A.M. Links: White House Complains About Politics, Democrat Decries Democrats in Decline, Cost of a Cigarette in NYC Jails Reaches $30

|

  • not anymore
    George Eastman House/Foter.com

    The White House's EPA nominee, Gina McCarthy, faces nearly universal Republican opposition, leading the White House to complain about Republicans "playing politics," which is kind of like a baseball player complaining that the opposing team insists on playing baseball and not T-ball.

  • Bill Clinton's former White House political director writes that the Democratic party is in decline. It's lost nine governorships and 56 House seats and will be at "considerable risk" after Obama leaves office.
  • A ban on smoking in New York City's jails has led to the price of a loose cigarette to reach $30. The Corrections Department uses dogs to sniff out tobacco but the union objects to its officers (which are often the source of imported contraband) being treated like inmates.
  • Paul Krugman, perhaps the most political and ideological "economist" in the country, says those warning of a stock bubble are being "political" or "ideological." See you at 20,000?
  • The Heritage Foundation may be hiring a public relations firm after fallout from a report tagging the cost of immigration at $6.3 trillion.
  • Ventura County in California passed an "urgency ordinance" requiring condoms in porn.
  • The Minnesota House has approved a bill legalizing gay marriage.
  • Arwa al-Hujaili became Saudi Arabia's first female lawyer.

Get Reason.com and Reason 24/7 content widgets for your websites.

Follow Reason and Reason 24/7 on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.  You can also get the top stories mailed to you—sign up here. Have a news tip? Send it to us!

NEXT: Veteran Democratic Strategist Says the Party is "in Decline"

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. http://www.businessinsider.com…..-it-2013-5

    Aghhh…..John McCain might be doing something good. SLD applies.

    1. Fisty isn’t going to be happy with you.

      1. It doesn’t count since he didn’t comment on a ML, jeez don’t you know the rules?

        1. Rules are for statists. Fuck off slaver.

          1. Additionally, all bets are off when Links are late. It’s just coincidence I happen to check at almost the right time. Constant refreshing is just what reason wants us to do.

            1. Nonunique page views are the key to internet domination.

          2. My savior told me to reject cynical voices like yours.

            ? LA LA LA LA ?

    2. I’m… not sure how to feel about this. On one hand, granular programming seems more or less inevitable and “right”, since it will bring better cost accountability into the industry and better value to the consumer. On the other hand, forcing an industry to operate a certain way is bound to have negative consequences. Maybe trying to break up the monopolies at a local scale would be a better approach to the problem.

      1. End the government supporting monopolies and then see what shakes out, I bet at least one of the many content providers would offer a more granular approach.

      2. As always, the estimable Virginia Postrel was right on the topic a dozen years ago.

        1. I think that’s a sorta drink. Ruling?

          1. When in doubt, drink. I think that’s the last rule in the game.

      3. Exact same thought. Plus it’s McCain, so that doesn’t alleviate any skepticism. Even though its something that is obvious and everyone is asking for it, he’ll find a way to horribly fuck it up.

    3. FUCK! No this isn’t a good thing McCain is doing.

      All this bill would do is ensure that the smaller channels on cable disappear when they can’t get enough individual subscribers. Oh and your bill will still be unchanged since 99% of it is licensing fees from the major popular channels and service costs from the cable comapny itself.

      Fuck McCain – just let the bastard cable comapnies run their shit without government help/interference and you’ll get the best for the fucking customer you stupid shit bastard.

  2. http://www.thedailybeast.com/a…..ginia.html

    How the Dems are losing VA.

    1. I read that. I think the problem Dems have in VA is that their entire base is government employees in NOVA. Outside of the Washington area, Virginia is a dark red state. That wouldn’t be a problem because the numbers in NOVA overwhelm the rest of the state except the overwhelming majority of Dems in NOVA are government employees and contractors. Government employees can’t go into politics under the Hatch Act. And government contractors generally frown on that as well since they want to do business no matter who is in power. So that leaves them with a very small pool of potential candidates. When you think of it that way, it is no surprise they ended up with the worst sort of political hack as their nominee for Governor.

      1. Outside of the Washington area, Virginia is a dark red state.

        Well, outside of the Appalachian poor folk/old yellow dog dems. Plus the soccer moms in Henrico and Chesterfield. Plus the inner cities of Richmond, Petersburg, Hopewell, Newport News.

        1. Even dark red states have Dem voters. If you split NOVA off from the rest of the state, Virginia would be pretty red. And Newport News is just a little beltway full of GS employees and contractors. Where are the Dems supposed to get their candidates?

        2. Charlottesville isn’t exactly deep red.

          1. Neither is Oxford, Mississippi. But that doesn’t make Mississippi anything but deep red.

            1. Just pointing out another city outside of NOVA where one could find plenty of democrats.

              1. There’s a shit ton of Democrats in VA. It’s a very winnable state. They’ve just run out of bench, because the best two pols they had are now Senators. Victims of their own success.

                If they were smart they’d get a folksy guy from the western part of the state, who can talk the gun talk and appeal to moderates. The NoVA tards, the SWPL assholes, and the urban blacks will vote for whoever wins the Dem nomination.

                They key to winning VA is winning the Richmond suburbs, and the swingier parts of NoVA.

                1. You mean my attempt to take over the state through domination of Blacksburg/Christiansburg + the ‘Noak isn’t going to work?

          2. Norfolk is Dem, non?

      2. There are a lot of government employees and contractors in the Norfolk area, too. Atlantic Fleet is HQ’d there, and many other DOD activities.

        Yes, Charlottesville is very liberal but not that populous.

      3. Northern Virginia is definitely chock full of ultra-liberal assclowns, but the thing is that more than half of them come from somewhere else, and many of them are short-timers.

        So while these people worship Obama like he’s the second coming, most of them don’t really give a rat’s behind about Virginia state and local politics.

    2. You know it’s going to be ugly when they’ve already written their concession speech and have started spinning the defeat six months ahead of time.

      1. Mccauliffe is just awful. I really think the stories about him leaving his wife in the delivery room to go to a fund raiser and then later leaving her and the baby in the car on the way home from the hospital while he popped in the grab and grin with a donor for 20 minutes are about the worst personal stories I have ever heard about a political figure. The guy left his wife and new born child in the car with the windows cracked like they were his dogs.

        1. Well, at least he didn’t drive them home on the car *roof*!

        2. If I were his wife I would have called a cab to take me to the divorce attorney.

          1. No kidding. People keep saying that those stories won’t affect him because so many women are mindlessly liberal. I don’t buy that. Women are fanatical about that stuff. They understandably have a bit of a chip on their shoulder about having to go through an incredibly painful and traumatic experience to have a child while their husbands get to hang out and update the family on Facebook and Twitter. No way are most women overlooking those stories.

            1. It’s like you’ve never even heard of Bill Clinton.

              1. Bill Clinton just banged a few groupies. He never left Hillary on her own in the delivery room. That is a whole different level than adultery.

        3. I imagine that, unlike a dog, the wife could have opened the door had she wanted to. Maybe she didn’t mind.

          In any case, I don’t know why anyone acts at all surprised or upset by things like this. I just assume that anyone running for office will be giant assholes who put their own campaign above everything else.

          1. In any case, I don’t know why anyone acts at all surprised or upset by things like this.

            Democrats depend a whole lot on the female vote. If the Republican campaign is even moderately competent, then these episodes will star in some campaign commercials. They will not go over well with women with children. They won’t go over well at all.

            1. Further illustrating how they are all scummy assholes. I have no idea what the wife thought about those incidents, but if she didn’t care, no one should.

            2. That’s expecting way too much from the Reps.

  3. Paul Krugman, perhaps the most political and ideological “economist” in the country, says those warning of a stock bubble are being “political” or “ideological.”

    He knows he’s written this down, right? It can be gone back to later?

    1. He can just claim there wasn’t enough investment. The same answer always applies – MOAR $ poured into _______.

      1. Thing is, I believe the Keynesian position is that one can take the amount of stimulus input and plug it into a simple, linear “multiplier” equation to get the amount of stimulus output.

        If it really were linear, then we would see all kinds of positive effects even if the input weren’t at his ideal level.

        1. It’s linear all right. It’s just that the slope is negative.

          1. You may be right about that.

        2. Well that and (and this is important) RUNNING FUCKING SURPLUSES IN YOUR GOOD YEARS TO PAY FOR THE DAMN STIMULUS IN THE BAD ONES.

