A.M. Links: Pentagon Confirms Drone Crashed in Somalia, German Finance Minister Warns of Welfare Reforms, Bachmann Won't Seek Re-Election

|

Credit: Office of Congresswoman Michele Bachmann
  • The Pentagon has confirmed that a drone crashed off the coast of Somalia, adding that it was unlikely to have been shot down by Al Qaeda-linked militants.
  • German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble has warned that reforming the European welfare model in favor of something resembling U.S. standards would spark a revolution across Europe, where in some countries more than 50 percent of young people are unemployed.
  • Former Congressman Anthony Weiner is gaining ground in his bid to be New York's next mayor, polling only six points behind frontrunner City Council Speaker Christine Quinn.
  • Apple chief Tim Cook thinks Google Glass will be interesting, but that Google's latest gadget won't appeal to everyone. Speaking at the All Things D Digital Conference Cook said, "Nothing that will convince a kid that's never worn glasses or a band to wear one."

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!

Advertisement

NEXT: NFL's Keyshawn Johnson Chases Justin Bieber Home Over Speeding

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. Former Congressman Anthony Weiner is gaining ground in his bid to be New York’s next mayor…

    Campaign out with your main vein out.

    1. Cuomo Flogs Weiner

      Is that what the kids are calling it now?

      1. Cuomo’s stiff opposition to Weiner won’t stand up to scrutiny of his own messy record.

    2. His wife gets to take in consulting fees while she’s an aide to Hillary Clinton. Fuck that whore.

      1. An article for the evidence-minded: Weiner’s bitch wife poops all over taxpayers:

        Linky

        1. Everyone knows that screwing the boss gets you special treatment. Not only should this come as a shock to nobody, but it’s no big deal. Even if it were, I can point to at least 236 different times this happened under Bush and each time was much, much worse.

          1. Filling in for shreeky this morning?

            1. Someone has to. We need to constantly be reminded of the horrors of GWB lest we be lured by TEAM RED’s siren song.

              1. We don’t need any reminders, there has been very few substantive changes (other than over reaching on O-Care) during the 3rd and 4th term of the Bush administration.

                1. A few weeks back someone on FB posted a photoshoped picture of a white Obama, with the caption “what if he was white” along with a bunch of controversies that would be non-existent if he were so.

                  I commented that he’d be a less evangelical, more statist GWB.

                  The outrage and butthurt were sweet nectar to me.

                  1. The media would have turned on him long ago if he was a white guy.

                    Hell, he never would have been elected in the first place.

                    1. I have a hard time believing that, for no other reason than the power of MY TEAM and the boot licking media.

                      Though the racism has been rampant among the enlightened progs, so who knows.

              2. That’s n danger when you believe that on a fundamental level there is no substantive difference between Team RED and Team BLUE. They’re simply different wings of Team Statist.

          2. BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH!!111!!!eleventy!1

      2. His wife whose mother was the head of the Muslim Brotherhood’s branch for women at a time when they were renown for violence that included the assassination of Sadat gets to take in consulting fees while she’s an aide to Hillary Clinton.

  2. The Pentagon has confirmed that a drone crashed off the coast of Somalia, adding that it was unlikely to have been shot down by Al Qaeda-linked militants.

    It fainted at seeing the lack of roads.

    1. Where it’s going, it doesn’t need roads.

    2. OUR LIBERTARIAN BROTHERS HAVE FLEXED THEIR MUSCLES!

  3. Kettle Resembles Hitler On J.C. Penney Billboard, Passersby Say
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..43248.html

    1. It’s a Rorschach test being conducted by the IRS.

    2. You know who else resembled a kettle?

      1. That’s racist.

      2. Ma and Pa Kettle?

        1. Serves me right looking for a suitable photo. 🙁

        2. I listened to audiobook version of The Egg and I on BBC and it was quite good.

      3. Kool-Aid man?

          1. *crashes through brick wall*

      4. A photo of the billboard, taken by a Reddit user, is pictured alongside a blurred version to better show the resemblance.

        Because blurring out an image makes it come into better focus!

        Redditards–living proof that the bullies didn’t completely finish the job.

        1. Myopia will show you truth.

        2. There’s a McD’s billboard out right now with an egg, cracked open at the top of the billboard. Don’t tell me I’m the only one who (from a distance) thinks that it looks like a giant bra.

        3. The kettle looks like Hitler to me even when not blurred. I showed it to my wife, and she also thought it looks like Hitler.

          1. It’s one of those things like the “is it a goblet, or two faces?” that you may not notice as first, but as soon as someone points it out to you, you can’t stop seeing it.

