Israel Willing to Invade Gaza, More Drones for US Borders, Unhappy Cows in California: P.M. Links


  • This is not likely to create peace.

    Gaza bombing continues. Israel says it would prefer a diplomatic solution, but is prepared to invade if need be. Would invading result in more of fewer dead children and civilians?

  • U.S. Customs wants to expand the number of drones it has patrolling the borders, or at least give a large sum of money to a government contractor.
  • Afghan President Hamid Karzai has ordered a takeover of the U.S.-run prison at Bagram Air Base. He claims American forces are still detaining Afghans despite an agreement to hand them over.
  • Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn has launched efforts to reform his state's public employee pension system with a web site explaining how pension debt is consuming the budget.
  • President Barack Obama stopped to speak in Myanmar today, the first sitting president to have done so. He praised Nobel Peace Prize Winner Aung San Suu Kyi and made note of the nation's reforms.
  • Back at home, 58 percent of Americans think Obama is not going to be able to reduce the federal deficit any time soon.
  • Those happy cows are lying: Dairy farms in California are closing down or fleeing the state.

Have a news tip for us? Send it to:

The updated Reason app for Apple and Android now includes Reason 24/7!

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, and don't forget to sign up for Reason's daily updates for more content

NEXT: Newark PD Issues New Policy on Recording Cops

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

  1. Marco Rubio says the age of the Earth is, “one of the great mysteries.

    Someone is prepping for Iowa.

    1. You don’t get far without convincing the SoCons that you’re one of them.

    2. Voters want to know where he stands on basic female biology.

      1. “I’m against it.”

      2. “Voters want to know where he stands on basic female biology.”

        “Well.. ..There is no such thing as ‘legitimate’ rape..that’s for sure..amirite?” -Rubio

        /Gets thumbs up from G.O.P handlers.

    3. To be fair, the old gal can be anywhere from 4.5 to 4.6 billion years old.

      Admittedly, that’s probably not what Rubio’s getting at.

      1. The correct answer is “what the fuck does that have to do with my job as a Senator?”

        1. This. The same holds true for all of the other stupid questions the media ask Republicans running for office. Wolf Blitzer won Bronco Bama the election.

          1. Of course the liberal chorus would then by like “buh buh, we need to know if you’re smart like us because government should be supporting science and shit”.

          2. To believe in Creationism demonstrates a lack of reason and a hard-boiled character flaw. Similar to believing the Earth is flat.

            1. IIRC, Ron Paul is a creationist, and I had no trouble supporting him because he wouldn’t use government to force that belief on me.

              Do you have a problem with that kind of pol?

              1. Ron Paul is very naive in some important subjects.

                His magical thinking on gold and not killing bin Laden for two examples.

                1. His magical thinking on gold

                  As opposed to a mystical belief in the Land of Print as You Please.

                  1. “As opposed to a mystical belief in the Land of Print as You Please.”

                    It worked for the Weimar republic, The Germans were apparently so fabulously wealthy in the 20’s, they would pay hundredsand hundreds of Deutsch marks for something as inexpensive as bread, just because they could…talk about decadence…and then Hitler ruined it. Of course, the historians always attribute to some other bullshit.

            2. It’s actually irrelevant to being a legislator, though.

              1. Because who needs logic in DC?

                1. Because who needs logic in DC?

                  Because for 99% of daily life, it is irrelevant. It reminds me of that scene in Sherlock:

                  Sherlock: Oh! You meant “spectacularly ignorant” in a nice way. Look, it doesn’t matter to me who’s Prime Minister or who’s sleeping with who.

                  Watson: Whether the Earth goes around the sun.

                  Sherlock: Oh god, that again. It’s not important!
                  Watson: Not important? It’s primary school stuff. How can you not know that?

                  Sherlock: Well If I ever did I deleted it.

                  Watson: Deleted it?

                  Sherlock: Listen. This is my hard drive and it only makes sense to put things in there that are useful. Really useful. Ordinary people fill their heads with all kinds of rubbish. And that makes it hard to get at the stuff that matters. Do you see?

                  Watson: But it’s the solar system!

                  Sherlock: Oh! How? What does that matter? So we go ’round the sun. If we went ’round the moon or round and round the garden like a teddy bear it wouldn’t make any difference.

                  1. But Randian, Sherlock also passed up a chance to sleep with that super, super hot woman. So, really.

                    1. But Randian, Sherlock also passed up a chance to sleep with that super, super hot woman. So, really.

                      Irene? No way; she totally gave it up to him after Afghanistan.

                    2. I assume that’s just speculation, and not something I missed, but I sure hope you are right.

            3. I am not speaking to the issue of the earth’s age you fucking moron. Learn to fucking read.

              1. “Similar to believing the Earth is flat”

                Or believing the great and mighty O will do anything at all to reduce the deficit.

            4. Believing the Universe was created in an instant is fine. It’s basically the Big Bang Theory, minus the randomness.

              Believing the Universe was created 6,000 years ago means you don’t trust the brains God gave you to weigh the available evidence.

            5. It’d be nice if some reporters asked loaded economic questions of politicians.

              Q – Would you agree or disagree with the phrase “from each according to his abilities to each according to his needs?”

              Q – Do regulations increase the cost of the regulated good / service?

      2. “Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I’m not sure we’ll ever be able to answer that.”

        Marco, Marco, Marco. “The Stupid Party”, indeed.

        1. He gave the Inheret the Wind answer! That worked so well in that play!

        2. Man, he screwed up. It’s supposed to be 6 days, with a day of rest after. Geez.

      3. “I’m not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that’s a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States,” Rubio told GQ. “I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow. I’m not a scientist. I don’t think I’m qualified to answer a question like that.”

        Glad to see he took the Jackie Rogers, Jr. approach to answering the question, man.

    4. The Catholic Church does not teach young earth creationism so I don’t really get this… Oh yeah he’s pandering to idiots.

      1. Which is what made Rick Santorum’s run in the Iowas caucuses so weird. The conservative protestants that influence the party so heavily in Iowa picked a Catholic and a Mormon over an elderly Southern Baptist that had refused to perform abortions or take federal money for delivering babies.

        1. Druuuuuuuuuuuggggggggsssssss



        2. Oh yeah, and


        3. Ron Paul is not jerking off to the thought of Armadeddon in the Middle East.

          1. We all can’t be Obama with a kill list.

            1. Well, I’m sure he doesn’t enjoy that. He probably flagellates himself after every kill order.

              Have you ever tried to play 18 holes with scars up and down your back? You don’t appreciate the man’s sacrifice.

              1. He probably flagellmasturbates himself after every kill order.


        4. An elderly Southern Baptist who invoked the golden rule!

          Run Paul’s rejection by the Religious Right is really the ultimate proof of how morally bankrupt they are. They like the part where Jesus throws out the moneylenders or curses the fig tree or tells how the time of the son of man is coming, but they aren’t to big on the turn the other cheek or Good Samiritan part.

          1. “They” are the GOP base.

            The next one will want world-wide Missile Defense Shields, two more wars, Contraception/Womb Police, and forced prayer in schools.

            1. Oh, shut the fuck up shriek, you tiresome cunt. Stop being pissy because your pastor put his penis in your poophole.

              1. What, pray tell, is wrong with a missile defense program? It might be technically difficult, even impossible, it might be prohibitively expensive, but I’d much rather have something designed to protect people as opposed to “well, you guys are all fucked, but rest assured that 30 minutes from now all those other guys are also fucked.”

                Shit maybe, I’m a dreamer. But shooting down missiles is a lot more moral then nuking the cities of the people that fired the missiles.

                1. Another problem with a missile shield is that it makes the firing of missiles less morally reprehensible

    5. Marco certainly showed he isn’t ready for prime time yet.

      If he can’t spot a trap question like that, and avoid it with a quip or an attack on the interviewer, he’s not going to do any better than Romney.

      1. Well, he’s got a year or so to figure it all out.

    6. Great, a neo-con with a penchant for stroking so-cons excitable areas.

      WHEN WILL YOU STOP YOURSELF GOP? It’s like you want to be irrelevant.

      1. Come on. In fairness, why the fuck are we letting media ask gotcha questions like this on a day-to-day basis?

        1. I don’t know, why the fuck are we even pretending to tolerate a GOP that clearly despises limited government as evidenced by their continual selection of neocon shitheads for promotion to the highest office of the land? (and by their piss poor treatment of the Paulites)

          1. I’m not tolerating anything, but asking about the age of the earth is not a serious political question. It just isn’t.

            If Marco Rubio were running for head of NIH, then maybe.

            1. It may not be a serious question for most of us, but for a large portion of the American electorate, both on the left and the right, it’s like crack. They can’t get enough.

              1. Well, Obama looking Presidential during Sandy was important to a lot of people too.

            2. I’m not tolerating anything, but asking about the age of the earth is not a serious political question. It just isn’t.