          Of course our government never does the former and wonders why the latter never works.

    2. When’s that stopped him before? Compare his comments on the Japanese crisis years ago with his positions today.

    3. When it blows up he’ll claim that he was joking and you’re just to dumb to get it.

    4. There are many people invested in and hoping for bad news for political reasons.

      Record highs in market indices don’t bode well for the Fat Rush’s of the country, re —– “I hope he fails”. Scoffing at these highs as just a “bubble” buys them more time to bilk their vapid audiences.

      1. Oh, I see, it’s a vast right wing conspiracy.

        I didn’t know.

        Thanks for pointing that out to us, Hillary.

      2. Well thanks for weighing in on that shreek. I guess we’ll do it your way. We are so lucky to have you.

      3. “There are many people invested in and hoping for bad news for political reasons.”

        “WASHINGTON ? The International Monetary Fund is urging the Federal Reserve and other central banks to closely monitor their extraordinary efforts to jump-start economic growth, warning that the policies could inflate asset bubbles and destabilize financial markets.”

        http://business.financialpost……imf-warns/

        And what political reason does the IMF have for bad news?

        1. Why, racism of course!

    5. Make sure you look into Paul Krugman, but nothing recent. Paul Krugman ceased being a real economist the minute he began his column in the New York Times

      -My thesis advisor, c. 2003. What’s funny is Krugs has actually admitted several times that he’s just a shill for the Party nowadays, but that doesn’t stop his acolytes from treating everything he says like prophecy.

    6. What is a bubble, anyway? Surprisingly, there’s no standard definition. But I’d define it as a situation in which asset prices appear to be based on implausible or inconsistent views about the future.

      When the bubble pops, Krugman is simply going to tell us that the current views were not based on implausible or inconsistent views about the future.

      Despite the fact that he is – in this very column – debating the many experts who are saying that the current view of the future is implausible and are thereby not being consistent with Krugman’s view.

      I don’t know that there are many people who would define a bubble the way Krugman does – virtually all trades are based on inconsistent views of the future or why the hell else would one person be buying while – in the exact same transaction – another is selling? And implausible is a pretty high bar – who the hell knows what is possible?

      I think a more common definition of a bubble is when a majority of trades are made on the ‘greater fool’ theory – it doesn’t matter what you pay for something because tomorrow there will be somebody else coming along willing to pay even more.

      But of course, since there are all these shadowy kulaks and enemies of the proletariat attempting to classify the current market as a bubble for political and ideological reasons, that future popping sound you are going to hear isn’t a bubble bursting, it’s the sound of the wreckers succeeding.

      And Krugman will be proved right.

      1. I think by that definition, every time the price of something goes down, we just had a bubble.

    7. Krugman would be 20% less infuriating if the Times would leave the comments section open for more than a few hours.

      Or at least I assume they still do that. I can’t actually read the column anymore because of my blood pressure.

      1. They do that so most of the comments will come from their friendly liberal readers, and not from conservatives who find links to his claptrap later.

  4. Swarmageddon! Cicadas come up for air in N Carolina after 17 years… and there’s a cookbook to tell you what to do with them

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci…..-them.html

    The recipe book by Jenna Jadin, below, can be found here. The recipes include:
    Scientist Jenna Jadin created a cicada recipe book during her time as a University of Maryland PhD student

    Cicada dumplings

    El chirper tacos

    Cica-delicious pizza

    Sizzling chili cicadas

    Southern cicada tartlets

    Banana cicada bread

    Chocolate chip trillers

    Cicada-rhubarb piece

    And, Ms Jadin’s favourite, chocolate covered cicadas

    1. The more important question is whether you or John would fuck them.

      1. You’d have to draw a line separating the the fat ones from the skinny ones.

    2. Just for you, Sarc…
      http://www.nydailynews.com/ent…..ry-1.26950

      1. To think of how many people say they’d kick her out of bed.

        1. More for us!

        2. I wouldn’t kick her out of bed. But I might consider it if there were other options available.

          1. John pron!
            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/fem…..-star.html

            1. Tammy has decided that she wants to put on a lot of weight as quickly as possible, and spends her days indoors eating … boxes of doughnuts and whole blocks of cheese.

              Also, fried chicken.

        3. It’s amazing what makeup and airbrushing can do for you.

          But if she actually did look like that picture, you’d have to be pretty stupid to kick her out.

    3. Brood II is for losers.

      Brood X is the King of Broods.

      1. Brood II are Kings in the North. Those fuckers absolutely saturate NJ while X is a minor nuisance.

  5. Some answers to the question, “What goes on in a college porn class?”

    1. I Teach a College Class on How to Think and Talk About Pornography

      *** meekly raises hand ***

      Um, will we have to, um, look at any?

      1. Look at it? I want to make it!

        1. “Your grades are pretty bad, but’s still physically possible for you to pass this course.”

          1. I found your video thesis ‘two girls and a deep dish pizza’ to be derivative and poorly filmed, what with the camera shaking so much…

            But the inspired use of artisnal mayo was oddly tittilating.

            C-

            1. Seriously, get a tripod, and I’m not talking about a well-hung male actor.

        2. Call Sugarfree – he could “help”.

        3. Look at it? I want to make it!

          I thought we discussed and rejected your shaved goat porn fetish?

          1. For the tenth time, it’s a hairless dog, not a shaved goat!

    2. Funny. I went to the school that first made the news with a controversial “porn class” about 15 years ago. I remember seeing it in the catalogue and thinking that it was kind of funny, but not too remarkable. Then some time later I saw some pearl clutching news piece about it, which I though was very funny.
      It seems to me that pornography is part of the literary tradition and I see no reason it shouldn’t be studied in English departments.

      1. Eh, like most culture war stuff, it comes down to tax dollars for me. If I’m paying for it, I am offended.

        1. Sure. But that applies to the whole system of public education financing, not just classes that stir up some controversy.

    3. His class takes an “interdisciplinary approach”…. sounds interesting.

  6. http://freddiedeboer.kinja.com…..1367956845

    Nothing left to cut.

    1. That corec is nice! I was there when they started building it, and let me say, they needed a new gym. Our old gym was from the 50’s and about 40% too small for the student body.

      OTOH, I believe Purdue’s tuition is frozen for 5 years, and was never super high to begin with (8k per semester in-state). I think that Mitch Daniels is doing some great stuff trying to cut administrative costs and streamline to save students money.

  7. Boy George is unhappy with the way he is treated by staff at shoe store.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs…..Evans.html

    He tweeted: ‘I’m sure lots of geezers buy women’s shoes at Evans? Or is it just me in my beard trying on wedges that’s so amusing?’.

    Uh, yeah. Probably.

    1. Like Al Bundy’s going to give a shit that Boy George came in to buy shoes.

  8. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/S…..reat-video

    It’s not the odds, it’s the stakes.

    1. Is Butterfield still writing headlines?

    2. Ya I’ll be quite happy to die after a solid life of post 30 partying while my meager collection gathers dust. Being Rebel Scum sounds exciting but it’s probably a nasty buzz kill

    3. It’s totally unpossible that increased gun ownership could be causing the drop in crime. Nope, if anything crime would be even lower if all you wingnuts weren’t clinging to your guns.

  9. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013…..etts-baby/

    Nancy Grace’s next move?

    1. I was hoping her next move would be seppuku.

      1. She doesn’t have enough honor to follow that example 🙁

  10. Here’s To Never Growing Up! Avril Lavigne hasn’t aged a day as she channels her teen years in new music video

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs…..video.html
    Will someone please hand her a face cloth so she can get that shit out of her eyes?

    1. Panda or raccoon? I think raccoon, because they are thinner.

      1. Plus, you know… the tape worms.

    2. And get to her out in the sun for a few minutes while you are at it.

    3. Blah. That is disgusting.

      1. She’s Canadian. What do you expect.

        1. Pamela Andersen?

      2. Since when is never seeing the sun and wearing eye make up that makes you look like a Zombie attractive?

        1. I don’t really mind her being pale (I do have that thing for redheads), but you’re making the explicit choice to put $200 worth of crap on your eyes!

          1. Pale is okay. But no color is not. She has no skin tone. At some point it just gets creepy.

        2. google “necrophilia” for the answer

            1. Yea, that’s one of the benefits of necrophilia.

        3. Since when is never seeing the sun and wearing eye make up that [covers up the fact that you are] a Zombie attractive?