            I totally get where they were coming from. Though I didn’t see the Nazi salute until I saw the blurred photo.

    3. “I will *never* shop at JCP again!”

    4. Der fuehrer’s face is in mah teh, Polly Prissy Pants!

    5. An obvious example of the pot godwinning the kettle.

      Media bias.

  4. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013…..man-awake/

    I for one welcome our new insect overlords.

    1. Umm. Cut the fucking power?

      1. No can do. Bees built a hive at the switch.

  5. German brewers warn fracking could hurt beer industry
    http://www.nbcnews.com/busines…..6C10077831

    German brewers have warned Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government that any law allowing the controversial drilling technique known as fracking could damage the country’s cherished beer industry.

    The Brauer-Bund beer association is worried that fracking for shale gas, which involves pumping water and chemicals at high pressure into the ground, could pollute water used for brewing and break a 500-year-old industry rule on water purity.

    1. …involves pumping water and chemicals at high pressure *several miles below any usable drinking water aquifer* into the ground…

      The ignorance and/or mendacity displayed by these anti fracking activists is getting really tiresome.

      1. The ignorance and/or mendacity displayed by these anti fracking activists is getting really tiresome.

        But the pressure causes the chemicals to migrate up to the aquifer!

        1. If the well is sealed very badly, possibly. However, *everything* at that depth is at that pressure–that’s why it takes so much pressure to pump it down. If it were really that much of a problem, aquifers would be polluted with oil and natural gas by natural action. The higher pressure required to actually separate the rock is only hels as long as it takes for the liquid to force grains of sand in between the rock in the deep oil/gas bearing strata. Once the pressure is relieved, gas can begin to flow up the well.

          1. If it were really that much of a problem, aquifers would be polluted with oil and natural gas by natural action.

            This.

          2. db,

            That actually was sarc. I have been told that by enviroweanies though. The way an aquifer normally gets polluted is if the well casing at the level of the aquifer has issues.

    2. They could just import Czech beer which is better and cheaper.

      1. I had one Czech beer a couple years back…

        Was the worst beer I ever had. Like Miller Lite with the flavor intensified.

        Don’t remember the brand, but are you telling me to try again? Could you recommend one?

        1. My recommendation: Drink them in Prague.

          They cant get to the US in proper condition.

          1. That. Although aiui, kegged beer travels much better. But yeah, there’s a lot of bad Pilsner Urquell floating around.

          2. I wonder why that is. I have Belgium brews regularly that don’t suffer degradation in quality. Perhaps, because they even tend to recommend aging they are well suited for transport.

      2. I had some of that Budweiser Budvar in Austria. It was pretty damn good.

    3. Ommegang in upstate NY said the same thing.

      1. ARGH! Don’t tell me that, I like Ommegang. Now I have to reconsider my support of them, the mendacious twats.

        1. I will now stop buying Ommegang.

    4. Oh no. Where oh where will we get our uniformly bland German lager?

      Oh, yeah, from everywhere else that makes the same kind of stuff.

    5. Wow, even the brewers in Germany are statists?

      Now I see why it was so easy for Hitler to assume power. Of course, he could probably win POTUS here in 2016 as long as he puts a D behind his name.

      1. It all started in a beer hall, didn’t it?

      2. All over people changing their votes
        Along with their overcoats
        If Adolf Hitler flew in today
        They’d send a limousine anyway

  6. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013…..p=obinsite

    That’s a big baby.

  7. How long before Bachmann is hired by Fox as a “news analyst?”

    1. I wonder what kind of pension + bennies Michel? Bachmann will be suckling from the taxpayer tittay?

    2. What do you bet she already has a nice fat think tank gig lined up?

      1. Kudos to her. The faster people get out of “public service”, the better.

    3. Red Tony fap material?

  8. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013…..hing-owns/

    Maine hermit claims eyeglasses are the only thing he owns. Of course, he said this after being arrested for burglary.

  9. German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble has warned that reforming the European welfare model in favor of something resembling U.S. standards would spark a revolution across Europe…

    You know who else benefitted from his (sort of) country’s economic downturn and subsequent unrest?

      1. Tommen?

        Am I spoilering things? I dont know where Season 3 is, as I will be buying the DVDs next Feb or so.

        1. Still haven’t got to the part when Daenerys marries Tyrion.

          1. I wonder if Bran will ever be able to control the big dragon with his second sight powers?

            1. Jon does after Ghost dies saving his worthless arse from The Others*.

              *yes, the shitty movie w/ that aussie ginger

        2. You are pushing it a little soon. Only one wedding has happened (Tyrion & Sansa) so far.

      2. SHUTTT UPPP!!!!

        ASSHOLES!!!!!