              The problem is, it is a serious political question, because social conservatives spent fucking decades making it one. Should it be? Is it logical? No, and no, but they fucking engineered litmus tests like these and now they’re getting turned against them.

              1. The problem is, it is a serious political question, because social conservatives spent fucking decades making it one.

                A media douche asked the question, not some raving christian bigot.

                1. Hence “and now they’re getting turned against them.”

            3. I’m not tolerating anything, but asking about the age of the earth is not a serious political question.

              The serious political questions are just too depressing at this point.

    7. “I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow. I’m not a scientist. I don’t think I’m qualified to answer a question like that

      IMO that’s the correct answer.

      Who gives a fuck about politicians’ opinions on the age of the earth?

  2. Myanmar or Burma?

      1. Powder or rock?

        1. Burma Shave

    1. It’ll always be Burma to me.

      1. Yes, I’d like to send this letter to the Prussian Consulate in Siam by aeromail. Am I too late for the 4:30 autogyro?

    2. Burma.

      Why should I use the name foisted on a country by a bunch of homicidal totalitarians?

      1. Wait. Are we talking about the French? I got lost here.

    3. Officially it’s Burma, given that it was named Myanmar by the junta, which was never recognized by the U.S.

  3. More Kiwi street ttyles

  4. Dairy farms in California are closing down or fleeing the state.

    Cali’s chickens are coming home to roost.

  5. 27 animals killed during filming of The Hobbit.

    1. See? This is exactly what would happen to actors without SAG!

      /Hollywood Asshole

    2. horses, goats, chickens and one sheep died at the farm


      1. As the Indians taught us, its okay to kill things as long as you use every part. That’s why when I accidentally beat one of my orphan workers to death, I donate their organs to the local university for research. It even has a foundation attached, and its an AMAZINGLY big tax dodge.

        1. You continue to amaze me with your sophisticated methods of modern tax compliance and minimization.

        2. Some universities will even accept the orphans still alive, especially if they’re male. Just make sure to have your paperwork in order when you drop them off at the processing center conveniently located in the gym shower.

          1. By ‘some Universities’, I assumne you mean one.

            Go Nittany Lions!

      2. “NOT THE CHICKENS!”

        Damn that’s funny.
        Sadly, don’t think anyone got the reference.

  6. Meanwhile, in Australia

  7. Is our long, national nightmare over?

    1. Based on this, I would say no:

      Hostess Chief Executive Gregory Rayburn had a different vision of how the bankruptcy auction process would play out.

      “Nobody wants to have anything to do with these old plants or these unions or these contracts,” Rayburn said in an interview. The company had hunted for buyers for the last several years as it tried to avoid a second trip into bankruptcy, but no buyer came forward.

      From here.

      1. I like this Rayburn fella (and I also like Hostess products. But principle trumps peckishness).

      2. “I’m not in a position to promise anybody anything, but I’m in a position to be hopeful,” he said Sunday to the Journal.

        And soon enough, they’ll all be on a street corner…hope’n for some change.

  8. ABC axes ‘Last Resort’. So long network TV’s best libertarianish show.

    1. :sadface:

      It was a great premise, terrible writers. Maybe if the viewership rebounds, they might change their minds

      1. It was also a bad fit to the network. ABC needs to do more soaps.

        1. Thursday night at 8 is almost as bad as the Friday night death slot for new shows.

          If they really wanted to give it a chance they should have put it in the Sunday night at 10 timeslot.

          1. The show ABC put there has got the axe as well.

            The show would have made a great mini series with the right writers. They should revisit the miniseries format given modern media.

            1. There should be more miniseries. There are a lot of premises that just don’t fit the tv show or movie format, and a miniseries would probably fit our dwindling national attention span.

              1. I disagree with you.

            2. There should be more miniseries. There are a lot of premises that just don’t fit the tv show or movie format, and a miniseries would probably fit our dwindling national attention span.

              1. Well now that you put it that way, i completely agree with you.

          2. Well, I think some of the poor writing was a result of a male military show on an otherwise female network trying to appeal to women with soapy, sexy plotlines.

            But also, yes, it was made to be a miniseries. Run for, like, 16 episodes. Its the kind of thing that the Brits do much better than us.

            1. I can’t speak generally, but The best miniseries ever is from the BBC.

        2. Oh, and as a Chemical Engineering major, I appreciate your username quite a bit.

      2. Yeah, we’ve got this nuclear submarine, and the largest military on Earth (ours) wants to sink us. So instead of going undersea and eluding detection, we park at an island and send a nuke toward New York, just to let them know we’re not bluffing. That’ll work.

    2. It seems my plan to wait to see if the show would survive before investing time in it was wise.

      1. It wasn’t a bad show, it lacked focus and the pacing seemed off, but it got better in recent episodes to where I wanted to see where they were going.

        Perhaps it would have worked better as a mini-series.

        1. Great inkers spank alike.

        2. too many sub plots. and it didn’t make sense that they just didn’t kill the warlord character.

          1. too many sub plots. and it didn’t make sense that they just didn’t kill the warlord character.

            I agree, but the Dr. Smith character type lives on.

            1. I could sorta buy the warlord character not being killed because he ran the island and had the loyalty of a lot of people, but then they made him so antagnoistic towards the captain that it made no sense that they’d leave him alive after he kidnapped multiple crew members, assisted the US government in using a chemical attack against the island, and oh yeah, burnt the soles of Robert Patrick’s feet because he beat up a drug dealer that was selling to the crew.

              1. And they never really showed the drug dealer helping people or anything that would create loyalty. Even Escobar funded soccer teams. Oh, and then there is the question of why the drug dealer was Caribbean on a South Asian isalnd.

  9. I guess I jumped the gun on this morning’s War on Christmas post.
    First we need to get through the War on Thanksgiving.

    But now, buzzkill forces of the politically correct have hijacked the holiday honoring white settlers who bonded with Native Americans for survival, and paved the way for jellied cranberry sauce, Black Friday sales and football.

    The joyous event is now frequently referred to as the Day of Mourning.

    1. I again renew my demands that Karlie Kloss and her completely inappropriate indian princess outfit be given over to me for re-education and, uh, community service.

      1. I don ‘t get the headdress flap. I’m German and if she dressed up as a Bavarian dirndl dress, I’d take no offense.

        1. It’s not a party until the identity politics turd is floating in the punch bowl.

        2. Nevertheless. There should be spankings!

          1. Oh yes! Many, many spankings.

            1. And then the oral sex!

    2. Goddammit I loves me some can-shaped “cranberry” sauce twice a year. If they take that away, that might be the last straw.

    3. Irreligious is my general sentiment, but I find Pastafarians even more goddamned annoying than sincere believers. It is not even that fucking clever, hipster punks. Angry Hillbilly is a way better.

      1. BTW, reminds me of a theory I developed while watching Seinfeld in the nineties. Shows like that tend to have secret histories of characters that they work into and allude to in shows without being explicit about it. The austerity and bleakness of Festivus leads me to think that Frank Costanza was captured in the Korean War by the Chinese and brainwashed. He was the real Manchurian candidate, but something went horribly wrong, and what we see is the result.

    4. Y’know what? I am tired of having to feel bad because Thanksgiving is supposedly about us killing Indian?

      Its not. Its a frickin’ harvest festival, which has been celebrated in about every culture since we had agriculture.

      Oh, god, I said agriculture. In a post about Indians. I fear I may have summoned… it.

      1. Yes, you did…now do you want endless incessant threadshitting about:

        1) “Myth of the noble savage”
        2) “Agrarian city state”
        3) “White chimp/shit-flinger”.
        4) a delicious medley of “All of the above”
        You’ll think twice about the unintended consequences next time…

        1. Best post of the day right there.

  10. Looks like owning a strip club just got a lot more expensive.

    Judge Phillips ruled that within 30 days Spearmint Rhino must stop charging dancers what are known as “stage fees” for the right to work. Phillips also ruled that the chain is required to grant all dancers in their clubs employee status within six months, ending the illegal practice of classifying dancers as independent contractors while also placing workplace demands on them that far exceed that legal status. By managing dancers like employees but putting them on the books as independent contractors, club owners get out of paying dancers the benefits they’re legally entitled to, which could include worker’s compensation, unemployment, and health insurance if they qualify. Owners and management alike tell dancers they’re independent, but they still exercise control over dancers on the job, routinely using the kinds of restrictive rules on breaks and conduct you’ve come to expect of Wal-Mart, not the mythically “anything goes” word of sex work.

    OMG!! Strippers are LITERALLY treated worse than Wal-Mart employees. IT would break my heart if I didn’t have a higher opinion of the work ethic of the average Wallyworld employee versus a stripper.

    1. I’m trying to think of the last time I saw a Walmart employee that I would like to see naked. Nope. Don’t think that’s ever happened.

    2. By managing dancers like employees but putting them on the books as independent contractors, club owners get out of paying dancers the benefits they’re legally entitled to, which could include worker’s compensation, unemployment, and health insurance if they qualify escape functioning as the unpaid tax collectors that the state regards them to be.