          FTFY

  11. Bill Clinton’s former White House political director writes that the Democratic party is in decline. It’s lost nine governorships and 56 House seats and will be at “considerable risk” after Obama leaves office.

    Seems like a shot at President Hillary from out of nowhere.

  12. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013…..ng-jogger/

    This is why you carry.

    1. This is why you provide a pull quote. Not clicking through without that.

      1. If you hover over the link, you get the entire story in the title.

          1. As usual it’s probably because you are too fucking retarded.

      2. I think it’s a link to a jogger mauled to death by a pack of pit bulls. Which means you need to carry big or go home. I’m quite a good shot but I don’t know how I would do against a pack.

        1. The fail in this thread is strong. Obviously the go to comment here involves cops shooting dogs.

          1. That was too easy. I expected it to be used up by the time the squirrels let my post through.

            1. Authorities in rural Los Angeles County were warning people to be on the lookout for four pit bulls suspected of killing a 63-year-old jogger Thursday, and they have seized several dogs in a search for those who may have taken part in the attack.

              Are they invoking the public safety Miranda exception as they question the seized dogs?

              1. Obviously we need more surveillance cameras.

                1. You know where dogs like to hide? Homes. I think the public safety imperative is clear.

                  1. Door to door Federal dog-restraint law compliance audits?

        2. “shoot the lead dog first.”

    2. 4 pit bulls kill a 63 year old female jogger.

    3. Note: They carted off six pits and 2 mixed breeds from a local pot cultivator, but no word on the actual type of dogs involved in the mauling.

  13. Old guy fights off intruder.
    http://boston.cbslocal.com/201…..er-home/2/
    Being Massachusetts, it’s no surprise that the cops recommend against fighting back.

    1. Redefining the term “smokejumper”?

  14. “Listening to socialists talking about employment is like listening to Paris Hilton talking about founding convents”

    http://www.thelocal.es/page/vi…..YzwLKKj2Ag

  15. Man WRONGLY told he had terminal cancer and months to live and quit his job and spent all his cash wins $60k suit

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..-suit.html

    1. Is it Iain Banks? Tell me it’s Iain Banks. But he’d still suck off the socialist NHS.

      1. He died of cancer, so it would be really weird if it was not terminal.

        1. What? No, he’s still in the process of dying last the internet heard.

          You’re thinking of Francisco Franco.

          1. Fuck off slaver. You don’t get to tell me who I was thinking of.

            1. No, that’s fuck off, critic. I get to tell you who you should have been thinking of.

              1. Slave off, critic fucker?

          2. This just in; Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead.

            1. But Zombie Stalin has been spotted moving north through Albania. EU authorities cite “Austerity” as the cause of their inability to thwart this undead menace.

      2. Aw man, I didn’t know about Iain Banks. So Hydrogen Sonata is the last of the Culture novels then? I am having a sad.

        1. I should finish that one. I got kind of bored and forgot about it halfway through.

    2. This was an episode of House, M.D..

      1. They should sue the man and the hospital for ripping off their plot.

  16. 3D printed gun, and it’s being banned by the freest country in the world, makes international news.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..signs.html

      1. Bizarre how government entities are having a difficult time understanding just what the internet is this late in the game. No physical item has passed thier borders. Nothing was smuggled. This is almost the same as a printed set of plans being brought into the country – which would break no laws. Even then the responsible party would be the person in the end country who did the download.

        1. This is almost the same as a printed set of plans being brought into the country

          You are ill-informed. There are draconian penalties for violations of export compliance laws for technical data.

          1. You might note that neither the article nor I said anythign about exports. The issue is imports to the UK.

      2. Anti-government ramblings were probably found on his Facebook page, too.

    1. Horses running free
      Spring, time of pollination
      Barn door closing now

      1. Your verses ring true
        Summer of our discontent
        Download this fed scum

        1. Oooh Haiku time…..!

          Here’s one I used on another site.


          His inner friends

          Their voices never silent

          Meds ineffective

        2. Budget discipline
          What the heck is that my friends
          Spend, borrow and print

    2. In response, New York Senator Chuck Schumer announced that he plans to introduce legislation that will ban the weapons because they can pass through metal detectors at airports and court houses without being picked up.

      ‘We’re facing a situation where anyone – a felon, a terrorist – can open a gun factory in their garage and the weapons they make will be undetectable. It’s stomach-churning,’ he said.

      Oh look, Titties wants to curb your rights to protect you from the scary.

      1. Also, why should a felon (who has been presumably rehabilitated and released back into society) not be allowed to own a gun?

  17. Coolant leak on the International Space Station.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..ening.html

    1. I read that in Spaceflight Now this morning. Sounds like a slow leak that spiked in rate yesterday enough to warrant a rapid response. That’s uncommon enough to make it a serious concern, although the rest of the power buses have enough to run the station on their own at the moment.

    2. On Star Trek, a coolant leak was very bad.

      1. It tended to be accompanied by a bunch of dry ice sublimating

        Also, any excuse to post a video of the Geordi roll

  18. Spray bottles work on big cats as well.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..-herd.html

  19. Dining etiquette to impress Mom

    Sorry, you slobs — it’s a *sequential* quiz.

    1. I am apparently a monster.

      1. Just try to perform the bread plate mnemonic without “Mabel, Mable!”

        1. I would be a bit pissed off if I told a kid to us my first name and his response was “I’ll have to ask my dad”.

          1. When I was a kid, we called adults “Mister John” and “Miss Jane”.

            Of course, they were probably all closet child molesters.

            1. I was trying to come up with a reason why you should ask your parent for permission to call an adult by their first name (when the adult has said that’s what they wish you would do). The only thing I could come up with is to let the paranoid parent know the person is possibly trying to get the kid comfortable with them in order to molest them later.

              1. That was the only one I got wrong…boy am I cultured or what?

                And I imagine the reason for that one is to let the parent know the kid isn’t just being rude.

                As a side note, I have yet to be called Mr. Bandit. 1: I am mostly around very young kids 2: when I AM around kids 3: and I think the current generation has no concept of etiquette (don’t forget, I am the optimist here and usually don’t paint with broad brushes but the shit they do now would get me beaten when I was young)

              2. I was raised to call all non-family adults Mr./Mrs. Last Name. It was an issue of politeness. If an adult said otherwise it was probably ok but I may very well have been afraid of getting in trouble if I didn’t ask my parents first. Had nothing to do with paranoia. It’s the same reason I have a trouble stopping using Mam and Sir when people ask because my mother might find out or something.

                1. So your mother would rather you ignore someone’s preferences?

  20. Arwa al-Hujaili became Saudi Arabia’s first female lawyer.

    Can a Saudi version of Allie McBeal be far behind?

    1. Now that would be a great TV show.

      1. Series finale is when she is beheaded by the Virtue and Vice goon squad?

        1. That would be the pilot episode.

          1. Same thing.

    2. Frankly, they won’t be ready to join the Free World until they have their own Very Special Episode of Murphy Brown.

    3. “Single female lawyer, havin’ lots of sex…”

  21. http://www.nationalreview.com/…..ommon-good

    The idea that there is a “common good” is the problem.

    1. It is not so much the idea that there is a common good. It is that we can know the common good to such certainty that we can force it on everyone from the top down that is the problem.

      There is nothing wrong with you or I or anyone else voluntarily choosing to work with others for what you feel is a common good or goal. Where we go off rails is the idea that your common good must be the same as my common good.

      1. Where we go off rails is the idea that your common good must be the same as my common good.

        I think the definition of “common good” pretty much requires it to be the same for you and me, or it isnt “common”.

        You are right that even if there is a common good, we cant know it for certainty. but its also possible that it doesnt exist at all.

        1. If we can’t know it or only God knows it, then it effectively doesn’t exist. And searching for it and mistakenly thinking you have found it is what produces really the worst evil in the world.

          The most monstrous acts of evil are always, if they are not done by a group of people and not just done out of one person’s malice or perversion, committed for the most noble of ends. The more noble the end, the more extreme and evil the means people will justify to themselves.

          1. You’re both responding to the poisoned environment created by progs.

            I’m going to go out on limb and say that you would both agree that a low level of infectious diseases is a common good ( which does not in anyway imply how to achieve that good).

            1. The market is a common good. Freedom is a common good. But those are very general things. I suppose where we go off the rails is the idea that we can dictate every individual outcome. But it is a slippery slope. Sure, stopping disease is good. But is killing everyone who has a disease and burning their bodies justified in stopping it?