        I am still 1/3 through book 2 here.

        1. Who cares? It’s still boring.

        2. have you got to the part with the UFO yet?

        3. Is there as much walking in the books as in the tv series? Becasue walking is teh awezum!

          1. Since book 4 is nothing but walking, I’m gonna say that the your gonna love the 4th season, then.

    1. George Soros?

  10. Wal-Mart to Pay $81.6M for Illegal Waste Disposal
    http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireS…..e-19273086

    Ending an environmental investigation that lasted nearly a decade, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. has pleaded guilty to improperly disposing of pesticides, fertilizer and other hazardous products and will pay a fine of $81.6 million.

    The company entered the guilty plea in federal court in San Francisco Tuesday to misdemeanor counts of violating the Clean Water Act and a law regulating pesticides. The charges came from Wal-Mart’s disposal of hazardous products that had been pulled from store shelves in California and Missouri because of problems like damaged packaging.

    1. “will pay a fine of $81.6 million”

      So who gets the money? They never really say in these kinds of stories.

    2. So that’s why I had to sit through three hours of the proper method to clean up bleach in order to work at Walmart.

    3. The state investigation began when a San Diego County health department employee saw a worker pouring bleach down a drain.

      Doesn’t pretty much all bleach eventually end up getting poured down the drain? Where do they think the water inside washing machines goes?

      1. We just closed up the Florida condo for a few months. Part of the mold/mildew prevention ritual all the snowbirds perform is…

        Wait For It…

        pouring bleach down all drains and toilets.

  11. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013…..-carolina/

    Animal hoarding is so disgusting.

    1. I love it when my home state is in the news for something retarded. Unfortunately there is a seemingly infinite supply of retards around here.

      1. Pssh. Florida has 10 of these stories every day. Because we not only breed our own idiots, they move here in droves and the weather is too mild to kill them off. They are every bit the destructive invasive specie as pythons and iguanas.

        1. Pythons and iguanas don’t get on welfare, so I think that was an understatement.

          1. and yet Kudzu is a product of welfare…plant/cattle welfare.

        2. Don’t knock it too much.
          CA used to attract all the ‘fruits and nuts’ from the rest of the country. Then the state gov got so big and fucked up that they started going to FL instead.

      2. My home state is Florida. It’s always in the news for something retarded. It has to reach epic levels before I even notice anymore.

        1. My home state is Florida. It’s always in the news for something retarded. It has to reach epic levels before I even notice anymore.

          This.

          Unless it’s Hurricane Andrew proportion, I don’t even notice.

    2. Animal skull hoarding is ok?

  12. Two of Obama’s top donors are now founding members of a PAC that supports a Hillary Clinton presidential campaign in 2016.

    Sure, let’s go someone with no experience to someone whose main experience involves lying about the death of American diplomats because it would look bad before an election.

    1. All it means is they have to promise more shit.

    2. two bushes and two clintons in the 32 years of presidents? Let’s hope not. You’d think a country of 350 million could find some other (genetic) material.

      1. Well, the Clintons are not genetically related (hopefully)…

        1. Prove it!

  13. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013…..-turnpike/

    Distant Pennsyltucky cousins of Mitt Romney found.

  14. polling only six points behind frontrunner City Council Speaker Christine Quinn.

    Is the new thing? Siblings of comedians running for political office? If she promises to bring back Tough Crowd, she has my vote.

    1. No one remembers him, or that show.

      1. How wrong you are: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03…..d=all&_r=0

        1. Twitter? I don’t know what that is.

          1. Twitter? I just met her.

      2. Speaking of tv shows, just caught the first ep of House of Cards and it was pretty awesome.

    2. COLIN! COLONIAL FOOT SOLDIER!

    3. are they related? Colin has a new show about the Constitution that I’d like to see

      1. I don’t know.

  15. Scottish outrage at ‘nanny state’ plan to ban pint glass in Highlands pubs
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new…..-pubs.html

    The traditional vessel is already outlawed in nightclubs in the Highlands, which are forced to serve all drinks ? including champagne, cocktails and the finest malt whiskies ? in plastic containers after 9pm because of police fears over potential injury.

    Now anyone enjoying a leisurely drink by the roaring fireside of even the remotest rural location could have to drink out of plastic because of the ruling.