    3. Is there a single judge in the system who doesn’t deserve to be violently raped in the midst of a Warty/Steve Smith tag team?

      1. Clarance Thomas. He at most deserves some one-on-one time with Warty.

    4. The biz must have changed. Way, way back in my law firm days, we had a client that was a major booking agency for strippers.

      No question they were independent contractors. They rarely worked a club for more than a month at a time. Turns out men who go to strip clubs like variety, so you needed to turn over your inventory.

      Maybe these guys own a whole bunch of clubs, and can rotate their dancers internally, so to speak.

    5. My favorite strip club patron: The old dude who goes in every night, who all the strippers know by name and dote on.

      1. A goal to aspire to!

        1. One of the things I’d do if rich.

      2. I tried it one year. It’s expensive.

  11. Would invading result in more [or] fewer dead children and civilians?

    Surprisingly, Hamas doesn’t seem to have its own children and civilians’ best interests at heart.

    1. This really was a pathetic attempt at objectivity, one supposes.

      Glad we didn’t apply such “logic” to any of our previous wars. Defending yourself from aggression is likely to cause more deaths than simply laying down and submitting.

      1. Not in the Israeli case. Given Hamas’ stated goal of exterminating the Israelis, submitting just makes the ensuing bloodbath easier for Hamas.

    2. Indeed. How long has it been since Israel invaded the West Bank?

      Unsurprisingly, lobbing missiles across your border into civilian zones without provocation with the express intention of killing civilians isn’t going to make you many friends in that country, especially when you pair it with an ideology which seeks the annihilation of the people in that country.

      1. I too suspect they will never “agree to dissagree” in light of that rational observation.

    3. On the contrary – the more dead, the better the propaganda. The one thing they seem to be able to produce in great quantity is more kids.

      1. Indeed. Children are the most inconsequential thing in the Gaza Strip right now; why not use them for your ends? A child is much cheaper to produce than a missile or new fortifications. Who gives a damn how many of them die?

        When you start from the premises that people are only worth what they can do for you, Hamas’ use of children in the war effort makes all the sense in the world.

    4. Reason, word to the wise:

      If you’re going to be running pictures of “dead” children killed by “Israeli” bombs, you should probably confirm that they kids are, in fact dead, and were, in fact killed by Isreali bombs.

      The Palis are famous for faking injuries and deaths for the cameras of gullible Westerners, and have been caught once already blaming the Israelis for deaths caused when their own missiles fell short onto their own people.

      Just sayin’, is all.

      1. ^^THIS^^

      2. They already got caught once in this very campaign.

      3. You ought to make sure that they are Palestinian kids, for that matter.

        One “Palestinian child injured by Israeli bomb” was actually an Israeli kid injured by a Hamas rocket.

      4. And the BBC LOVES Palipropaganda. Apparently, so does Reason.

        Good to see Reason’s Likud faction has become dominant.

  12. U.S. Customs wants to expand the number of drones it has patrolling the borders…

    They’re not fooling anyone. They’re planning to build the wall out of drones!

    1. This does explain that RFP we got for Tetris piece-shaped drones…

  13. It’s never to early for the War on Christmas! Judge blocks Santa Monica from allowing the display of Nativity scenes on public beaches.

    1. Let’s see how the PM people stack up against the AM people. You can go here for one set of responses.

      1. In my “good manners matter” appraoch – on a freakin’ beach?! C’mon…go put it in a park or at City Hall or some other boring place. Leave the sand alone.

    2. My reaction to both sides is: who gives a shit? I think it is rather sad that government is so entrenched in our lives that we even have to discuss this.

      1. Really. Can’t the atheists just pretend it’s a terrorist wedding party?

        1. Ok, so Rich thinks public nativity scenes should be drone-hellfire’d. Anyone else?

          1. I’m down with the whole Wicker Man thing. So if we have a bonfire on Christmas where we start the fire with a drone strike, and then rebuild the nativity scene next year, it’s cool.

  14. Were those dead kids trampled at Walmart on black Friday last year?

  15. Study: Even apes have mid-life crises.

    1. “He took up with that slut Cindy, 3 trees over, with her swollen and hairy labial mound. Have you ever seen such a ridiculous thing? And THEN started dragging around a new, shiny red gas can, with which to intimidate all the lesser males. It’s pathetic, really.”

  16. …58 percent of Americans think Obama is not going to be able to reduce the federal deficit any time soon.

    And yet we voted him back in anyway. It would seem the deficit is no one’s priority.

    1. Funny thing is, the deficit is going to kick everyone’s ass regardless of circumstances.

      1. Yep. The other 42 percent think the deficit will *never* be reduced.

      2. Because people don’t care about the Deficit until the Deficit starts caring about them.

    2. I didn’t vote him back in, thank you very much.

  17. Because only government knows how to build Roadz

    1. The pole has not caused any harm, so far. Quebec provincial police said there had been no reports of accidents at the site.

      That’s unpossible!!! There aren’t any signs up!

  18. The picture for this article needs a better caption

    1. “In forthcoming Twinkie shortage, reddit and 4chan hurt most”

      1. Reddit is too busy blaming the CEO and greed to notice and 4chan has found more creative sex toys.

    2. Next week on Mutual of Omaha’s Wild Kingdom: Technologists in their natural habitat…………

    3. But seriously, the first sentence of the article would have been a better caption.

    4. Obama Campaign Staffed by the Ugly, Fat, and Hairy. Madeline Albright Relieved to be Finally Replaced.

    5. “Dude, I Ate Hillary”

    6. “Politically correct replacements found for Victoria’s Secret models”

  19. “Those happy cows are lying: Dairy farms in California are closing down or fleeing the state.”

    Maybe they don’t want to have to pay for all those free sex changes.

    “San Francisco to cover sex change surgeries for all uninsured transgender residents”…..residents/

    1. Incidentally, a nice chunk of San Francisco’s budget comes courtesy of federal taxpayers.…..sco#Budget

      Those are your tax dollars at work!

      Have a nice day.

      1. .5% of their outrageous 9.5% sales tax goes to BART??? A city that big and dense can’t recoup its rapid transit costs via user fees?!

        1. Transit is a money-loser. Everyone admits that; even the pwoggie fellators of such.

        2. You see, San Francisco is more like a European city…like Athens. You don’t expect anything there to be self-sufficient, do you?

    2. Where’s my Emporer of the Holy Roman-ectomy? I know deep down in my soul that I truly am that, but people keep refusing to call me “Your Eminence” or accommodate my need for a bathroom I can feel comfortable in- one with marble and gold leaf toilet paper. And do you know how triggering it is to be surrounded by peasants all the time, without the protection of courtiers?!

      1. Just for the record, I have no problems with transgendered people, but it is an elective surgery.

        It’s essentially a cosmetic surgery that makes people feel better about themselves.

        Hell, if you have a heart attack, they’ll treat you for that episode in the ER, but I don’t think they just give free heart bypasses to people who need them–to solve the problem long term. If you want that, you have to pay for it yourself.

        So, why are they doing this procedure for free? …when their budget is hurting, just like the State of California’s. It’s because they have no political opposition; no negative political consequences to pay for being fiscally irresponsible; and because they score political points for tweaking the noses of cultural conservatives.

        And that ain’t no way to run a government.

        1. Speaking of the ER, I assume we only see a subset, but many of the transgender folks we treat in the ER have profound psychiatric illnesses. It really makes one wonder what review process is required for the surgery.

          1. I know nothing about the selection process whatsoever; evidence of psychiatric problems for all I know may weigh in favor of getting sexual reassignment surgery.

            God knows, I’m not trying to weigh in on the desirability of these procedures or whether these procedures really help people. I know almost nothing about this, but I know two things for sure:

            1) This is going to be really expensive at a time when San Francisco, California, and the federal government are all dealing with budget crises.

            2) People from all over the country who want free sexual reassignment surgery are now planning a move to become residents of the city of San Francisco, I’m sure.

            1. It’s like “Dog Day Afternoon” except instead of Pacino’s character robbing a bank, he just moves with his love interest to San Francisco!

        2. Ken Shultz| 11.19.12 @ 5:24PM |#
          “It’s essentially a cosmetic surgery that makes people feel better about themselves.”

          Remember, the benefits have been cut to the bone. One more penny cut and children will be dying in the streets!

          1. Exactly.

            I feel really bad for people who are suffering with this or any other condition that can be remedied with an expensive elective surgery and expensive follow up care, but San Francisco and California and the Federal government and your truly are already doing more than we can afford.

            They still can’t keep all the people who are convicted of crimes in jail because they don’t have enough money to build and staff more jails! And they’re giving away elective surgeries for free?

      2. Marble and gold leaf toilet paper would hurt like a motherfucker.

  20. Scientists discover ‘super Jupiter’, a planet 13 times more massive than Jupiter.

    1. didnt A C Clarke say Jupiter 10x would have enough for stellar ignition?