              1. The market is a mechanism, not a good. And freedom is a right, not a good. Stopping disease is not done to promote a common good, but to eradicate a threat to liberty (life). The degree to which one (or society) acts, and is justified in acting, should be in proportion to that threat.

              2. Of course not. But that’s a policy level discussion. Common goods are the specific goals and the policies are how to acheive those goals. Low levels of violent crime is a public good, it’s a goal. How to achieve that could involve, more or less prisons, family law, gun ownership etc.

                The progressives have poisoned the concept to public goods by insisting that their preferred policies are public goods as in fewer guns are a public good.

              3. Well, then no one would die from the diseases and our disease mortality rate would be zero!

                Careful what you suggest, someone might just implement it.

      2. Where we go off rails is the idea that your common good must be the same as my common good.

        Nah, we’ve gone off the rails by extending the concept of the common good from a few very specific things; like low levels of violent crime and infectious disease to mean anything that I (prog) want

        1. Exactly. If you ask the average nonpolitical guy what the common good is, he’d probably say roads and schools and police and firefighters.

          A progtard thinks that every single government program and worker is the Atlas supporting the common good.

  22. What is it with geniuses who are politically retarded? Last week Richard Dawkins’ twitter feed was full of anti-gun derp, today he’s on an extended roll arguing that the British House of Lords should be replaced by “functional constituencies.”

    “The Noble Lord the Member for the Royal College of Bloggers” “The National Guild of Youtubers” “The National Twitter Federation”

    Yes, providing special interests with a permanent legislative seat is clearly the way to improve our politics. Naturally, US fans think this is a great idea over here, as well. I wonder what the Honorable Cotton Gin IP lobbyist thinks of abortion law?

    1. Geniuses think that their genius in their field makes them experts on others.

      1. Incidentally, your “genius” with game isn’t carrying over into link spamming the AM links.

        1. It’s a links thread. I provide links. You don’t like it, get reasonable and block me.

          I have a government job for another two weeks. I am going to spend it on Reason.

          1. You only provide links. Everyone else provides a useful pull quote so that one can gauge whether it’s of interest. Are you too lazy or just incapable of quick reading and grasping the point?

            1. Try hovering over the link – that will clue you in. I mean, they are Fox News – the links are not given subtle titles.

              1. Forget it, dude’s super butthurt this morning.

                Did you get transferred to Thule or something? Or worse?

                1. Did you get transferred to Thule or something? Or worse?

                  My comments were rated a second grade reading level.

              2. All I’m asking for is the level of effort and professionalism Reason puts into the 24/7 links. If they can spend five seconds ripping someone off, why can’t he?

                1. Look, I save my effort and professionalism for flirting with the coeds.

          2. If you’re constantly on Reason, you may have your job for *less* than two weeks.

            Oh, it’s a *government* job — never mind.

            1. Budget stuff. See in VA, the government actually lives within its means. So I was brought on as a temp gig while they streamlined and consolidated functions.

          3. I have a government job for another two weeks. I am going to spend it on Reason.

            Do we work together by any chance?

      2. ^This^

        I’m always amazed when I sit around historians who are specialists in, say, the French Revolution, who then talk about modern politics as if their academic status confers some expertise.

        Similarly, I was listening to a science podcast the other day with a palentologist (sp?) who was attacking creationists. Part of his argument was that, although some creationists held PhDs, they were not in evolution related fields. Fair enough. Then he & the host proceeded to spend 20 minutes decrying the use of fossil fuels citing both Jon Stewart and “Who Killed the Electric Car.” Apparently his training in palentology & the host’s training in nothing qualified them to speak on energy policy.

        1. What is sad is to see science hitch itself to one political team. That paleontologist is bundling the science of evolution with a bunch of other value judgements and political positions that have nothing to do with science or evolution. It is a terrible slight of hand they are doing. They are taking something valid, evolution, and bundling it with all of their other prejudices and ideology to try to convince people that to believe in evolution is to believe in all of this other stuff. You can’t just believe in evolution. No you have to believe in social justice and global warming and the rest as a consequence. I don’t think that is a very good idea if your goal is to convince people of evolution.

        2. This person wouldn’t happen to be Donald Prothero, would it?

          1. Bingo.

        3. You could argue the backstabbing of the French Revolution corresponds to contemporary politics.

          1. If only we had their permanance of removal for those cast down.

      3. Idiots also think that their genius in their field makes them experts on others.

    2. Richard Dawkins ?@RichardDawkins 4 May
      From the web page (now taken down) of the company that markets “My First Rifle”. 2nd Amendment: Well ordered militia. pic.twitter.com/8mXAiUGn7j

      Funny, that looks to me like precisely what a well-ordered militiaman would start out as.

      1. Please–was there ever any doubt that Dawkins is nothing more than a tunnel-visioned aspie?

  23. Everyone should be aware of a development from last night’s PM Links. Instead of ad hominems, we will be responding to all comments that annoy us with a grade level required to read it. We’ve got to get our commenting score up! Use as many polysyllabic words and complex sentence constructions as you can, regardless of relevance to the actual content of your discussion.

    1. I concur (of course), but suggest that your missive is erroneous in suggesting that the proposed course of action need replace the nea-constant stream of ad hominem-laced repartee to which the blog readers have become accustomed. It may be indicative of a limited cognitive capacity that you would feel the options as thus phrased are mutually exclusive, for which you are to be alternately pitied and reviled.

      1. Dammit, *near-constant

      2. I would be pleased to commend you for that eloquent treatise, which achieved an equivalent grade level rating of 18.39 according to the aforementioned (albeit implicitly) electronic evaluation system, thus elevating the collective score of the commetariat of this website (which we have chosen to frequent for our leisure and discussion needs) in comparison to the rest of the interconnected network of electronic news source.

        1. 21 years of “formal education” needed to understand what you just wrote? That implies that the average Ph.D. would fail to fully comprehend your comment on the first reading. Methinks they need to review their algorithm somewhat.

    2. Your comment scored a 12.02. This comment scored a 44.08:

      supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious.

      1. I wish to amend Auric’s proposal above to include the requirement that those convicted of Mocking The System shall be summarily banhammered to Wherever Lucy Went.

        1. Verily.

        2. Don’t throw me in the briar patch!

      2. OTOH – A constant force, acting on a particle of mass m, will produce a constant acceleration a. Let us choose the x-axis to be in the common direction of F and a. What is the work done by this force on the particle in causing a displacement x? We have, for constant acceleration, the relations a = ( V – v ) / t and x = ? ( V + v ) t. Here v is the particle’s speed at t = 0 and V is its speed at time t. The the work done is W = F x = m a x = m ( ( V – v ) / t ) ( ? ( V + v ) ) t = ? m V? – ? m v?. We call one-half the product of the mass of a body and the square of its speed the kinetic energy of the body. If we represent kinetic energy by the symbol K, then K = ? m v?. We may then state the above equation in this way: The work done by the resultant force acting on a particle is equal to the change in the kinetic energy of the particle.

    3. Wouldn’t the higher grade level required indicate poor writing? This would give Orwell a conniption fit.

  24. The stock market will hit 20k and even 30k.

    That doesnt mean Krugman isnt wrong though.

    Note that I give no time span for my prediction, nor am I predicting it in constant dollars.

    1. I have some futures contracts I would like to sell you.

    2. I noticed you also didn’t say which stock market. Clever girl.

    3. There are no constant dollars.

  25. Ventura County in California passed an “urgency ordinance” requiring condoms in porn.

    Ventura County is about to score, and its nervously standing in the drug store checkout line.

  26. The Ke$ha creature is at it again.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs…..video.html

  27. The Minnesota House has approved a bill legalizing gay marriage.

    Like atheists in a foxhole, there are no single people in a blizzard. No homo.

  28. China is not happy with a US military report stating the obvious.

    1. Say, I think Japan is ready to join the nuclear club, don’t you?

      1. So *that’s* why they’re talking to the Norks!

  29. http://www.nationaljournal.com…..n-20130509

    Even National Journal now admitted Bengazi may be a problem for Obama and Clinton. The Hicks guy getting demoted should be a bigger issue than it is. Demoting and destroying career civil servants for the sin of being honest about politically embarrassing things is kind of a big deal.

    1. Didn’t the media go berserk a decade ago when they falsely reported that Bush had done something similar at DoJ?

      It’s hard for me to care too much about either case because I think the president should be able to fire anyone in the bureaucracy at will.