    As the plans to extend the scheme were revealed, landlords labelled them “nanny-state” interference, and accused licensing board chiefs of treating their customers like children.

    may the spirits of the Black Watch rise from their eternal slumber…

    1. And to think, I actually thought that Scotland seemed pretty relaxed when I was there. I guess it tricked me because it is rural.

      1. It seemed laid back in the early nineties.

        OTOH, never get off an overnight flight to Scotland, have two pints with lunch, then get on a tour bus. Slept through the entire tour.

    2. anyone enjoying a leisurely drink by the roaring fireside of even the remotest rural location could have to drink out of plastic

      What?! And have that fucker MELT?!

    3. Obligatory:

      “E could ‘a drawed me off a pint,’ grumbled the old man as he settled down behind a glass. ‘A ‘alf litre ain’t enough. It don’t satisfy. And a ‘ole litre’s too much. It starts my bladder running. Let alone the price.’

    4. I blame Trainspotting.

      1. +1 Danny Boyles

      2. “I hate being Scottish. We’re the lowest of the fucking low, the scum of the earth, the most wretched, servile, miserable, pathetic trash that was ever shat into civilization. Some people hate the English, but I don’t. They’re just wankers. We, on the other hand, are colonized by wankers. We can’t even pick a decent culture to be colonized by. We are ruled by effete arseholes. It’s a shite state of affairs and all the fresh air in the world will not make any fucking difference.”

        1. Lucius Vorenus is the fucking man.

          1. Holy shite! I did not realize that was the same guy.

        2. All the worthwhile Scotts had moved to America by 1900.

            1. +1 Highway to Hell

    5. Ban glass because it could hurt someone! Ban plastic because its bad for the environment!

      Jesus nanny state, make up your fucking mind!

      1. Umm, have you not switched over to banana leaf cups or Indian mud cups yet?

        Gee, abw, I just don’t think you’re serious about saving Gaia.

  16. Kindergartener given detention for bringing this tiny LEGO figure gun on school bus

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

    Crane’s son has been forced to write a letter of apology to the bus driver. He was also given detention Tuesday and could be temporary stripped off his busing privileges.

    I would have told them to get fucked. Seriously. Scared of a lego gun the size of a quarter? Hey driver, go fuck yourself.

    1. They punished the kid that tattled on him. So that’s a silver lining.

      1. This never made sense to me as a kid. Either you have rules and enforce them or not. Why would you punish someone for enforcing the rules? “No one likes a tattletale.” Ok, that means no one likes to actually enforce the rules, so chuck the rules.

    2. They wouldn’t let my wife into the National Archives because she had a Glock keychain that was a 1/2 inch model of a Glock 17. The guard gave her a ration of shit for “bringing a weapon” onto federal property and made sure she was aware that he could arrest her for it if he wanted. Gee, awful nice of him to only confiscate it and send her on her way.

      1. did it fire .9mm bullets?

      2. In a sane world a crowd would have gathered around the guard to point fingers and laugh mockingly.

        1. In a sane world, there would be no guard because my wife would have been allowed to have her actual gun with her and not had to worry about getting mugged. But, being DC, only thugs can have guns.

          1. True. Humanity is returning to its default state of slavery.

      3. “Don’t even *think* of bringing that in here!

        And I mean that literally.”

      4. It is a bit humorous that this happened at the National Archives, right? All that stood between your wife and the enlightened documents upon which our freedom is established was a bureaucrat and a miniature keychain…

        1. Well, they couldn’t have her learning stuff about our history. Being an obvious gun clinger, she was definitely looking for some sort of esoteric legal document that supports her right to own and carry a weapon. The noble bureaucrat was the only thing standing between her and anarchy in the streets.

    3. That’d be alright with me. Bus driver is probably a perv anyways.

    4. What a bunch of pussies the Massholes have become. When the Red/Blue civil war actually arrives, the civilian populations of the Blue states are going to be ridiculously easy to subdue.

    5. In my city, the bring real guns to school:

      Gun discharges outside Minneapolis school

    6. Seriously. Scared of a lego gun the size of a quarter?

      Clearly that bus driver should be in law enforcement.

    7. Mieke Crane, the boy’s mother, insisted that her son knows that guns are bad,

      WTF???

      but he did not make the connection between his Lego toy and a real firearm

      At least he’s smarter than the adults at the school.

    8. If I was the parent, I’d make sure that was the most sarcastic, passive-aggressive apology letter ever written.

  17. ‘Drop duffel. Light and throw napalm, unzip bag and begin firing’: Oregon teen’s secret diary reveals his chilling plan to ‘shoot and throw bombs’ throughout school in Columbine-inspired attack

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..chool.html

    Acord was arrested on Thursday night after police received a tip that he was making a bomb to blow up West Albany High School

    Dumbshit! You’re supposed to keep shit like that to yourself!