      1. Actually, it requires 70 Jupiter-masses to reach stellar ignition.

        Though, stellar ignition is also a function of density. So, I guess a 10 Jupiter-mass planet could undergo stellar ignition if it also had a volume 1/7th that of Jupiter.

        I thought the Monoliths in 2010 were squeezing down the density of Jupiter, more so than merely adding mass? Been a long time since I’ve seen the movie.

  21. I really wish reason would stop posting snuff photos.
    The severed heads were pretty bad. Now dead children?

    1. To be honest, I’m OK with not having to live in happy rainbow land. I just wish more people would see the results of our goodwill drones.

      1. It’s cheap and exploitative. The costs and benefits of our drone campaigns can be discussed and explained logically; showing pictures and assuming bad faith on the part of people who support drone strikes is neither conducive to a rational discussion of the issue, nor will it convince anyone who isn’t already sold. It is an attempt to substitute rational discussion of foreign policy for outrage — and rings particularly hollow when one considers how often the exact same debate tactics are used against libertarians.

        1. Much better than the rant I wrote, thanks.

        2. Rational discussion has a poor prognosis for peaceniks, so they avoid it like the plague.

        3. How does showing actual results of drone campaigns assume bad faith? Complaining about it is an attempt to avoid honest discussion.

    2. I do agree. Another thing I despise is on air interviews of victims. Report on it in your own words, but don’t make me a goddamned voyeur getting off emotionally on the suffering of others in the process. It’s undignified for everyone involved.

    3. If it wasn’t for the fact that my taxes are going to help Israel, I think the libertarian angle on Israeli/Palestinian conflict would be–WTF does any of that have to do with me?!

      In terms of killing children, I don’t know why Israel bombing Gaza is so much different in libertarian terms from Gaza rocketing Israel. Why not show snuff photos of Israelis getting blasted to bits, too?

      Hopefully, it’s not because none of our tax money goes to Hamas–because that really isn’t the issue with dead children. Hell, if Mexico were dumping hundreds of rockets into San Diego, most Americans would support Obama doing a lot worse to Tijuana than what Israel is doing to Gaza. And, likewise, if Mexico treated Americans the same way Israel has treated Palestinians over the years, I think most Americans would support something like what Hamas is doing only targeting Mexico…

      There just isn’t a libertarian angle on dead children in any of that. If they want to talk about tax support, fine. But dead children aren’t the issue–both sides have plenty of dead innocents to show.

      1. none of our tax money goes to Hamas

        Bzzzz. Wrong Ken. We provide the Palestinian Authority with millions, and they are Hamas.

        1. Point still stands that our money supporting this is the issue–not the dead children on one side or the other.

        2. Wow, I underestimated the amounts given by a hundred.


          1. I mean a factor of a hundred.


              1. Wouldn’t have changed one Obama-vote. RP isn’t glam.

              2. Actually, he did. Nobody paid attention.

      2. Israel doesn’t have as many casualties because it’s a functional society that is concerned about its citizens’ welfare, and it is much better armed.

        If you live in shanty towns and are armed with rocks, picking a fight with a stronger, better armed society is a bad idea.

        1. Like I said, I’m not picking a side based on the number of dead children on one side or the other.

          I just don’t want to be involved in this with my tax money anymore.

          1. I wasn’t claiming you were, Ken, just correcting you on the idea that we only give to one side.

            I don’t pick sides based on the numbers of dead children either. I do, however, pick sides based upon the absolute, murderous, even genocidal, intent of one side, and I am always awestruck by those who do not.

            1. That was a response to rho.

            2. By pick sides, do you mean “I wish my tax money to be given to one side and not the other?”

          2. “I just don’t want to be involved in this with my tax money anymore.”

            Ken, you position is exactly the same as the Israeli settlers. They don’t want your money involved anymore, believing (correctly) that such money comes with strings, like the restraints put on Israeli housing and defense by the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations.

            I agree with Ken and his settler friends. The U.S. should get the fuck out of the way and let Israel kick the shit of the Palestinian savages. I can’t think of any people who deserve it more.
            Let Allah sort the bodies.

      3. Right on Ken. We shouldn’t be sending money to either side. It’s up to them to resolve their differences

      4. I think the libertarian angle on Israeli/Palestinian conflict would be–WTF does any of that have to do with me?!

        I don’t know. I believe liberty, justice and peace for all people, regardless of which borders they happen to reside within should be a legitimate libertarian concern. I’m not a libertarian only for Americans, even though that’s the only real place I have some slim marginal slip of political say. So yes, I don’t think any tax money should be going to either Israel or Palestine (or anywhere else), but that doesn’t mean we believe government shouldn’t be involved in foreign diplomacy and shouldn’t be outspoken for our national values. It’s hard to broker real, balanced diplomacy when we are already backing one side over the other.

        So call out Israel for violating the property rights of innocent Palestinians, call out Palestine for violating or failing to control attacks on innocent Israelis, call out both for failing to abide by their treaties and still seek a way forward.

        But we have to be consistent in our principles and until we have a government that isn’t also murdering innocents, torturing captive soldiers/enemies and invading countries at will we have no grounds to talk.

        1. Oh, and while we have the biggest nuke arsenal by an exponential number, we have little grounds to tell other “rogue” states that they can’t have any.

        2. “torturing captive soldiers/enemies”

          Soldiers? Link, please?

          1. Are Taliban considered “soldiers” or “terrorists”?

        3. “So call out Israel for violating the property rights of innocent Palestinians”

          Can we call out Israel for violating the property rights of Israelis? Because Israelis who have shown the deed to property have been ordered to move because Israeli lefties demanded the property be given to Arab squatters.

          What about the thousands of Jews kicked off land that Israel acquired from the Hitler-worshiping savages when they invaded Israel? They built homes and started communities, then some Israeli and Arab politicians sucked each other off, so the military moved in and evicted everyone. Was your libertarian bleeding heart moved for them?

          And how exactly do you know what land belongs to Arabs and what belongs to Israelis? The BBC? Noam Chomsky?

          “But we have to be consistent in our principles” Sounds good. But let’s have some facts first, not just moral equivocation between a civilized capitalist country and a savage hell-hole that doesn’t recognize (and therefore cannot have) property rights.

          And since we have a government that goes around the world to bomb people who are no threat to us, maybe we should not be so quick to condemn a government that is fighting a real threat in its own back yard.

    4. Now dead children?

      If it makes you feel better, Hazel, there is a nonzero chance those kids aren’t dead at all.

      1. If they aren’t dead, why are they stacked like logs?

        Do the hospitals in Gaza normally stack live children in piles for easier storage?

        1. You mean, why have they chosen to pose these children in a way that took a hell of a lot more work than stacking them like logs?

        2. If they aren’t dead, why are they stacked like logs?

          Because it makes good Hamas propaganda? Do you actually see anything in that photo that couldn’t be explained by having four living kids posed with makeup applied for just long enough to take the picture?

  22. Mostly because I am fascinated by the business of television: NBC give “Guys with Kids” a back four

    See, this move is seen by television writers as two things:

    1)NBC is sticking with its strategy of going “broader”, and away from its niche, critically aclaimed but low-rated Community/Parks and Rec identity. It has also changed Up All Night into a multicam sitcom, it has an upcoming one based on “About A Boy” (wouldn’t that kind of just be a sweeter version of Two and a Half Men?), etc


    2)Even though Guys with Kids is pulling only a pretty low 1.3 demo number, it is produced by Jimmy Fallon, and NBC wants to keep him happy.

    This is weird to me because…


    1. 1) This makes no sense. The sitcom is low rated, and its doing as bad as Community in an easier slot. And that isn’t defending Community‘s numbers. But its also a show going up against an ABC juggernaut that is, in a similar place, doing family oriented sitcoms as well. Plus, I think the only way that someone beats CBS at the multi-cam game is that CBS just doesn’t get the internet and its audience slowly ages out of 18-49. I mean, Mike and Molly and 2 Broke Girls suck, but they got plugged behind already watched shows, got huge ratings as a result, and will probably one day be the pull used to bring in their own new shows.


      2) How the fuck is Jimmy Fallon so big at NBC, or in general? Firstly, he is simply not that talented. Secondly, his show is on behind Leno’s, super late at night. I’ve heard it does well there (never seen the numbers) and I know that maybe behind the scenes there’s a plan to eventually have Fallon succeed Leno (which once upon a time everyone thought with Letterman-Carson)… but, while its an institution, how much money does late night really make for the networks anymore? Who under 40 feels a need to watch it every night?

      Its also really stupid for NBC to lose its “smart” TV label. That’s what its brand has been since the early 80s, when they created Must See TV by keeping two smart but badly rated shows (Hill Street Blues and Cheers) and waited for a tide to rise those ships (The Cosby Show).

      1. No one is interested in NBC failing? Because I find the fact that the networks and advertisers have simply failed to adapt to the internet a deeply interesting subject, and I kind of see NBC as the tip of it.