      1. Bush didn’t even demote anyone. They just hired attorneys at DOJ who fit their views of the law. The media had a pearl clutching fit over the AG actually wanting to hire attorneys who would follow his orders and agreed with his philosophy on the law.

        And the problem with letting the President of either party just hammer the civil service for political reasons is that you end any hope of ever having any transparency or honest government. If the government fucks up or does something illegal, who is going to tell? The politicals certainly won’t. And if you put the bureaucracy at the mercy of the politicals, they won’t either.

        1. To be sure, if I were named AG, I’d fire everyone and bring in proven libertarians. That’s not for “ideological purity” but for ensuring my anti-government commands are carried out.

          1. You mean you wouldn’t hire a crazy feminist or black nationalist to run the civil rights section? What a partisan hack you are Pro.

            1. Why choose, I’m sure you can find a crazy feminist black nationalist on the progjob market. I hear you get bonus points if they turn out to not themselves be a black woman.

              1. Transrace, cismale.

          2. …I’d fire everyone and bring in proven libertarians…ensuring my anti-government commands are carried out.

            Here’s to hoping that you meant that to be ironic.

        2. And the problem with letting the President of either party just hammer the civil service for political reasons is that you end any hope of ever having any transparency or honest government.

          Maybe, but we certainly don’t have a transparent or hones government with civil service protections and we also have an unaccountable permanent bureaucracy.

          At least a spoils system has a degree of accountability that has been lacking for a long time now.

          And as a bonus that type of system erodes blind faith in government.

          1. Maybe, but we certainly don’t have a transparent or hones government with civil service protections and we also have an unaccountable permanent bureaucracy.

            That is only a big deal because we expect so much out of the government and have it doing so many things. When Chester Arthur signed the civil service act, we had a much smaller government. And it didn’t matter as much if it was accountable as long as there was elected civilian control. Transparency and honesty were more important than total accountability. We just need a smaller government.

            And lastly, do you really think hiring all political hacks and idiot sons every four years would make things any more accountable or efficient? Have you met a political appointee? Most of them are idiot sons and daughters of big donors. No one with a real job can afford to take off for four years to work in Washington. So they instead use their influence to get their kids jobs and out of the house and not screwing up the family business. More of them would not help.

            1. As a government employee I can attest to the truth of that. Most of the time you have to find the best way to fool the appointee into thinking they’re doing something when really they’ve just been boxed in a playpen where they can’t break shit.

              1. As a military guy sitting next to many long term civil servants, there are a good number of long time, ‘tenured’ slugs that are treated the same way, or have jockeyed the system so that they can sit and sleep at their desk.

                So neither solution is anywhere near optimal.

            2. And lastly, do you really think hiring all political hacks and idiot sons every four years would make things any more accountable or efficient?

              Inefficiency is a plus and anyway I doubt that the government could replace all 2 million federal employees everytime a new president was elected. But the power to fire at will would give the president control of the bureaucracy. And yes that would increase political accountability.

              Civil service protections seem like a great idea, but the fact that they’ve coincided with the explosive growth of government and the lack of accountability for government makes we think that they’re a large part of the problem.

              1. I doubt that the government could replace all 2 million federal employees everytime a new president was elected

                You are very naive. They could and would replace them in a heart beat. You don’t think Congress wouldn’t gladly sell those jobs?

                And if inefficiency is a plus, then what is your bitch with civil service? And letting the politicals fire them on a whim only creates accountability if you assume the politicals will ever fire anyone for the right reasons. The that I can only say, are you kidding me? The politicals would hire and fire for one reason, loyalty to the cause and the connections of the person hired. That is it. You really are naive if you think they would hire or fire anyone based on merit.

                1. Ok you convinced me.

                  1. Efficiency at what? Personally, I would rather have half the people at half the government agencies be incompetent shitweasels spending their time becoming more efficient at downloading porn, huffing Wite-Out and generally fucking off than have them efficiently churning out and enforcing more regulations. I say we need far more political hacks appointed to government jobs and far fewer productive government employees.

                2. C’mon John, you work for the government. Everytime a contracting firm loses their bid for government cheese, a new firm comes in and hires 90% of the same people.

                  “hey, at least they’re experienced!”

                  Typically, the experience revolves around how well they can get more cheese.

                  The only fix is to make and hold civil servants accountable in a fair manner. If you can figure out how, you can write yourself a huge contract for your own hunk of cheese.

                  1. C’mon John, you work for the government.

                    Which is why he holds such an illogical position on civil service protection. It’s in his personal interest not to change anything.

                3. The politicals would hire and fire for one reason, loyalty to the cause and the connections of the person hired.

                  You’er kinda naiive. That is exactly the system we have today. The cause one needs to be loyal to is “statism and cushy jobs until the day I retire.”

                  You really have to be fucked up to think there is a significant difference between Bush and Obama. Now, there probably IS a significant difference between Rand Paul and those two assholes. And if by any change Rand Paul could win the executive branch, you want to handicap/retard him with a bunch of statists?

                  The reason nothing ever changes is BECUASE of civil service protection.

            3. And lastly, do you really think hiring all political hacks and idiot sons every four years would make things any more accountable or efficient?

              Nope. And I’d prefer inefficiency as much as possible.

              The benefit of mass firings every four years is two-fold: 1) no chance of a permanent power-base, and 2) prevents careerists from even seeking the positions in the first place.

              You’re also ignoring the fact that the grant system essentially has been the spot where the short-term political hacks gets their cushy jobs anyway. So we already have the worst of both worlds.

        3. you end any hope of ever having any transparency or honest government.

          WTF? Do you have any study showing career bureaucrats are more honest and transparent than short-termers?

          From my experience, the longer-term bureaucrat develops such a power base that they can get away with just about anything. At least the short-termers will be open and honest about how the previous short-termer was fucking up.

    2. Demoting and destroying career civil servants for the sin of being honest about politically embarrassing things is kind of a big deal.

      Destroying people for being politically embarrassing is a time honored tradition basically as old as the republic. The scandal is how bleeding obvious and clumsy they were about it. I demand a higher level of competence in corruption from my civil masters.

      1. Destroying other political players is. The bureaucracy is supposed to be off limits. This is one of the things Nixon got in trouble for.

        1. C’mon, John, you know that “supposed to be” and “what really happens” are two entirely different things. What gets you in trouble is not following the proper form of punishing your smaller enemies. It’s an ever evolving set of unwritten rules, but it’s naive to say that bureaucrats are off limits.

          1. Your are supposed to send them to Europe doing a cushy but do nothing job or give them a promotion and a big office but no real job or anyone who reports to them. You are not suppose to demote them or try to fire them. You buy them off and let them play golf every day for not talking. You don’t try to destroy them. That just gives them nothing to lose by talking and makes it obvious what you are doing.

            But Obama and his people are thugs. They only know one way to do things and it does not involve much thought or subtlety beyond “get that bastard”.

      2. We miss so much corruption, that’s either hidden completely or not revealed sufficiently to act on. Therefore, when we actually catch it, we should crush everyone involved. Hold the idiots to higher standards, not lower ones.

        1. We miss so much corruption, that’s either hidden completely or not revealed

          My stepmother is a high(ish) level DoD bureaucrat. The reality is probably worse than the imagination. Her stories about Rumsfeld and the run up to the Iraq were particularly grotesque. Talk about punishing the little people, that guy would totally fuck people for dissenting from the Proper Truth.

          1. He was an asshole. Of course some of the people he fucked were just as bad. The whining the generals did about how mean he was to them was particularly galling. Most of those generals were total assholes themselves who had ruined any number of junior officers’ careers for the sin of not towing the company lion. They were just shocked to be informed that they had a boss too.

            1. Most of those generals were total assholes themselves

              Actually my comment was about civilian employees, particularly the intel gathering sort. There were WMDs, there had always been WMDs, and there was no saying otherwise in any substantive voice, for example. Thinking about how many people, some of them my friends, died in Iraq partially because that asshole couldn’t tolerate dissenting opinions makes my fucking blood boil.

              1. I was involved in that too. And the WMD intel was not where they fucked up. That is a total myth. Everyone thought they had WMDs. He had used them just 15 years before and probably used some of them in the first gulf war.

                Where they fucked up was the idea that there would be any sort of civil society or government left in Iraq once Saddam was gone. They actually thought they could cut off the head and put in a new head and go home. It was profoundly stupid and naive. The entire Iraqi government and civil society was based on terror. Once the threat of terror was removed, the whole thing clasped. Every civil servant stayed home from work or ran for their lives. The mob burned down every government building in revenge. There was nothing left. All government institutions had to be rebuilt from the ground up. And they were totally unprepared to do that because they totally misunderstood the nature of Iraqi society and government.