    1. How many of these retards are just fantasizing?

      1. This kid supposedly had bombs and Molotovs ready to go.

        1. Well, this one, yeah. Remember when Heathers was a lighthearted look at high school outcasts?

          1. That was a great movie. I wonder if it’s on the cheapo online Netflix?

            1. Streaming that movie probably gets you on some terror watch list.

            2. It most definitely it.

              1. *is*

    2. Probably got bullied. I mean, that face is just TOO punchable. He’s like Ezra Klein’s nephew.

      1. I heard Ezra Klein on Morning Joe today and thought, I wonder if he lisps when he’s got a cock in his mouth?

        1. Ezra Klein ALWAYS has a cock in his mouth.

  18. “Socialist dwarf*” Robert Reich’s wife gives up law perfessin’ for acupuncture.
    http://taxprof.typepad.com/tax…..-prof.html

    The American Conservative on “The cult of competitiveness”
    http://www.theamericanconserva…..itiveness/

    1. * – RR actually applied this moniker (honorific?) to himself in an imagined conversation with Alan Greenspan. It’s hard to explain but I’ll do it if asked.

      1. Reich lives a rich fantasy life.

        1. Reich lives a rich fantasy life.

          he’s got his head up in the clouds….but doesn’t realize it’s really his a$$.

  19. Heavy protection for jurors in Zimmerman case… as judge REJECTS request to allow Trayvon Martin’s text messages to be included as evidence

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..sages.html
    Dude must be found guilty, and no stupid facts will get in the way of getting the right verdict.

    1. It does pretty likely that the text messages are not relevant. Unless they reveal that he was planning on committing a crime, or he was texting during the altercation, it doesn’t seem like they could do anything but prejudice a jury.

      1. Unless they reveal that he was planning on committing a crime

        What if they contain something to the effect “If anybody disses me I’ll stomp his ass”?

        1. That would be what I just said.

          1. Apparently that’s for the judge to decide.

          2. See, I’d have let them in, as evidence of Martin’s character trait for aggression. (Are they inadmissible hearsay, though?) From FL’s rules of evidence, it looks like the “pertinent trait of character of the victim of the crime” should be admissible. I don’t know whether the subsequent section of the Evidence chapter, 405’s, language about “proof may be made by testimony about that person’s reputation,” means that you can only introduce that evidence via a witness and not by simply admitting the texts into evidence.

            If the Mail’s version of events is correct, dude got into a fight the day he got shot. So near anything having to do with that fight seems relevant to me. And it had damned well better be admissible if the prosecution starts yammering on about what a peaceful kid Trayvon was. No one’s offering me a job as a felony court judge though…

            It’s looking more and more like a show trial, especially with the judge not sequestering the jury pool. Expect more leaks as both sides try this case out in the press.

      2. it doesn’t seem like they could do anything but prejudice a jury.

        ___________

        so fucking what? Zimmerman is on trial, not Martin. Zimmerman should be allowed to bring up whatever the fuck he wants, because he’s defending himself. If the State’s murder case is derailed by a couple text messages, then it’s a shitty case.

        Or did somehow it become unlibertarian to embrace the widest possible rights for criminal defendants?

        The judge just hamstrung his defense, because the context matters. If Martin texted stuff like “Hey dude, I just don’t see the point of getting in fights for no reason.” then it casts doubt on Zimmerman’s story. Conversely, if Martin texted stuff like “Yo anyone talks shit to me, I’ll kick his ass.” then it bolsters Zimmerman’s story.

        1. I’m thinking it bolstered Zimmerman’s story, or it would have been allowed. This is a show trial. He must be found guilty.

          1. Of course it bolstered Zimmerman’s story. If it didn’t, the prosecutor would not have worked so hard to exclude them.

            1. Bingo. He probably texted his girlfriend or buddies saying that he saw Zimmerman following him and he was going to cold-cock him, or worse, when he had the chance.

    2. Maybe the judge was just pissed about the wide leakage of those facts and the attempt “to try the case in the media.”

      1. MSNBC and the like have already done a great job of trying Zimmerman in the media.

        This is the state taking action to make sure that Trayvon’s character is not shown in court. That would ruin the narrative that an evil racist white guy brutally murdered an innocent, peaceful black kid.

