t refer to real-world suppression efforts, but ugly subliminally racist conspiracy theories. I’m frankly not looking forward to their freakout.

                    6. you have a really ugly spirit, Tony. I say this about very few people, but you genuinely just aren’t a good person.

                    7. I sometimes doubt if we will ever see another presidential election without litigation.

                    8. Voter ID laws, early voting rollbacks, etc. are real and nobody is seriously disputing their purpose is to suppress Democratic votes combat voter fraud.

                      Like I said, they have their talking points and you have yours.

                    9. Except there’s scant to no evidence of voter fraud (except sometimes in mail-in voting which Republicans aren’t scrambling to regulate), and there are voter ID laws and such on the books and in the courts. And Republicans have been caught on tape more than once admitting the whole point of these laws is to give the GOP a boost by making it harder for typically Democratic voters to vote.

                    10. And Republicans have been caught on tape more than once admitting the whole point of these laws is to give the GOP a boost by making it harder for typically Democratic voters to vote.

                      Lack of citation makes your statement bullshit.

                    11. Voter suppression

                      Citation suggested, but not required?

  27. Eli Broad is being interviewed on Bloomberg right now.

    FUCK YOU, YOU CRYPTOFASCIST THIEF.

  28. By the way, speaking of Emmy news: Fuck Homeland. I’m still not watching that shit.

    I already saw the good version of The Manchurian Candidate and I have no desire to watch a mashup of it with The Unit style WoT porn.

    Although I will say, after watching the acceptance speeches: WTF, Damian Lewis is British? Damn, dude, can you do me a favor and become an accent coach? After Band of Brothers I’ve spent all the intervening time thinking you were from Iowa.

    1. Some British people do American accents very well (See: Laurie, Hugh). Many do not, but the ones who do trick you into thinking they all can.

      1. I dont think anyone does a southern US accent well. Even actors originally from the south.

        If they never gave up their original accent, they pull it off, because they are just speaking. But those who switched to “neutral”, cant seem to go back.

        And dont get me started on using a deep AL/GA accent for a character from eastern TN.

        1. ^^^this x 1000. The ones from the South ham it up to a ridiculous level and the others just sound fake. I think the Jason character from True Blood – sorry, everyone has a guilty pleasure – is a Brit and he actually does a pretty good Southern accent. Otherwise, you are dead on accurate.

          1. Aussie, but he does okay.

            1. So he is from southern Britain.

          2. Jason (Ryan Kwanten) is Australian, as are Anthony La Paglia (Jack Malone on Without a Trace), Simon Baker (The Mentalist), and of course Nic Kidman, Rusty Crowe, Guy Pearce, Toni Collette (United States of Tara), Heath Ledger, Rose Byrne (Damages), and a bunch of others. I’ll let you judge the accuracy of their accents

            1. I don’t think Russ did the West Virginia accent very well in A Beautiful Mind – it sounded more drawling Georgia to me, rather than the more twangy West Virginia.

              What I would love to see is someone attempt a Vermont accent. A real, honest-to-dog freakinese. That would show us who is truly great. It’s a really hard accent.

              1. Haven’t a lot of the regional accents disappeared, or at least become rarer.

                When I hear people from Maine nowdays, hardly any of them speak like my grandfather did and his Bar Harbor accent softend quite a bit since he left there in his twenties.

                Of course, Maine’s a pretty big state so I don’t expect everyone to talk like Bar Harborites. I knew a French-Canadian father/son team of carpenters from Northern ME about twenty years ago and they didn’t sound a bit like Bar Harbor.

            2. Actors used to be terrible at attempting accents until some time in the 70s or 80s. I’m pretty sure it’s because voice coaches are better, not because the actors are.

              I remember that Hollywood put Rod Taylor on the screen playing American characters in the fifties speaking stryne with about as broad an accent as there was.

              When Gregory Peck played Captain Horation Hornblower (1951) absolutely no effort was made to have him do an English accent.

              Anthony La Paglia and Russel Crowe do American accents well enough to foll me. In fact i was surpried to find out that Anthony La Paglia was an Aussie.

              Also, I was absolutely astonished to find out that Rachel Griffiths, who played Nate’s psycho girlfriend on Six Feet Under was from Melbourne (not the one in Florida). After that I watched some of the additional material on the DVDs and, sure enough, her native tonge is Stryne.

            3. The ones that crack my up the most are the comedy-era Schwarzenegger movies where his name was something like “Bob Smith”. At least give him a Germanic-sounding name, FCOL.