                The WMD thing is a total red herring. Did some people not think he had them? Sure. But what the fuck did they know? Really no more than anyone else. In hindsight they were right. But so what? They just as easily could have been wrong. It is not like the answer was obvious. It wasn’t.

                1. Everyone thought they had WMDs

                  Not everyone, John, and some people got crushed for suggesting it too strongly.

                  Where they fucked up was the idea that there would be any sort of civil society or government left in Iraq once Saddam was gone.

                  Totally agree, and as a bonus we had the example of the former Yugoslavia not too long before to draw on. 3 different groups that hate each other in one “country” held together by a dictator sound fucking familiar? Inexcusable.

                  Did some people not think he had them? Sure. But what the fuck did they know?

                  Um, reality? Seriously, man, I’m not attacking people that suggested WMDs, but the environment that suppressed (viciously at times) an open discussion about what turned out to be the truth.

                  1. Um, reality? Seriously, man, I’m not attacking people that suggested WMDs, but the environment that suppressed (viciously at times) an open discussion about what turned out to be the truth.

                    I am saying given what was known at the time, there was no compelling reason to believe them versus the vast majority of intel people who thought differently. Just because they turned out to be right doesn’t mean the decision was the result of bad faith or erroneous given what was known at the time.

                    As far as them being “surpassed”. Well yes, when your view loses in the organization, that organization is no longer interested in listening to you. Had the decision gone the other way, those who thought there was WMDs would be claiming they were suppressed. What is suppression is also known as making a decision.

                    1. I am saying given what was known at the time, there was no compelling reason to believe them versus the vast majority of intel people who thought differently.

                      Facts aren’t determined by putting thoughts up for a vote.

          2. Yes, it’s important to stress that corruption, abuse of power, and, above all, lies, are entirely bipartisan.

  30. Your Friday Reason Challenge:

    Get through this Bob Burnett op ed without ripping a phone book in half.

    1. My daily “reason Challenge” is getting through the day without breaking my phone due to the fucking Squirrels.

    2. Republicans have no sympathy for the unemployed. Republican presidential candidate, Herman Cain, told the Wall Street Journal, “If you don’t have a job and you’re not rich, blame yourself.”

      RACIST!

      *** rips white pages in half ***

    3. I barely got past the “Leading progressives value Opednews. Please show that you do too.” lightbox. Then I got far enough to deduce that he doesn’t know what U6 means. Then I stopped and failed the challenge.

      1. I have a feeling Opednews will be a repeat offender in the Friday Reason Challenge.

  31. I’m baaaaack; I just moved from Seattle back to the Old Dominion for my jerb. I know, I primarily lurk, but it’s good to be back reading here…

    Is anyone else thrilled to death the Habs were booted out last night???

    1. The downside is that one of those two teams had to advance.

      1. I wonder what the earliest that all Canadian teams were out of the playoffs is.

        1. You don’t mean “Canadian teams.” You mean Canadian teams based in Canada, right?

          1. Yes, teams whose owners/fans/stadiums are Canadian. Not players.

            1. Okay, that clears things up for me. I remember quite well when Tampa’s Canadian players won a Stanley Cup. Good times.

              1. I remember quite well when Boston’s Canadian players won a Stanley Cup thanks to their American goalie.

                1. The Tea Party maniac who killed children or something? I remember him. Can’t imagine how the Canadians allowed him to play.

                  1. A couple of sports radio hosts around her hate him now that he made a couple of political comments on Facebook that were conservative and decided to take a year off. Which is kind of funny because it was actually better for the team that he “took a year off” instead of retiring.

                    1. He’s a damned good keeper. Without him, the Lightning would’ve gone to the finals.

    2. The only Montreal team that I didn’t want to lose every game was the Expos.

    3. I kind of hope Toronto advances because of all the butthurt over the guy with the “Toronto Stronger” poster.

      1. I hadn’t even heard that one. Classic.

    4. I’d be fine with it if PK Subban could transfer to Ottawa until they’re eliminated. Hockey without him is a much duller sport.

      At least the Wild are out. Fuck you, Zach, can’t wait for your amnesty buyout.

  32. Nothing, nothing, nothing, then BAM! 110 Comments. This sucks.

    1. Commenting all the way down here is useless. You’re basically a second class commenter at this point.

      1. You’re basically a second class commenter at this point.

        Well look at that name. Of course he’s gonna be second class with a name like that. It’s like having a handle of ‘joe’.

        1. Well, no one with a four letter handle gets any respect around here, so I admire his attempt to distinguish himself through minimalism.

          1. No respect at all!

            *** straightens tie ***

            1. The fourth letter gets up up to 1.98th class. A second word is where you really see a return on your keystroke investment.

              1. This type of snobbery is unacceptable.

                /outrage

                Spaces have no place in internet handles.

                1. When you add an accent aigu THEN you have made it.

        2. first our prose style gets marked, now our handles?

          TOO MUCH PRESSURE!

          1. Relax, you’re fine. You’ve got a real go-getter type of handle. You’ve got upper-middle thread written all over you.

        3. I have lost face.

          1. Nic Cage?

          2. You could at least go with the obvious Monty Python joke!

            1. Obvious jokes are less funny than the unexpected. I applaud efforts to find uncommon material.

              1. That’s why I said “at least”. It’s still better than no joke at all!

      2. We need a government program to uplift the bottom-of-the-thread comments to relevance.

        1. We can call it the Fist Penaltax.

          1. Once it gets out of committee it’ll be for the benefit of bottom feeders, not bottom-of-the-thread commentors, and you know who’ll benefit from that fuck up.

        2. Federal subsidization of bottom-of-the-thread commentators would only encourage mass illegal immigration into the H&R commenting boards.

          1. Commenter registration will lead to confiscation. It’s happened every time it’s been done!

            1. Isn’t commenter confiscation just banning? Or does Reason have SWAT teams abduct the commenter?

              1. Officially it’s the first, which we’ve all seen happened. But maybe the second answers the question of what happened to R C Dean.

                1. yeah where is RC? We need a J sub check in.

              2. Mention sheep, fucking and a particular lawyer and you will find out.

                Or ask Warty

        3. Or we could just ban Fist.

      1. NO LAUGHING NO LAUGHING!
        I can make you all go away! Any time I want to!

        1. You want to get rid of me?

          Now I’m sad.

  33. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/po…..eferences/

    Jay Carney lied about Bengazi. Let me get my shocked face. At this point, it should be news when he tells the truth about something.

    1. The guy is insufferable.

      Plus, shouldn’t he be in middle school?
      /ad hominem

      1. He was such a fool to take that job. He is going to become the tar baby for all of Obama’s sleeze. He thinks he is going to leave the administration in four years and go back to some comfy job in the media. I think he is going to have a rude surprise. The media will never turn on Obama. But at the end of 8 years they are going to feel a bit dirty for having prostituted themselves so badly for so long. That doesn’t mean they will have any kind of moment of honesty or anything. But it does mean they are not going to really want to be reminded of how disgusting they were and how sleazy and dishonest the Obama administration actually was. And I think Carney has turned himself into one big reminder of all that and no one is going to want him around. Couldn’t happen to a more deserving guy.

    2. Lying implies knowingly telling a falsehood. Carney knows nothing, he just goes out there and randomly babbles in a pro-administration way. He can’t lie.

  34. http://www.newstatesman.com/br…..applaud-it

    “One of the victims of Stuart Hall, who had a long record of assaulting teenage girls, told ITN how Hall attacked her at the hotel where she worked: “He grabbed hold of me and he started kissing me and then he tried to force himself on me. I struggled, I tried to push him away, and it was only the fact that there was someone walking along the corridor . . . that he stopped and I managed to get away.” Some people are asking, with an air of annoyance, as if they were tired of all the fuss: how many more revelations will there be?”

    Unless they have an answer to the biological superiority of men over women, not much can be done about rape culture. As long as a group has power over another, there will be those on the margins who exploit it. This is true even among women. How many stories have we seen recently of female teachers exploiting young male’s in the classroom? Obviously it doesn’t balance with the number of times male’s do it, but these string of femal teacher-male student relation stories reveals a human predisposition to exerting power for sexual ends and not just a male one.