        NBC’s biggest fuck up was not launching a big reality show from 2002-2006. All the other networks got one on and could then use those to promote other shows (The one sorta exception is CBS, which around that time was launching its now big dramas and comedies behind its already established big reality show Survivor)

        1. I do like Parks and Rec, but not enough to put that much thought into it.

          1. Believe it or not, the business TV programming is a spectator sport to lots of people. I’d say I’m mildly interested, but usually only when it concerns shows that I like getting axed (fucking Fox canceling Lie to Me) or inexplicable full-season pickups. Psychology also plays a part – why are shitass shows like Two and a Half Men such big hits? It’s not like the characters are relatable to a wide audience, and it’s not like it’s well-written or funny. So what’s the deal?

            1. Well, it makes sense as a spectator sport, since each season we are treated to new shows and the deaths of bold old favorites and terrible dreck. Yet with little apparent rhyme or reason.

      2. 2) Jimmy Fallon has been Lorne Michaels’ best friend since his SNL days – that’s how.

        1. Is that it? I never knew that.

          Also, how is Lorne so powerful still? 30 Rock is leaving, Up All Night hasn’t stuck and may never, and SNL sucks. I’ve heard that SNL has come back in the ratings a bit… but that’s because it has mostly become the Saturday episode of the Colbert Show (I don’t mean that in a good way either. I mean that in a, “Let’s laugh at the stupid people who aren’t smart progressives, like us!”) . Also, don’t most 18-49 year olds have friends and shit to be with at 12 on a Saturday?

        2. And that does explain how Fallon got billed as one of the shows stars despite sucking.

          1. And that does explain how Fallon got billed as one of the shows stars despite sucking.

            Or because sucking. Wink wink, Nudge nudge.

            1. I believe you’re thinking of Julie Chen’s stardom.

      3. Isn’t Community supposed to be back on in a few months? I mean, you go to the NBC site and they’re advertising Community t-shirts right on their front page.

        And honestly, it’s got a devoted enough following that could easily get bought out by a cable network and still wouldn’t lose many viewers. Also, I’m a bit concerned quality will drop now that Harmon’s more or less not running the show anymore.

    2. It has also changed Up All Night into a multicam sitcom

      I don’t see how making a show look and feel cheaper is going to increase its appeal.

      1. What is meant by ‘multicam sitcom?’ Is this as opposed to a single cam sitcom?

        1. Single cam vs. multi cam

          Multi cam just kind of looks outdated.

    3. I also find the bidness of TV interesting, but I honestly have a mental block about NBC. It is the only broadcast network I watch regularly (although I do tune into CBS for The Amazing Race when it airs), so I don’t get why it’s scraping the bottom of the barrel, ratings-wise (especially since CBS moved Survivor to Wednesdays a number of years ago, leaving the 8pm Thursday slot wide-open for competition).

      I hadn’t noticed that Up All Night went to multicam – I’ll have to check it out this week.

      1. I see the same thing as Goldwater WRT NBC, and it strikes me as weird too, because, like Kristen, it’s the only broadcast network I’ve ever watched regularly. But I’ve also come to accept the fact that most people don’t want to watch the same shows as me.

        But I mean, Seinfeld? Seinfeld was huge. Yes, I know a lot of people who didn’t like it. But it was huge, and it was a lot funnier than a lot of what’s on now. I feel like sitcoms really suck now compared to when I was a kid, but I’m sure it’s just some kind of bias.

        1. Parks & Rec regularly causes me to LOL, even without benefit of wacky weed. That is the only sitcom ever to have done that. Not to mention the utter perfection that is Ron Swanson. I also LOL at 30 Rock, though not with the same regularity and vehemence as I do with P&R.

      2. The other weird thing, and my social circle isn’t huge to be granted, is that not only do I watch only NBC (okay, I watch Hulu generally), I watch NO CBS shows, and no one I know makes CBS must see viewing. I had a roommate in college who watched Big Bang, but thats the only person. My mom watches NCIS reruns, but not their new stuff. So, its weird that they are the number 1 network. Fox at least makes sense. I know people who watch Glee, I like New Girl and Ben and Kate… but no one is a big CBS person.

        I think NBC might be getting a big Internet/DVR group that is just not counted. That, or its a “big on the internet, small in real life” thing.

        1. Big Bang has got to be one of the shittiest shows I have ever seen. Those people are all so unhappy and mean to each other!

        2. I am not super up on ratings right as of this moment, but for years, Two and a Half Men was the highest rated show on TV. And I think CSI, or some variety of CSI, was (among?) the highest rate drama. CSI is reasonably okay, I mean, compared to 2.5 Men at least, which was (and I assume is) just awful.

          Ratings now do count timeshifted (DVR) viewing, at least within the seven days after original broadcast, and online viewing stats are taken pretty seriously (but the ad money is not the same as it is for broadcast, not at all).

          I think what we’re really seeing is that these are, really, “cult” shows, at least to some extent. I mean, you can’t really be the “smart network” when most people aren’t that smart.

  23. Phillips also ruled that the chain is required to grant all dancers in their clubs employee status within six months

    The War on Independent Contractors continues. In four years it will probably be illegal to be anything other than an employee.

    ps- If the strippers don’t like the terms of employment, they can get a job at 7-eleven.

    1. I, personally, don’t understand how renting a stage to strip on is different from renting a chair to cut hair in, but as someone who has chosen repeatedly in the last 6 years since I became an independent contractor to remain so, maybe I just have a higher tolerance for paying for my own shit and a lower tolerance for HR weenies.

      1. That choice will last only so long — those who write the definitions write the definitions. So where you are probably on some standard concerned with whether you alone determine when, how, and whether you will work, it will become: did you ply your trade in contract with a given entity on x-percentage of days working, irrespective of any other factor. Or some such. And if so, you will be redefined as being a de facto employee, for whom withholdings must be paid.

  24. “This is not likely to create peace.”\

    Got any pictures of the people killed in Israel by Hamas rockets?

    Didn’t think so.

  25. If Israel finally decides to ruthlessly wipe out the terrorist organizations on their borders, I for one won’t shed a single tear or lose a second of sleep. Mostly, I’ll wonder just what the hell took them so damn long.

    1. Or if the palestinians decide to finally wipe out the armed thieves who stole their land (or, more correctly, the squatters who benefitted from the the theft of their land), I would not shed a tear either.

      Honestly, both sides have absolutely justifiable grievances, and both have been vicious and unreasonable. There is no hope, no peace, no joy to be found there. It is a black hole of misery for the human race.

      1. Or if the palestinians decide to finally wipe out the armed thieves who stole their land (or, more correctly, the squatters who benefitted from the the theft of their land), I would not shed a tear either.

        So if a Native American terrorist group had the means to do the same to us you’d be okay with it?

        1. The Native Americans did that, and they ultimately failed in the attempt. It’s not a matter of being “ok” with it, this is just how things work. Someone takes, someone resists the taking.

          Do you deny that the Palestinians were displaced when western powers created a Jewish state after WWII, or was that whole area just empty lots?

          1. The population of Palestine in 1914 was some 657,000 Muslim Arabs (most of whom were Bedouins), 81,000 Christian Arabs (most of whom lived in urbanized or semi-urbanized areas in the West Bank), and 59,000 Jews (most of whom lived in farming communes or Jerusalem).

            About 10-25% of the land was already purchased and owned by Jews by the time of the Balfour Declaration.

            It is worth noting that a good number of what are today called Palestinians are in fact immigrants who were attracted to the job opportunities created by the Jewish settlers between 1900-1938.

            1. Israel is the only legitimate nation in the ME. May she crush all her enemies.

            2. But Immaculate Trouser, you’re actually using facts! That’s not the way it works. You need to make vague references to events that never took place, then when you are thoroughly refuted, retreat to bullshit moral equivalence.

              Jesus H. Christ, show him how it’s done.

          2. Considering the Jews have been there for, oh, 5000 years, I’d say they are not quite “squatters”. I guess Arab conquest is the last legitimate move into the area, or are you agitating for Ottoman Turk restoration?

      2. The issue is a multi-faceted one, that’s for sure.

        Even so, this particular chapter in the sad saga is not difficult to figure out: a group of thugs on the Palestinian side of the border lobbed missiles in the hopes of killing non-combatants who have nothing to do with their grievances, knowing full well that the anticipated Israeli reprisal would leave their people much worse off. Seriously: if you and I are in a legal dispute and I shoot your four-year old daughter because I feel like I am in the right, does the complexity of the legal debate justify or in any way excuse my killing of your daughter?

        The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is tricky. The moral status of thugs who kill innocents and bring disaster on their people? Not so much.

      3. Or if the palestinians decide to finally wipe out the armed thieves who stole their land

        If the Palis were to start going after the UN, I might just have a little more sympathy.

        That, after all, is the organization that set aside “their” land for Israel.