    3. What’s WITH the Daily Mail arbitrarily using all-caps for WORDS within ITS headlines?

      1. Maybe Dunphy is their new editor?

          1. HERC 2016!!!

            But if I recall he hailed from the Great White North.

  20. Obama Asks Pentagon for Syria No-Fly Zone Plan

    The White House has asked the Pentagon to draw up plans for a no-fly zone inside Syria that would be enforced by the U.S. and other countries such as France and Great Britain, two administration officials told The Daily Beast.

    “The White House is still in contemplation mode but the planning is moving forward and it’s more advanced than it’s ever been,” one administration official told The Daily Beast. “All this effort to pressure the regime is part of the overall effort to find a political solution, but what happens if Geneva fails? It’s only prudent to plan for other options.”

    1. “enforced by the U.S. and other countries such as France and Great Britain”

      LOL! You mean enforced by the U.S., of course.

    2. Not that I have any doubt we could pull it off but Syria’s air defenses are orders of magnitude more formidable than anyone that we have attempted this with in the past. They have a better air defense network and with over 400 serviceable Fighter aircraft (plus a couple hundred more archaic ones) around 100 of which are modern current generation Mig 29’s any attempt to put a no fly zone into place is going to lead to some rather heavy losses.

      1. Take out the radars with cruise missiles and their ADA effectiveness goes to shit real fast.

        The MiGs will be a problem if they’ve got the parts to keep ’em flying. That depends on whether or not Putin wants them to.

        1. Oh don’t get me wrong, the end result is a foregone conclusion. The only countries we couldn’t impose a no fly zone on are Russia and China, it is just that in this case we’re going to lose more than a plane or two.

          As far as Putin, I’d imagine he’d want those Migs flying the the SAMS at their top level of readiness just to test out what kind of damage they could do to us. It would provide useful intel on our capabilities at little financial and no political cost to him.

          1. I’d imagine he’d want those Migs flying [and] the SAMS at their top level of readiness just to test out what kind of damage they could do to us. It would provide useful intel on our capabilities at little financial and no political cost to him.

            Shades of North Vietnam. Wonder if he’s sending ‘technical’ advisers too, or just giving the Syrians a bunch of manuals?

      2. …and with over 400 serviceable Fighter aircraft (plus a couple hundred more archaic ones) around 100 of which are modern current generation Mig 29’s…

        OTOH, the example of the IAF v. Syria in 1982 is probably instructive. Russian SAM technology has improved since, but then again, so have the SIGINT, ELINT, and ECM to get rid of or neutralize them. It also helps that the previous three tasks can be handed off to unmanned, stealthy aircraft. I agree with you that I don’t think it’ll come off as cleanly as the previous no-fly zones over Bosnia and Iraq.

  21. How six frat brothers built up the world’s biggest online poker site and enjoyed a life of fast cars, cocaine and glamorous girls… until the FBI brought it all crashing down

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..-down.html
    Oh no! Consenting adults are engaging in voluntary economic activity… and having fun! Some are getting rich! They didn’t ask permission and they’re not taking orders! What do they think this is? A free country? We’ll put a stop to that!

    1. He said he’d ‘fooled himself into thinking that what he was doing was okay.’

      It was okay. The only people that ever stole money from me via online poker are the US government (and thankfully only about $150).

      1. About $70 from me, and I never sent any in, I got my initial bankroll (~$35) from a freeroll tourney.

        1. I bought in $50, but I got out about $1500 over the course of a couple of years.

      2. $275 here. Not enough to think too much about, but worth being a little pissed over.

        Especially since the bill that shut online poker down was hidden deep within a defense appropriations bill. Fuckers.

    2. The Europeans are making a killing on this thanks to US fuckingn with domestic internetn gambling.

    3. FWIW, Absolute Poker was the company involved in one of the biggest cases of online poker fraud. Scummy people, and the Mail article doesn’t change that assessment, but I don’t think they were co-mingling funds, unlike the turds running Full Tilt.

      1. I will be interested in seeing how much Mezrich’s book goes into the scandal. Up until the revelation that FTP couldn’t pay its players, it was the biggest scandal in the history of online poker. Shit like that threatened to destroy the whole industry by ruining the confidence players had in the game.

        It would have even likely been a bigger deal if the UIGEA hadn’t passed a year earlier.