    1. Absolutely. That is why the revelations about the Catholic Church were not surprising. The only surprising thing was that some people managed to convince themselves that that sort of thing was unique to the Catholic Church rather than endemic in pretty much every hierarchical institution.

      1. People wielding spiritual/temporal authority for illegitimate ends?

        Say it ain’t so!

  35. iPencil

    Complex though it is, the iPhone is also a remarkably egalitarian device: The president of the United States uses one, as does the young Bengali immigrant who sold me my coffee this morning. But you can bet that her children do not attend schools as good as those that instruct the Obama daughters. The reason for that is politics: not liberal politics, not conservative politics, not bad politics, but politics per se.

    1. I thought Obama used a Blackberry because the iPhone couldn’t at the time be certified for secure data?

      1. Obama is cool and hip and liberal, therefore he obviously uses an iPhone despite any evidence to the contrary.

    2. ! Door to door Federal dog-restraint law compliance audits?

      1. What?!?!? Oh, Squirrels, you cray-cray!

  36. http://espn.go.com/olympics/sa…..t-capsizes

    Anyone else see that kick ass youtube video of the America’s cup catamaran doing about 60 miles an hour in San Fransisco Bay? Apparently, it is a bit more dangerous than it looks.

    1. So, so es this mean that they will finally put the Simpsons out of it’s misery?

    2. Apparently, it is a bit more dangerous than it looks.

      Someone got his ticket to eternity punched just yesterday during practice.

  37. Commenting all the way down here is useless.

    Sez you.

    1. Unthreaded comments are useless. I know it’s your trademark, but still.

      1. Keep fighting the good fight Brooksie!

    2. It’s comments all the way down?

      1. They’re hanging from the bottom of the article, so yes, yes it is.

  38. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/po…..eferences/

    The Obama Administration had no time to do anything to save the people in Bengazi or track down the people who did it. They only had time for the important things, like revising the talking points 12 different times. God these people are gross.

    1. This is the consequence of always being in campaign mode and being obsessed with public image–people like this never take the time to actually consider the situation and the long-term ramifications of their actions.

      Instead of saying right off the bat, “We don’t have all the details and won’t speculate on the situation until as many of the facts are in as possible. But we’re shocked and saddened by the deaths of these Americans and will do what we can to figure out what happened,” they immediately looked for something to cast blame on, like any campaign manager would do.

      Only an administration coddled by the media for so long could have acted this way.

    1. And won’t it be easy for other smart and so inclined people to develop their own 3d printed weapon design?

      1. One thing that’s been going through my head for the past few days: these people who wish all guns could be magicked away, do they not realize how astoundingly lethal a sword is? Do they not realize that a guy who’s rich enough to get a good sword and train with it for 10 years is pretty much invincible in a world without guns?

        1. Our goal should be a world without swords.

        2. No they don’t. They have no idea about history. They think Robin Hood was a documentary. The lack of guns is why the medieval world could maintain feudalism. What chance would a bunch of untrained peasants with pitchforks and clubs have against armored, trained, and mounted knights? None. When there was the occasional revolt, they just slaughtered them. But introduce firearms into that equation and everything changes.

          1. They think Robin Hood was a documentary.

            They also think that Robin Hood stole from rich capitalist corporations and gave the money back to the poor non-union workers.

            1. God I hate how twisted people make that story.

            2. I always point out that Robin Hood was the ultimate libertarian–he built a community in Sherwood Forest that was completely unaccountable to the crown and in constant rebellion against government authority, paid no taxes, and redistributed the tax revenue the crown took back to the people who paid it in the first place.

              1. Nice.

          2. Ban Crossbows and Arbalests, too, just to be on the safe side.

            1. In the future, all wars will be fought with black-market Jarts.

          3. One 5-gram hunk of lead and a few hours training can outdo 200 pounds of steel and a few years of training.

          4. In fairness, the longbow and pungi stakes were pretty effective against mounted knights. But longbows took 3-5 years of training as well.

            1. The longbow took lots of training. That is why they stopped using it in favor of muskets. The longbow is a much more deadly and efficient weapon than an early musket. But the musket is so much easier to learn how to use.

              And stakes and pikes are only effective if you have a disciplined trained force. It takes a lot of discipline to stand there with a pike in the face of a charge. Not something a mob of civilians is likely to do.

              1. Oh, yeah. Being on the first rank of the Tercio took balls.

              2. Not to mention that Europe was running out of mature yew stands, making the price of longbows steadily increase.

        3. This is why we need blade control. Only chefs and cops should be permitted access to instruments whose only purpose is tearing flesh.

        4. In a world without guns, the police will still have guns.

        5. Stuff swords, hands can be pretty lethal too. One reason I’m pro-gun is that they even the odds when you’re faced with someone who can physically overpower you

          But I do like how you have been getting all Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon for a few days

          1. One reason I’m pro-gun is that they even the odds when you’re faced with someone who can physically overpower you

            “Women don’t need guns. They just need a big, strong man to protect them.”

            I wonder how the progtards feel about that statement.

          2. Yes. There are some very big and very dangerous people out there. In a world without guns, you are at their mercy.

          3. That, too. I weigh 250 pounds, I can deadlift 600 pounds, and I train grappling a few hours a week. Just try to stop me from doing anything, you know?

            1. Well, I would say you cheat when you put people in the 7 tentacle lock, but that might just be me.

              1. They specifically request that!

            2. Train grappling?

              Is that a new euphemism for sexual assault? or masturbation?

            3. You and Dunphy should have a strongman contest.

        6. The firearm represents the democratization of violence, which, prior to it, hand resided largely in the hands of the aristocracy.

        7. You don’t need to be rich to obtain a decent longsword. I have heard and read nothing but good things about these ones, and it would only set you back about $250.

          http://www.iloveswords.com/ME606_swords.html

      2. Yes, there’s really no point in banning this particular 3D model: the design is overly complex, clearly indicating it was done simply to prove a point. In terms of producing a functional weapon, you’d have to prefer the use of simple rubber bands over printed plastic spiral springs (I’m assuming that’s how it works, just judging from the pictured floating around the net).

    2. All weapons should be Nerf weapons.

  39. Sinners repent!

    For the rest of the world, capitalism is not working: A billion live on less than two dollars a day. With global population exploding to 10 billion by 2050, that inequality gap will grow, fueling revolutions, wars, adding more billionaires and more folks surviving on two bucks a day.

    Over the years we’ve explored the reasons capitalism blindly continues on its self-destructive path. Recently we found someone who brilliantly explains why free-market capitalism is destined to destroy the world, absent a historic paradigm shift: That is Harvard philosopher Michael Sandel, author of the new best-seller, “What Money Can’t Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets,” and his earlier classic, “Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do?”

    1. What is so bad about inequality in and of itself? If the billion living on less than 2 dollars today get more by 2050, why is it bad if others get more too?

      1. Auric Demonocles| 5.10.13 @ 10:33AM |#
        …”If the billion living on less than 2 dollars today get more by 2050, why is it bad if others get more too?”

        What the idiot leaves out is that the billion living on $2 *were* living on $0.50 until the collapse of communism and the rise of more liberal economic practices.
        See, oh, mainland China. Does this twit hope they go back to eating tree bark?

    2. I love this sub-header:

      In one generation, market ideology consumed America’s collective spirit

      I didn’t know there was such a thing as a collective spirit, considering people are not Borg. I also did not know there was such a thing as a “market ideology”, considering the market is a human phenomenon arising from trade and contracts and not an idea.

      One gets to learn something new every day.

    3. Okay, I skimmed the article. It says markets == bad. It seems to have conveniently left out the implied: as compared to what?

      1. Everything would awesome if we all sharez!!!11 /commutard

        1. would be*

    4. Funny, I thought that (hundreds of?) millions have been lifted out of poverty over the last decade, exceeding wildest expectations.

    5. Sounds like progress to me. 30 years ago a billion lived on less than 1 dollar a day. These people got 100% raises over 30 years and still bitch and moan.

  40. Fuckin g character limits…

    For more than three decades Sandel’s been explaining how capitalism is undermining America’s moral values and why most people are in denial of the impact. His classes are larger than a thousand although you can take his Harvard “Justice” course online. Sandel recently summarized his ideas about capitalism in the Atlantic. In “What Isn’t for Sale?” he writes:

    “Without being fully aware of the shift, Americans have drifted from having a market economy to becoming a market society … where almost everything is up for sale … a way of life where market values seep into almost every sphere of life and sometimes crowd out or corrode important values, non-market values.”