        And, of course, from a sovereign state POV, it was never the Pali’s land. It was either Egypt’s or Jordan’s, I believe, after the 1948 war. Before that, I guess it was under British control. But there was certainly never a Palestine.

        1. “That, after all, is the British that set aside “Ottoman Turkish” land after their loss in the first world war, for Israel, Trans-Jordan, Saudi Arabia, etc.


      4. “Or if the palestinians decide to finally wipe out the armed thieves who stole their land”

        Stupid up the butt much?

        1. I am not an advocate of the Palestinian violence. I’m not an advocate of the Israeli violence. However, the fucking place was not just empty desert when the west carved out a chunk for Israel.

          Of all the places to create a Jewish state, I can’t think of a worse one. There will never be peace until the (un)Holy land is smoking hole with a very unhealthy glow at night.

          1. “Of all the places to create a Jewish state, I can’t think of a worse one.”

            Yeah, some dumb place that has been the center of their religion and identy for thousands of years – could they simply not have accomodated their Arab conquerers? I mean, how else could you not have a better claim by conquering the place and claiming your prophet had jumped on a horse all the way to Heaven exactly from the spot where another religion had its holiest location?! I bet you have fun jeering at Hindus who try to reclaim temples that the Moguls had turned into mosques too.

            1. Surrounded by much larger nations who are fanatically devoted to their destruction. Yes, it’s a shitty place for a Jewish state.

          2. “until the (un)Holy land is smoking hole with a very unhealthy glow at night.”

            You make a statemant like that, but the Isrealis/Palastinians are the problem?
            Yeah…a thernonuclear blast will solve the problem….it’s so simple, it’s ingenius. Don’t do em’ any favors.

            1. You think the Muslims, Palestinians and Jews are all going to get all friendly? They are incapable of living at peace with one another. If I were to attempt to design a plan that maximized human suffering and pointless conflict, with no possible solution I could not do better than what was done with the Middle East in the 40’s.

              Show me a path to peace there.

          3. Of all the places to create a Jewish state, I can’t think of a worse one. There will never be peace until the (un)Holy land is smoking hole with a very unhealthy glow at night.

            *looks up at forum name*

            Shit. The Book of Revelation makes a hell of a lot more sense now.

          4. “However, the fucking place was not just empty desert when the west carved out a chunk for Israel.

            You’re right, it wasn’t. At the turn of the 20th century Jerusalem was a majority Jewish city. The rest was controlled by Jews, various Arab douche bags and then by Britain. The Arab douche bags sold much of the barren, largely uninhabited land (see Mark Twain’s travel diaries, for one of many references to this) to Jewish buyers at about a thousand times the value, then laughed all the way to the bank.

            Problem: Jews actually made something of the place, so now some other Arab savages with NO FUCKING CLAIM to the land want to murder Jewish school children in retaliation. And they’re depending on ass-wipes like you to defend them. Expect a dozen roses soon.

      5. “Or if the palestinians decide to finally wipe out the armed thieves who stole their land”

        Jesus H. Christ: your history is bullshit. Try reading something that wasn’t written by people who despise freedom and property rights. So wiping out terrorists is the same Palis wiping out Israel?

        Fuck you and your tears.

  26. Studies show men have bodies issues. Jezebel: Women, Minorities Hardest Hit

    …If anything, those sculptures and paintings indicated how media images of male bodies haven’t really changed that much, and certainly not in comparison to how often the ideal body for a female gets a revision. From Botticelli to flappers to Marilyn Monroe to Twiggy to J. Lo, the expectations of women’s bodies drastically change. Women will never be able to keep up with how we’re supposed to look because the connotation and definition of “fat ass” seems to change almost yearly.

    None of this is to say, however, that men don’t feel pressure. Our culture values the thin and the muscular, not the fat, and this applies to men, too. But hardly to the same degree; you’re certainly not going to see fat sitcom wives anytime soon.

    So while we can empathize with young men dealing with the anguish that can come with not liking what you see in the mirror, most guys will could never even begin to scratch the surface of understanding the widespread, crazy body image shit that goes on in girl culture. Until the extreme focus on one’s physique becomes an inherent part of “boy culture,” there’s no comparison.

    1. Um. I don’t think its the men driving “girl culture” to “extreme focus on one’s physique”. During pubescence I was looking for a healthy one with a, uh, friendly disposition. All other physical factors secondary.

    2. you’re certainly not going to see fat sitcom wives anytime soon.

      This is demonstrably false.

  27. Federal Judge blocks Obamacare mandate for a company, hilarity ensues

    While I could have linked you the original WaPo, the Jez one is funny because even the comments are going, “You don’t understand this ruling, do you?”

    1. Any judge that does not embrace the Gospel of Feminism must be a wingnut, petty legal issues like whether or not the government proved its case be damned.

      1. Yeah. But I also wanted to post this because its good news. Hypothetically, this could reach the Supremes, and they have an easy 5 Catholic majority (Roberts, Thomas, Scalia, Kennedy, Alito) unless Roberts pusses out again (and while Roberts seems like the kind of shit to accomodate government power, he seems like he might be okay on religious liberty of anything not involving the devil weed)

    2. Hey, thanks for mansplaining how Xtians get to try and force their practices on other people because religion. Oh, wait, it’s not other people—it’s women.

      Funny how people only get all technical and everything when it’s women.

      Yeah, that’s the only time anyone ever gets technical.

      1. “Technical” and Amanda Marcotte are not two things that I associate with one another.

        Marcotte has to be one of the sloppiest writers I’ve ever encountered. Every time I read one of her articles I question the wisdom of having learned your Teutonic tongue.

    3. That, and you think if you give the jezzies enough page hits they’ll eventually give in and sleep with you. Go on, Goldwater, you can admit it. This is a safe place.

    4. Forcing companies to cover contraception via health insurance is one of the infamous “social issues” which supposedly won Obama the election.

      This gives some perspective to the whole “if only libertarians ditched the socons they’d pull in lots of antigovernment votes” narrative.

      1. People not knowing what “insurance” means also helped.

  28. Don’t worry, TEAM RED and TEAM BLUE, you will no longer have to be in a purple relationship:…..84037.html

    Where’s our libertarian dating site, huh? I mean, I do meet the most fetching women at the biannual orphan hunt, but many are not in my area!

    1. There are only so many women who can be brainwashed to withstand the MALE GAZE. Unless you’re training 16 year olds with daddy issues La Femme Nikita style.

      1. Unless you’re training 16 year olds with daddy issues La Femme Nikita style

        Wait, no one is already doing that? AND I THOUGHT LIBERTARIANS LIKED MONEY!

        1. Yeah. Believe me, as soon as I can find a lawyer who will touch my business plan, I’m going all in. Er. Shit. That made me sound like an adulterous general.

          1. I can help – unless R C Dean beats me to it 🙂

  29. If you own or plan to own high rise property in United Arab Emirates down buy the ones with the flammable cladding.

    “””Tower cladding in UAE fuels fire”””‘…..fuels_fire

    1. Fuel for the WTC conspiracy theorists is more like it.

  30. 3-D Printing In Everything: James Bond Edition

    Three replicas of the classic car were created using a large scale 3D printer for the filming of the latest installment from the spy series.

    The models double for the now priceless original vehicle from the 1960s in the film’s action scenes.

    1. I have no idea how a 3D printer works. Can someone explain in layman’s terms?

      1. Imagine building something by spitting tiny balls of chewed up gum at a plate until a shape emerged. Now make it plastic instead of gum, same concept.

      2. There are several varieties. One, say you took an inkjet printer, and replaced the ink with a binder. Then, situated the print head over a bed of what is basically cornstarch. Take a 3D model and slice it into thin sections. For each section, print the profile on the top of the cornstarch, which has been leveled off nice and flat. After that, add another thin layer of cornstartch, and repeat the process with the next slice of the model, until at the end, you have reconstituted the 3D model.

        You can do this also by cutting the profile from a slice of paper, and then bonding that to ones previously cut. Or by focusing a laser into a vat of light-sensitive liquid, or by melting a metallic powder. Or by building a model from the bottom up, by moving what amounts to a glorified hot-melt glue gun over an area, gradually building the model in slices. There are other methods, as well.

      3. Think of an ink-jet printer that extrudes tiny dots of molten plastic that solidify pretty immediately. But with a z-axis as well. Basically, you put a CAD drawing into an attached computer and it breaks your shape down into regular 3-D “dots”, and tells the printer head to extrude or not at a position based on the CAD drawing. Some of the newer ones are a bit smarter than the old “print all x-axis dots at y-axis position 1, go to next y-axis position”.

      4. The thing goes into that little slot next to the other thing. Then you press the red button. But first you have to press the code button which is blue. Then there is a loud sound like a lawnmower, but it’s real loud. You should go down the hall and get a sandwich from one of those machines until the lawnmower noise stops. When you can’t hear the lawnmower sound anymore go back in the room and press the code button (blue button) again. This time you don’t have to press the red button because you have to press the orange button instead. If you pressed it, that door/flappy thing near the back of the machine will open up and the thing you want will be in there. Hope that helps.