              Or Diane Krueger in National Treasure – German accent, but the character’s name was “Abigail Chase”.

              1. The one’s that Australian actors used to use on domestic radio and TV show in the fifties and sixties were godawful. That’s why I’m so pleasantly surprised at how well Brit and Oz actors are doing now.

                Noo quite on topic, but when my parents first came to Oz in the late forties they were somewhat in demand to play American parts on local radio plays. A lot of Canadians got work in Oz doing “American” accents too. Mind you Aussies can’t really tell the difference.

          3. oh, it’s Bill from True Blood who’s English, and Anna Paquin in a Kiwi. How good is his Southern accent, in your expert opinion? To me he sounds less exaggerated than her, but I’m not a local so can’t judge

            1. Bill? Not good, plus it comes and goes. It’s like he’s channeling the Kevin Costner version of Robin Hood. Not every Southerner sounds like Paula Deen. Hell, Paula Deen doesn’t sound like Paula Deen but since the show is located in rural spots, some accent seems necessary. The Lafayette character is pretty good.

              1. I thought Bill’s accent was supposed to be like GWTW-era South, since he was turned around the Civil War. So, not really intended to sound like a modern Southerner.

        2. ^^THIS^^

          It’s because Hollywood thinks of the entire south as some homogenous redneck stew.

          A high Virginia accent sounds noting at all like a central Kentucky accent which sounds nothing like a Savannah, Georgia accent.

        3. Yes, I never watched “The Closer” because Kyra Sedgwick’s accent is terrible in the commercials and I can’t stand when people compliment her on it.

        4. Holly Hunter’s accent sends a thrill up my leg.

      2. Two posts in a row — the squirrels ate them. I guess Im not going to reply to this.

        1. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

          I need more validation.

          1. And now my first response showed up…after sending the email to the squirrels.

            Anyone want to guess what in that 1008 post caused it to get flagged as spam?

    2. I’m pretty sure McNulty, from The Wire is British too.

        1. McNulty’s an old Etonian and his wife is the daughter of the 29th Knight of Glin, so he’s pretty pukka.

          Carcetti was played by an Irishman, if that counts

          1. McNulty’s an old Etonian and his wife is the daughter of the 29th Knight of Glin, so he’s pretty pukka.

            I have no idea what this sentence means.

            1. How it got past the spam filter I’ll never know.

            2. Dominic West attend Eton, the most famous and probably best non-government school in the UK. It’s probably the most prestigious school in the country (both Prince William and Prince Harry went there). The 29th Knight of Glin is one of the two(?) heriditary knighthoods in Ireland, so she’s the daughter of an aristocrat. In short, he’s posh

            3. That means you are not so pukka.

              1. My dominant ethnicity is white boy from the ‘burbs, nicole. I don’t understand all this talk of foreign lands with funny words. If it’s not available at the mall, my people hate and fear it.

                1. You need to read some Wodehose and watch some episodes of Upstairs, Downstairs (the original, not the new one). That and Downton Abbey and you’ll learn everthing you wanted to know about the British aristocracy.

                  Also, I did not know that there were hereditary knighthoods. I knew about baronets, who are also addressed as Sir so-and-so. That is also a hereditary title that is not in the actual aristocracy.

                  1. aah, but this is in the Irish peerage. The Knight of Glin is a medieval title, and is addressed as “Knight”. Well, he’s dead and had not known male heirs so the title is dormant while they look for a male heir (currently they think there might be a US relation).

                    Baronets were created by James I so he could sell them as a hereditary knighthood in England and raise much-needed cash. A baronet can be an aristocrat (which is a bit fluid in England), but would at least be part of the gentry, but one would not have a seat on the House of Lords (well, when hereditary peerage brought you such things). If you had one you would be Sir Isaac Bartram, Bt (which stands for baronet) and would be addressed as Sir Isaac.

                    1. I knew all that. My post was oversimplified. I was also aware of the Sir “firstname” thing. Most Americans and Canadians are not, if my utterly unscientific survey of people I know is accurate.

                      When I was growing up the Governor of Tasmania was Sir Ronald Cross, Bt. (or Bart.)

                      The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Tassie used to be automatically knighted in the Birthday Honours following his appointment. I’m pretty sure most states did the same.

                      Of course, since then ‘strylyuns have realized that knighthoods and such are not really in keeping with their egalitarian traditions.

                      I was a little surprised When I moved to Canada in the early sixties that Canadian law had not allowed knighthoods ot titles since before 1920.