    Moneygrubbers! I wonder if he spends his spare hours gamboling.

    1. That is one of the oldest critiques around. That language about everything being for sale is literally straight out of the communist manifesto. For over 150 years now Marxists have been warning the unfaithful how all of the professions were going to be corrupted by money and all of our values were going to be for sale.

      Their schtick never changes.

      1. It actually is a lot older than that, having been a meme floating through Christianity off an on for millenia. In fact, the phrase the love of money is the root of all evil is at heart an anti-market sentiment.

        1. “In fact, the phrase the love of money is the root of all evil is at heart an anti-market sentiment.”

          An anti-greed sentiment isn’t an anti-market sentiment.

          “Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth”

          1. An anti-greed sentiment isn’t an anti-market sentiment.

            Sure it is.

            Love of money moves people to do evil things like working on the Sabbath, respecting Homos that buy from them and selling alcohol.

  41. Our goal should be a world without swords.

    Or windows.

    1. Or threads.

    2. Or boards with nails in them.

  42. Battle of Nations Day 2. Medieval touranment style fighting between national teams. USA got our asses kicked in the 21v21 melee yesterday. Hopefully, we’ll do better on the 5v5 and 1v1 levels.

    1. There are people out there who are seriously into medieval marshal arts. They take it very seriously. Their websites are a riot. About half of the information consists of talking about how the training is very intense and not for people who just want to go to a Renaissance Fair.

      1. Actually, there’s a group who have gotten into rediscovering old (pre-small sword) fencing schools. Italian renaissance or Frankish longswords, for example. Apparently, its brutal, like MMA compared to a kung-fu movie. Foot-stabs and just outright wrestling and shit that you’ll never see in the movies or on a fencing carpet because they are ugly but effective.

        1. That is who I am talking about. The old training manuals for such stuff still exist. And up until a few decades ago, no one had read them or thought about them for a very long time. It turns out that medieval fighting looked nothing like the movies. And was as you say incredibly violent and intense. It is like MMA times ten with large sharp objects thrown in to boot.

  43. This woman knows how to handle a pack of dogs.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xB7iz1HTh9U

    1. Fuck. Yeah.

    2. “I’m gonna shoot him in the toodles” would make a sweet t-shirt

      1. With a graphic of her holding the gun amd sming. I like it.

    3. Is it just me, or was anyone else wishing she’d take her finger off the trigger?

  44. The Heritage Foundation may be hiring a public relations firm after fallout from a report tagging the cost of immigration at $6.3 trillion.

    How about hiring analysts who can do math?

    1. How about hiring analysts who can do math?

      Er, they do.

      How about some of their detractors showing us their math?

  45. “IRS apologizes for targeting conservative groups

    “…Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS unit that oversees tax-exempt groups, said organizations that included the words “tea party” or “patriot” in their applications for tax-exempt status were singled out for additional reviews.

    “Lerner said the practice, initiated by low-level workers in Cincinnati, was wrong and she apologized while speaking at a conference in Washington.”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..r=homepage

    1. “Lerner said the practice, initiated by low-level workers in Cincinnati, was wrong and she apologized while speaking at a conference in Washington.”

      And they called me a conspiracy theorist!

      1. low-level workers in Cincinnati

        Sounds redundant.

    2. Oh, the comments…

      scottaarrgMy dog loves me

      Good!

      Michigan Joe

      Pure bull. If you have nothing to hide, then don’t worry about it.

      tharksketlerShow me what you got, Nihilist!

      OK, tea-baggers. Now you finally have something to be legitimately upset about!

      madmattWit personified, famous in France

      What the IRS doing their job more thoroughly than usual?

    3. ?initiated by low-level workers in Cincinnati…

      That is world class “taking full responsibility” there. She should be moving up to Treasury Secretary or Secretary of State eventually.

    4. initiated by low-level workers in Cincinnati

      Proof that increasing government bureaucracy does nothing but give unwarranted power to society’s dregs looking to make everyone else pay for their station in life.

      1. But according to John these people should have their jobs for life.

  46. The White House’s EPA nominee, Gina McCarthy, faces nearly universal Republican opposition,

    Oh, come on, Republicans!! Tell me who can look at that lovely face and not think that the woman has only jobs and a healthy economy in her little bureaucratic mind?

    1. Can the dems find any women who are not scary ugly?

    2. Holy fuck. Is that a woman? That’s worse than Christine Lagarde.

    3. That’s a man baby, yeah!

  47. “leading the White House to complain about Republicans “playing politics,””

    Pot, please meet kettle; I’m sure you guys have a lot in common.

    1. It’s absurdity of the highest level. What’s next, Obama complaining about Chicago politics?

      1. In the campaign, some Obama supporters said Romney was the grandson or great-grandson of a polygamist.

        1. It’s really hard not to make comparisons to doublethink, isn’t it?

    1. NOW we know WHY they will need a PR company to prop up their image:

      1. Using a 51-year time frame

      They possess the Sword of Omens!!

      2. Ignoring economic growth

      What a bunch of pessimistic, grumpy old farts!

      4. Including U.S. citizen children

      You know, because they’re the children of… illegals!. They’re different! They eat tacos during Cinco de Mayo! Yuck!

      6. Ignoring enforcement costs

      What??? No Opportunity Cost analysis? Where did they get their analysts from? The Paul Krugman Skool Of Stupidnomics?

      7. Not analyzing the whole bill

      Cherry-picking? In this country? Can’t happen here!

      1. Wasn’t it SIV who complained that one of the counter-studies only went to 10 years, and said that was fishy? He insinuated that not going out further was a deliberate flaw to hide malfeasance.

  48. A ban on smoking in New York City’s jails has led to the price of a loose cigarette to reach $30.

    Let’s see. When I was in Camden County Jail about 12 years ago, a cigarette was 10 “items” (candy bars). Candy bars were about $1 on the Commissary. So, a single cigarette was about $10. IIRC, there was a $30 or $40 limit on weekly commissary purchases.

    You could get a “rollie”, which was a cigarette rolled in a piece of the wrapper of that toilet paper was packaged in. That was usually 2 or 3 items.

    1. If I were running a prison, I’d be passing out dope to anyone that wanted it. Don’t you want mellow prisoners?

      Oh I forgot, the correction officers union only gets raises if they fail.

  49. “WASHINGTON (AP) ? The Internal Revenue Service is apologizing for inappropriately flagging conservative political groups for additional reviews during the 2012 election to see if they were violating their tax-exempt status.

    Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS unit that oversees tax-exempt groups, said organizations that included the words “tea party” or “patriot” in their applications for tax-exempt status were singled out for additional reviews.”

    http://bigstory.ap.org/article…..ive-groups

    1. Ha! I beat you – and *Reason* – to that story.

    2. I’m having a feeling of deja-vu, all over again…

      https://reason.com/blog/2013/05…..nt_3740317

  50. The Minnesota House has approved a bill legalizing gay marriage.

    Statist advocates of licensing everything under the sun besides printer’s ink engage in the happy dance. Next up: So what is wrong with a little more gun licensing? The pattern continues until the news business is mentioned again, when the cries of “civil liberties” are writ large on every publication.

  51. “JimNolan
    08 May 2013 1:54pm
    Recommend
    12
    @Swan17 –
    Who decides if the parents are doing the job properly and on what criteria?
    If it were down to me, it would be very simple. Are you sending your children to school? No? Then you’re not educating them properly. Send them, or we’ll put them in a place where they will be sent.”

    Looks Airstrip One has another citizen who has learned to love Big Brother.

    1. “JimNolan
      08 May 2013 2:46pm
      Recommend
      10
      @jennyanydots –
      What makes you think that home-schooled children don’t get a “proper education”
      They don’t go to school. Next question?”

    2. “Children are not the parents’ property, and have rights of their own. We, as the gubermint, know precisely what those rights are, and have the authority to enforce them, up to and including removing the children from their parents and putting them into a gubermint indoctrination camp–er, public education environment, where they will actually get an education in the important issues of life, such as how to use a condom to cover fruit, how to obey authority, and how to obey those in authority.”

      1. Actually, that’s almost correct. Children are not parents’ property, but if you’re going to make them wards of the state, go whole hog and make creches a la Brave New World .

  52. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job Ive had. Last Monday I got a new Alfa Romeo from bringing in $7778. I started this 9 months ago and practically straight away started making more than $83 per hour. I work through this link, Mojo50.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.