        1. You forgot to dump the stuff into compartment J.

          1. and having your 14 year old show you how to do it.

      5. PC LOAD LETTER? What the fuck does that mean?!

      6. Remember Star Trek? A 3D printer works like a replicator. You ask for what you want, and it appears.

        In the future, everything will be really cheap, because you can print it out whenever you want it. Except for toner — that you will pay dearly for.

  31. Mr. Shackford,

    Apparently dead Jewish babies do not enter into your equation. They would be saved if the rocket attacks were to end.
    Considering the misfires of Hamas missiles and the fraudulent reuse of other images in Hamas’ misinformation campaigns, you might want to verify their reports before jumping to your desired conclusion.

  32. Hahaha cosmopolitan Reason writers always are writing sob stories after Israel kicks Hamas/Moooslum ass, but no articles about the three Israelis killed first by Hamas..or how every war Israel has been in was started by their opponents. I dont even have a real warboner for Israel, especially with our money, but dont lie that the Israelis are the ones itching for war.

    The DC cocktail parties are showing through, Reason..

    1. Really, shame on you Shackford. Hamas has broken every previous cease fire; they need destroyed after all this and what they do to the Gaza residents every day.

      1. Again, it is instructive to note the tremendous difference both in living standards and in violence between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

        The West Bank and Israel have not resolved all or even most of their differences, but they are in the process of resolving them in a more or less civilized fashion.

        Israel has honored the terms of the peace agreements that it has signed with the neighboring Arab countries and has more or less normalized relations with them.

        So, why is it that Gazan leadership is supposed to be excused for not figuring out a process that almost all of Israel’s neighbors have managed to grok? Was the lesson of Operation Cast Lead (missiles lobbed at Israeli citizens = invasion + lots of death) really so difficult to learn and easy to forget that Gaza is back at it less than 5 years later?

        The Gazan people have legitimate grievances against the Israeli government in some important regards. The Gazan leadership and terrorist groups are doing nothing to make sure those grievances are resolved.

        1. The Gazan people have legitimate grievances against the Israeli government in some important regards.


      2. Trying to emotionally manipulate me with photos of dead kids is a great way for me to tell someone, to his face, that I don’t care about dead kids.

        1. Photos of dead kids does not prove anything. Hamas killed a pregnant mother with their first rocket strikes. But Israel is not in this for the PR campaign. The only people who gain from pictures of dead kids is Hamas, because the media only pays attention when non-Israelis are killed.

          Hamas has quite a history of sacrificing kids or using them as shields, so fuck off.

          1. Yelling and further trying to manipulate my emotions by doubling down on “Teh Childrenz” is a great way for me to get my daily laugh in.

            1. Did I misunderstand your comment? Indeed I think I did. Apologies.

        2. You mean you recognize dead kids as a necessary evil for Israel to defend itself… I hope?

        3. When I hear some local-TV idiot read a news story that begins something like, “Ten people were killed in an apartment fire. Three of them were children”, I yell at the TV idito, “How come you don’t care about the seven adults who died?”

  33. typo:

    more of fewer

    should be:

    more or fewer

      1. Probably wrong thread?



  34. The Freedom to Coerce Religion

    One of the most upsetting and disturbing developments in the past few years of wingnut propaganda is the attempt to define “religious freedom” as expanding the powers of the already-powerful over others, specifically with an eye towards coercing others to live by your religious rules. Even though the courts correctly (usually) see religious freedom being best protected by eliminating coercive prayer in schools, for instance, your average wingnut believes these rulings attack their religious freedom. After all, what’s the point of religion if you can’t impose it on others? Thus, the only way they can see to protect religious freedom is to give, say, schoolteachers the right to lead their class in prayer (as long as it’s the correct Christian prayer, of course).

    This word, coerce… I do not think it means what you think it means.

    1. Keep this up and I am going to have to replace Alex Parenee at the top of the “Punchable Pundits” list.

      1. And since Marcotte takes to beating up The Blaze commenters (seriously, how fucking lazy is that?), well, here:

        I’m Wiccan and I believe in science.


        1. I’m Wiccan and I believe in science.

          Whether or not this person believes in it changes nothing. My belief that red M&Ms; are yummier than green ones (doesn’t that mean they’re spoiled?) is on more solid ground than her imagined solidarity with science.

          1. I’m not Wiccan, but if a hot chick wants to teach me all about it, I’m all ears.

            1. he, he, he. Understood. Just watch out around Solstice and the like.

            2. You’ve clearly never seen any chick who professes to be a Wiccan. Think Lena Dunham in looks, even more insanely feminist/man-hating, usually poorly educated, strong penchant for magical thinking (duh), all while screeching that Christianity was designed by men to destroy nature and women. Frequently, Wiccan trolls (and I mean that as both the hideously ugly unfuckable bitch and contrarian horseshit peddler varieties) further profess love of “science” (as this fuckwit Marcotte does) as a means to deride Christians as stupid and unscientific.

              Oh, and if I didn’t already explain it, Wiccan bitches are fucking ugly. Always.

    2. No, it’s just that once religion enters the equation, they see that (e.g. in the scenario given above) their property taxes are indeed not paid voluntarily, and their lips magically gain the ability to form that most venerable of phrases: “Fuck off slaver!”

    3. Damnit, you beat me to it. I was thinking of posting it.

      I think I could skip Jezebel and just post Marcotte. Given her absolute hatred of religion, if the Obama care mandate can’t be enforced on Christian businesses such as publishing companies or especially anything related to the DREADED Catholic Church, she will flip the biggest shit the internet has ever seen. She’s already insane as is, but, if that happens… I mean, she might start bombing Churches.

      1. You ever read Dennis the Peasant? He had some hilarious send ups of Marcotte’s… writing ability. Some of the funniest stuff I’ve ever read on the internet.

        1. I’d love a link

          1. Looks like the site is dead now, but here’s an archived version of it.


  35. Oh, one thing I never got to comment on, re:Amanda Marcotte’s insane article on the Catholic Church in Ireland…

    In case anyone didn’t know, she got kicked off the Edwards campaign as his blogger. Per wiki:

    On January 30, 2007, the John Edwards 2008 presidential campaign hired Marcotte to act as the campaign’s blogmaster.[10] Soon afterward, many bloggers began to quote Marcotte’s blog, especially posts in which she criticized the Catholic Church’s position on birth control and access to abortion.[11] One Marcotte blog post that was criticized included: “Q: What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit? A: You’d have to justify your misogyny with another ancient mythology.”[12] Columnist Kathryn Jean Lopez wrote that Marcotte’s hostility to religion should alarm Edwards, while journalist Terry Moran argued that Marcotte’s comments could be construted as hate speech…..s_campaign

    I mean, she HATES the Catholic Church. I think she is one of those who is of the belief that from the fall of Rome to the Reformation, the Catholic Church burned every woman who wasn’t barefoot, pregnant, in the kitchen, and mute at the stake as a witch.

    …Which we did, but thats why we kept them barefoot, pregnant, in the kitchen, and mute- SO THAT YOU WOULDN’T LEARN ABOUT IT.

    Seriously, she would start a modern Know-Nothing Party if she could

    1. How dumb, incompetent, and bigoted do you have to be to get fired by the Edwards campaign, anyways?

      Scratch that: how dumb, incompetent, and bigoted do you have to be to think that hiring Amanduh to speak for a political campaign in any capacity is a good idea?

    2. A swift dick’n would straighten her right out. -The Pope

  36. I have often lamented the newer, nicer internets:

    For those of us who learned to love the web best as a hostile, predatory, somewhat haunted place, this kindness is startling?but not as startling as it might once have been. These days, life online has become friendly, well mannered, oversweet. Everyone is on his or her very best behavior?and if they’re not, they tend to be quickly iced out of the conversation. The sweet camaraderie that flourished during Sandy isn’t just for terror and crisis anymore; it has become the way the Internet lives now.

    But apparently, it doesn’t actually exist for me anyway.

    1. There’s an entire group of people online that cannot, and will not, tolerate any dissent or criticism. Soccer mommies are the worst. If you can’t be supportive, say nothing seems to be the motto. There are Facebook groups that I follow where they will delete your comment most rikki-tik if they feel you are being unmutual or whatever psychotic buzzword they use. Sarcasm is just being mean.

      Sadly, they are the best way to find out what’s going on in my neighborhood.

      1. Unmutual?! I’d strongly consider urinating (for reals) on someone that used that term. T, if you end up needing legal counsel after dealing with these folks, let me know.

      2. Fuck ’em. They can’t break my Usenet shell, only defriend me.

  37. Possibly the most ridiculous article I have ever read about online ad targeting (and that is a tough competition to win, folks):

    That worries some federal regulators and consumer advocates, who say that such electronic trading systems could unfairly stratify consumers, covertly offering better pricing to certain people while relegating others to inferior treatment. A computer-generated class system is one risk, they say, of an ad-driven Internet powered by surveillance.