                    2. I was also being facetious with my reading and viewing recommendations. If you have no idea what knighthoods, titles etc mean you’ll be utterly at sea trying to understand them.

                      Also, Most Americans and Canadians that I have met seem utterly unable to comprehend how Britain’s (formerly, it has loosened some but still exists) rigid class structure works.

                      I think Australians understand it better. possibly because they are more recently aquainted with it and the old resentments are more pronouced. I could be wrong on that though.

                    3. I actually looked up “The Knight of Glin” and would probably have now known that except that I only read enough to know that he is addressed as “Knight”.

                      Still, it was all news to me.

  29. lol, my last post marked as spam.

    No clue why a discussion of southern US accents is spam.

  30. the fact that he’s even in WI is interesting.

    By “he” I presume you mean the Ascended One. My guess is he’s mugging for the people who pumped money into the recall election.

  31. Apparently Warren is practicing law without a license in MA

    http://legalinsurrection.com/2…..e-problem/

    1. As I oppose occupational licensing, I dont have a problem with her behavior.

      But it seems very unethical on her part. Now if she was practicing law out of civil disobedience to the bar requirement, that would be different.

    2. This is not as cut and dry as the article makes out.

      Lizzie seemed to focus her efforts to cases appearing in Federal Court.

      I don’t believe that one has to be licensed in the particular state where a federal case is being heard. Maybe RC Dean or John can enlighten us as to how that works.

      This is not to detract from the fact that Elizabeth Warren is a mendacious shitbag, and that licensing rules are an abomination.

      1. The article asserts that if she even lists a MA address as an address for the purpose of practicing law anywhere, she has to get herself admitted to the MA bar.

        And that sounds logical to me.

        If I get a MA address and declare it the Bank of Fluffy, I can’t claim I’m immune to MA’s banking laws because I’m only accepting out-of-state deposits.

    3. Rules like that don’t apply when you’re one of the beautiful people.

      1. Apparently, she admitted to it. Not sure how that will play out in Deep Blue MA, but nonetheless if a Republican had done this the national media would jump on it like a pack of hyenas.

  32. Apropos of nothing, I received my copy of the Colorado College alumni magazine the other day. It features a one page “letter” from the new president which is a truly remarkable buzzword salad encapsulating almost perfectly everything which is wrong with modern higher education. This, and the fact that they are spending twenty seven MILLION dollars on a new! improved! athletic center which would cause your average Beverly Hills kept woman to drool with envy, eliminate any conceivable regrets I may ever have had for not sending them a single fucking penny.

    They obviously have more money than they know what to do with already.
    Take your tin cup and shove it up your ass, Jill.

    1. Take your tin cup and shove it up your ass, Jill.

      She’s probably do that if your donation were large enough

      1. OK, I actually laughed out loud at that one. Nicely done.

    2. This is me with FSU. I will give money directly to the underfunded engineering school (underfunded because it is a 50-50 joint venture with FAMU and so FSU can’t just throw money at it, not that FSU wouldn’t spend a shitton to get up to ACC standards), but as long as they can keep the left-handed hispanic student organization fully funded, they don’t need my cash.

    3. This caused me suddenly to remember Richard Mitchell,The Underground Grammarian.
      He’s been gone 10 years, but his stuff on education and the education bureaucracy is still a joy to read.

    4. The way I see it, I already gave Arizona State plenty when I went to grad school there. I’ve been watching the last 5-10 years as they spent tons of cash building these brand-new facilities and implementing a bunch of “social justice” bullshit programs.

      Having a degree from there should be as embarrassing as having one from Penn State these days.

  33. Wang Lijun, Bo Xilai’s former police chief, has been sentenced to 15 years in prison for “bending the law for selfish ends, defection, abuse of power and bribe-taking.” He does not plan to appeal his sentence.

    Sounds like he’d make a great congressman or president.

    1. “bending the law for selfish ends, defection, abuse of power and bribe-taking.”

      That, I think, is in the Illinois Constitution under “Duties of the Governor”.

  34. Interesting… a site that reweights presidential polls to current party identification weights. Its called unskewedpolls.com, although it is really not unskewed. Just reweighted from 2008 voter ID levels to 2012 voter ID levels. Take with a HUGE grain of salt as the producers are obviously GOP guys. Still… makes you wonder if NOVAHockey’s anecdote is what the real time internals are showing.

    1. They should be careful not to swing too far the other way, but someone needs to reweigh the polls to fix this crazy D+10 stuff that’s out there.