        1. There’s some news out that FTP, specifically, Annie Duke, was doing the same sort of super-user thing. Things like getting to look at people’s hole cards a 1/2 hour or so after the hand. She claims differently, of course, but those taped board room meetings are awfully suspicious…

          It’s so ridiculous. Running an online poker room is a license to print money. If you look at the rake those guys pulled in, it’s just absolutely disgusting. The rake is easily the best player at the table (measured in bb/100) for the vast majority of stakes. There’s a guy at 2+2 looking at PLO 100 stats, and almost no group of players (separated by # of hands played per month) makes money at the game before rakeback. (The one that does makes 0.2 bb/100)

          And poker room operators want to cheat on top of it?!

    4. The real problem with Absolute was the cheating scandal they suffered.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cereus_Poker_Network

  22. Democrats Unleash a Binder Full of Obamacare Messaging
    http://blogs.rollcall.com/gopp…..messaging/

    House Republican leaders recently subjected their Democratic colleagues to the 37th vote in two and a half years to repeal “Obamacare.”

    But heading into the week-long Memorial Day recess, Democratic leadership went on the offensive to prepare the rank and file to defend President Barack Obama’s 2010 health care law back home.

    The Democratic Steering and Policy Committee sent members back to their districts last week armed with “Affordable Care Act Toolkits,” meticulously organized binders containing every piece of information lawmakers could possibly need to communicate the nuances of the law to their constituents.

    1. meticulously organized binders

      If only they could invent some kind of portable device that used electricity instead of paper…

      1. The primary mission of the Federal government is to deforest the entire world. Inventing the internet was their greatest mistake.

    2. One question asks, Isn’t it true that this expensive law is going to bankrupt the country and explode the deficit?”

      “The opposite is true,” is the provided answer.

      Another question: “Won’t employers refuse to hire that 50th employee because of the health care law’s requirements for businesses with 50 or more employees?”

      The answer: “There is no evidence that this will be the case.”

      Oh, I *must* have that binder! 😎

      1. One question asks, Isn’t it true that this expensive law is going to bankrupt the country and explode the deficit?”

        “The opposite is true,” is the provided answer.

        Yes, Obamacare is going to bankrupt the deficit and explode the country!

      2. One question asks, Isn’t it true that this expensive law is going to bankrupt the country and explode the deficit?”

        “Nuh-uh!,” is the provided answer.

        Another question: “Won’t employers refuse to hire that 50th employee because of the health care law’s requirements for businesses with 50 or more employees?”

        The answer: “Whaaaat? That’s just crazy talk! Why are you talking all crazy?”

    3. Do any of those binder have women?

    4. But heading into the week-long Memorial Day recess, Democratic leadership went on the offensive to prepare the rank and file to defend President Barack Obama’s 2010 health care law back home.

      If they still have to “defend” or “explain” the law over 3 years after its passage, you know it’s a piece of shit.

  23. Christian heavy metal singer blames steroid use for ‘paying hitman $1000 to kill his wife’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..-wife.html
    I’m not responsible for my actions! The inanimate object made me do it!

    1. Christian heavy metal metalcore singer blames steroid use for ‘paying hitman $1000 to kill his wife

      FIFY

      1. How many people really give a shit about the difference between “heavy metal” and “metalcore”?

        1. Well, some of us have taste.

          1. I don’t think anybody wants to share Warty’s taste.

            1. what *does* Warty taste like? The ragged screams of a million souls crying for mercy?

              1. Chicken. But evil chicken

                1. You are Leroy Jenkins?

                  I knew it.

              2. poetic but probably not right. Surely he tastes more like a sort of decaying mould

      2. Christian metalcore singer blames steroid use for ‘paying hitman a gun $1000 to compel hitman to kill his wife.

        FTFY. Because we all know people using guns for violence have no control over the boomstick’s siren call.

      3. Christian heavy metal singer blames steroid…

        It would have made more sense if claimed Satan made him do it.

        1. Well, steroids *are* Satan’s jism.

    2. $1,000? You can’t get anyone reliable for a job like that for 1K

      The dude was nominated for a grammy and now he’s a skin-flint!?!? His cheapness is giving Christians everywhere a bad name. Awful.

      1. The folks who award the Grammies have sunk so low they’ll nominate anybody.

        (Well, I don’t think they’ve sunk as far as the Local Emmy people.)