    “As you profile more and more people, you’ll start to segregate people into ‘the people you can get money out of’ and ‘the people you can’t get money out of,’ ” says Dan Auerbach, a staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital civil rights group in San Francisco, who formerly worked in digital ad data-mining. “That is one of the dangers we should be worried about.”

    Bonus points for getting someone from the Center for Digital Democracy to refer to internet users as “chattel” because we see targeted ads.

    1. Only Kulaks want some people to have more Ipads at a cheaper price than others, nicole.

      1. Honestly, I have had the most “luck” turning people ever-so-slightly libertarian when talking about online ad targeting. People worry about their privacy, worry about their information being sold or used–and when I say to them sure, but what’s the worst thing a company can do with your information? Market to you? What’s the worst thing a government can do?

        But this new line where it goes behind the basic desire for privacy, which is totally understandable to me, to this issue of like online ad morlocks and eloi…I don’t even get it. You’re upset that you see ads, but you’re also upset that poor people might see different ads from you…and almost never does it enter into the equation that if you weren’t seeing ads, you’d have to pay for content.

        1. The worst the government can do is hand your information over to the government. Which most of them will do, even without a warrant.

          1. Yes, but we try not to complicate things too much for the normals.

        2. You’re upset that you see ads, but you’re also upset that poor people might see different ads from you…and almost never does it enter into the equation that if you weren’t seeing ads, you’d have to pay for content.

          I didn’t read the original article, but figured the guy was worried that those of us who don’t click on the ads will stop getting the free content.

          1. No, it’s just all about how targeted advertising in general is bad, because you might be, basically, discriminated against in what ads you see. It’s not super relevant that this is online, except that the data collection and the bids made based on that data are done so much faster.

            I don’t know, it’s totally bizarre to me. It’s like a teenager just looking for the next thing to complain about.

    2. I don’t understand how this is seen as a danger. From each according, y’know.

    3. That worries some federal regulators and consumer advocates

      Any time you see the term “consumer advocate”, think “government advocate”.


    Today, the aspiring feminist can check out Jezebel for and find out what to get Ryan Gosling for Christmas, why Bobby Jindal is a secret misogynist, men’s body issues (?), Lena Dunham’s weight critics (and why they can’t sleep at night!), and interspecies love (?!).

    They’re going to have to wait for the hard-hitting analysis on women’s rights in the Middle East, practical advice on getting ahead in the workplace and producing value, and keeping and maintaining a healthy relationship of the opposite sex, I suppose.



  39. Would invading result in more of fewer dead children and civilians?

    It would result in fewer dead Israeli civilians, and that’s all that should count as far the Israeli government is concerned.

  40. Christ.

    You know how when you’re playing with a friend in the sandbox and they ask you to share your toys and you don’t want to and so they’re all, “Sharing is nice, be nice!” and you’re all, “SCREW THAT I’M OUTTA THIS SHITBOX WHERE’S MY SNACK PACK I WANT MY MOMMY!” and you march off, snot-nosed and clutching your beloved possessions tightly to your chest?

    , Brit Ruby organizer Sean Handley posted on github:

    It was pointed out on Twitter that the lineup so far is white males.
    This became frenzied and shared with allegations of racism/sexism.
    This put the sponsors in an awkward position regarding commitment to the conference.
    This meant the venue contract couldn’t be signed because of a potential lack of financial security.
    Since the team can’t be personally liable for the costs, there was a hard decision to be made.
    That decision was: cancel.
    Yes, gender equality and racial equality are important. But the team’s motives were to get the best speakers who were able to make it to Manchester. Turns out, a lot of the famous Rubyists are white guys and all of the ones who said they’d like to come were, indeed, white guys.


    So, I guess, how dare they not pay out of pocket? The entitlement displayed in this post is astonishing. It’s like the Obamacare changes employers have to make. Or the union caused layoffs.

    1. I don’t think adding diversity at the end works. You have to start with it as one of your goals. Who wants to be the token female?

      Because you’re not the token female if you were accounted for at the beginning of the planning process.

    2. I have literally no idea what that post was about.

      None at all.

    3. Who wants to be the token female?

      Getting laid? How many nerd couples a bigger female with a skinny male, or two bigger people with classes? Jesus, go to a con sometimes.

      Although, any heftiness on the part of the nerd ladies is the fact that in my experience they have huge libido and are freaky in a good way. And sometimes freaky in a bad way.

    4. So I just read the article.

      My. God.

      “Note: Ruby was created in the 90s by Yukihiro “Matz” Matsumoto in Japan.”

      I like how they throw that in as if that means that the conference organizers could convince Matsumoto or some other Japanese programmer to go to their conference at a cost that was reasonable to them.

      For fuck’s sake.

  41. Turns out, a lot of the famous Rubyists are white guys and all of the ones who said they’d like to come were, indeed, white guys.

    Umm, yeah, okay.

    Assuming I had even the faintest understanding of what this gibberish is supposed to mean, why would I care?

    1. The article is about people bitching about diversity at a conference so much that the sponsors cancelled. It is saying that the organizers are at fault for cancelling, and it’s just petulance on their part. Much like the claim that hostess went bankrupt because the owners are just mean.

      Reality eludes these people, and the results of their actions aren’t really their fault, it’s because those people they affected are selfish five year olds. It’s just part of an expanding leftie meme. I figured this was another good example.

      1. The main thinkers and idea men (or wymyn) on the left are defined by a complete unfamiliarity with working a job which depended on their ability to provide value to others at a reasonable cost. At best, some of these people have jobs where they are retained based on perceived competence.

        The very idea of marginal costs and quality eludes such people.

  42. Hamas has broken every previous cease fire; they need destroyed after all this and what they do to the Gaza residents every day.

    Fap fap fap.

    I seriously could not give a fuck less about any of the various tribes of savages in Semiteland. If we are going to let ourselves get drawn into their fucking unending blood feuds, let’s just kill every single person within 500 miles of Jerusalem, and turn the place into a skate park.

  43. In the 11 years since 9-11, despite 2800 dead in a terrorist attack in New York and Washington and two ongoing wars, I don’t recall a single time Reason ever published a picture of a dead American. Yet, here we are with dead Palestinian children? Why is that? Do Palestinian dead not deserve the same respect American dead do? Is it that one side’s dead doesn’t count?

    That picture is exploitative and disgusting? What purpose does it serve? Reason really is a bunch of bottom feeding douchebags sometimes. They have hit a new low on this one.

    1. A picture of a dead American doesn’t generate enough pathos.

      Pictures of dead third-worlders in the media are like when movies include a shot of a child dropping his teddy bear in the middle of a battle or disaster — it’s a cheap and easy way to generate sympathy. I met precisely two journalists when I lived in Central America; both there to cover violence-related stories. Both of them acted like the poverty in Central America was the greatest thing ever — they might as well have been in an amusement park, from the way they were grinning about everything. And of course, they proceeded to condescend to me by explaining how everything that was wrong in those countries was due to American imperialism, and that the truly odious left-wing dictatorships in the region were a reflection of the will of the people.

      In short, fuck journalists.

      1. I had the “pleasure” of accompanying LAT “journalists” during the first Afghan elections in 2004… I managed not to puke on any of them. The photog guy was cool, however.

    2. Reason showed a picture of our dead ambassador to Libya just a few weeks ago.

  44. From the “I don’t know any poor people, but fuck them unless it’s the government doing the helping” files:

    Here’s the thing. I genuinely do not know who attends Black Friday sales. Do you go? Do you know people who go? I am genuinely asking, because I don’t think I know anyone who does (and I know like 100 people!). Personally, I will go to almost any lengths to avoid inconvenience and discomfort, so Black Friday is my idea of where hell sends Satan when he needs a time-out. I hate hassle.

    1. and I know like 100 people!

      All of which are privileged, urban elite, no doubt.

      (Also, 100 is a bit on the low side; most people’s monkeysphere exceed that by a bit; well, except for us misanthropes, who avoid people).

  45. Maryland and Rutgers to the Big 1G? For the love of god, this shit needs to end. Is there any way anyone could stop this conference crap?

    1. Resistance is Futile. There will be Only 4 Super Conferences…soon.

      As a Big Ten alum, I am slightly miffed.

      1. Are you a Leader or a Legend, or both?

    2. Ff enough people ask for someone to stop conference realignment, Barack Obama WILL get involved.

    3. Naming your conference “The Big n” where n is some integer makes no sense. In the beginning, there was the Big 10 and the Big 8. Then the Big 8 added four teams and became the Big 12. Okay so far. Then the Big 10 added one team and became the Big 11… no wait, they stayed the Big 10.

      Now the Big 12 has 10 teams and the Big 10 has 12 teams. And these are institutions of higher learning?

      1. The Big 10 has 10 teams; it’s just no longer base-10.

  46. God damn are the bears playing like shit

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.