      There is a point where the polls become newsmakers rather than news-reporters.

      1. Wishcasting has replaced broadcasting

      2. There is a point where the polls become newsmakers rather than news-reporters.
        —————–

        we passed that point long ago. It’s lazy journalism at its worst.

        1. Nate Silver is anything but a lazy journalist. He is granular almost to the point of insanity.

          The sad thing is even if things don’t go your way on election day, you’ll have some ready-made conspiracy theories for that too.

          1. We don’t have “a way”. I only want honesty and the truth.

            Polls with D+9 (as many of them have) are not correspondent with the truth, IMO.

            1. C’mon, Randian, everyone knows the US is a center-left nation!

            2. Well, if they’re prepping for massive voter fraud, it will look less suspicious if the polls are consistent with the results well before the election. /conspiracy theory Tony was talking about

            3. GOP voter ID has plummeted while Democratic ID has remained stable (the GOP defectors have become independents). Most polling firms are taking this into account.

              1. It still isn’t D+9, Tony.

                1. That’s the thing–they’re going by how poll respondents identify when they call them (not going by party registration), and they’re finding a large (and seemingly improbable) advantage for Democratic ID compared to GOP among likely voters. They’re not picking an outlandish party ID ratio out of thin air, they’re using the same methodology they’ve always used, and that ratio is what they’re finding. GOP ID has plummeted in 2012 especially.

                  1. No, sockpuppet, you’ve got that backwards. Dem turnout in ’08 was at an all-time high. It has swung slightly the other way according to the Gallup tracking poll. I understand that most polls use previous turnout. However, party turnout in past elections is not particularly predictive of party turnout in the next election, especially at the party level. These polls (which may not be better predictors than the standard polls) seek to present a more real-time view of a non-constant electorate.

                    1. especially at the party Federal level.

                    2. The methodology isn’t to use past election turnout or predictions about turnout, but to filter poll respondents into likely voters and then ask them their party ID (not registration). The seemingly high ratio of Democratic ID to GOP ID is not the result of any arbitrary picking process, but a result of the data collected in the polls themselves.

          2. The sad thing is even if things don’t go your way on election day, you’ll have some ready-made conspiracy theories for that too.

            *cough*OhioVotingMachines*cough*

  35. Richard Mitchell,The Underground Grammarian.

    Most excellent.

    Thanks.

  36. Wouldn’t be surprised if they were cyberattacked by Israel:

    While Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is in New York, his cronies at home are shutting every single one of their citizens out of the internet. Their reasoning: ‘we may get attacked by zionist viruses.’

    http://gizmodo.com/5945862/ira…..m-internet

  37. Sounds like one heck of a plan to me dude. Wow.

    http://www.AnonPlanet.tk

  38. That most voters correctly remember were the consequence of events that happened during Bush’s presidency.

    It’s too bad that voters won’t remember that most of those things from Bush’s presidency were supported by Democrats.

    I’m wondering why you keep bringing shit like that up. Maybe you weren’t reading Hit’n’Run during Bush’s presidency, or else you weren’t paying attention, but Bush was criticised by the Reason staff and most of the H’n’R commentariat every bit as much as the Ascended One has been.

    And for pretty much the same reasons. Hardly anyone is complaining that BO is different from GWB. We’re complainging that he is too much like him.

    1. I don’t know who you’re arguing with, but it’s certainly not me. All I said is that most voters, those who don’t watch FOX News, still attribute a large bulk of the blame for current economic and fiscal conditions to the last president, and that explains why he is doing so well relative to the conditions.

      And your perfunctory equivalence assertions don’t convince me that you’re wiser than those voters.

      1. That’s what I said was too bad. It’s too bad that voters don’t understand that B Hussein Obama’s policies are not functionally different from Shrub’s. If they did they might demand policies that were different.

        My question is why do you keep addressing comments at H’n’R as though most Hit’n’Runners are diehard Republicans? If your argument is with Republicans, you made a wrong turn in the intertubes somewhere.

  39. The sad thing is even if things don’t go your way on election day, you’ll have some ready-made conspiracy theories for that too.

    Toady, when the fuck have things ever gone “our way on election day” for libertarians?

    The only way for things to go “our way on election day” is for Obama and Romney to both lose.

    Of course, in your mind, apparently, opposing Obama means loving Romney because, of course, there is no other choice. With few exceptions the only people I have seen supporting Romney here have done it as an “anything but Obama” move. Frankly, I didn’t think we could get a prez much worse the GWB. BHO has proved me wrong.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.