        1. Incidentally, Taylor Swift has been nominated for 15 Grammies (and won 7 of those).

    3. I liked Jamie Lewis’ take on it.

      Tim Lambesis, frontman for a band that’s produced naught but monotone dreck for the entirety of its existence, As I Lay Dying, is blaming his attempt to hire a hitman to kill his wife on “roid rage”. No, I am not making that up- a Christian metal singer is claiming a nonexistent side effect of exogenous testosterone usage caused him to act violently and impulsively- so violently and impulsively, in fact that he calmly and collectedly attempted to hire another person to kill his estranged wife as part of a fiduciary contract to be executed at some undisclosed point in the future. Generally, I log things like a snap decision to have a cheat meal or to take another crack at a 405 behind the neck push press as “impulsive”. … What I don’t consider to be impulsive, however, is to seek out a contract killer (a process I assume takes more than 45 seconds), meet with said contract killer, hand him photographs of my estranged wife and a list of the places she frequents, and then bargain with him over the price. that, instead, strikes me as methodically, in addition to being incredibly non-violent. An impulsive violent act is randomly punching a person in the face while you’re walking down the street. Haggling over contract details, however, is not. All of that, of course, assumes that “roid rage” is a thing, which it (according to science) is not.

      1. I enjoy As I lay Dying. Jamie Lewis can fuck off.

        1. Ouch. Sorry about your taste, dude.

    4. Can’t you see you’re not making christianity any better, you’re just making rock ‘n roll worse. — Hank Hill

  24. ‘Any moment, someone’s going to find out I’m a total fraud’: Emma Watson admits feeling ‘inadequate’ as an actress

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs…..tress.html
    Well, duh.

    1. Too bad more entertainers don’t have that kind of self-awareness.

    2. All actors and actresses are inadequate next to Bruce Campbell.

  25. The Pentagon has confirmed that a drone crashed off the coast of Somalia, adding that it was unlikely to have been shot down by Al Qaeda-linked militants.

    No one better tell Susan Rice that the drone crashed in 6 seconds, she might blame a Vine video.

  26. Toronto police arrest man, take phone after attempt to film takedown at Sheraton
    http://www.thestar.com/news/gt…..raton.html

    Andrus was told that he’d “filmed enough” and, although other guests were around him, was told repeatedly to back up.

    And then, “suddenly and without warning” he was “violently attacked” by an officer and “subjected to various forms of strikes and pressures,” he alleges.

    Security video shows Andrus, who suffered numerous injuries including rib fractures, being taken down by a number of officers. He was also charged with obstructing and assaulting police.

    I blame the Maple Leafs.

    1. He was also charged with … assaulting police.

      I’m sure he did. I bet he hit those poor officer’s hands with his chest and head repeatedly!

    2. What if he were filming them smoking crack?

    3. Eventually bystanders are going to stop shooting film.

  27. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013…..-in-court/

    The fix is in. Zimmerman will not be allowed to bring up Martin’s history during the trial. He will not be allowed to introduce text messages and social media Martin created.

    In short, he will be denied his entire defensive strategy because the powers that be want him locked up. This is a bullshit show trial.

    1. Then maybe his defensive strategy should involve what happened during the actual incident, not that the guy said dumb shit on Twitter earlier.

      1. Except, dipshit, Martin’s criminal history is relevant as shit because the damn media has made him into St Trayvon the Innocent Martyr of the Tea and Skittles.

        So Zimmerman has to show the jury that this kid was not a fucking choir boy, but at best troubled and at worst violent. The drug use, the fights, the school discipline issues, the possession of stolen property, these show a pattern of criminal behavior. And if he’s got text messages or social media posts talking about beating people up or kicking someone’s ass, then that bolsters Zimmerman’s defense.

        1. Because he knew all this before he confronted an unarmed teenager who wasn’t committing a crime at night after stalking him for half-an-hour.

          1. That’s not Zimmerman’s defense. His defense is that Martin attacked him, knocked him down, and was raining blows upon him while pinning him to the ground. He then shot Martin.

            The forensics support that, his injuries support that, and unless we have a wild theory that Zimmerman pulled a gun on Martin, and then didn’t get a shot off while Martin closed the distance, the forensics and injuries back up his story.

            1. Between the only other witness being dead and the Florida cops letting all the trace evidence wash away for a hours and hours and not securing the scene, Zimmerman’s defense will probably hold up.

              1. They secured the scene almost immediately. What are you talking about?

                They went over the details of what happened, with Zimmerman, almost immediately after it happened. Do you not recall that Zimmerman cooperated fully with police?

            2. That’s not Zimmerman’s defense.

              You just said it was:

              In short, he will be denied his entire defensive strategy [to bring up Martin’s history] because the powers that be want him locked up.

              1. The prosecution is asserting Martin was the aggressor. Zimmerman wants to compare his history with Martin’s to show the jury that Martin was the aggressor.

                1. The prosecution is asserting Martin was the aggressor.

                  Did you mean Z when you wrote Martin? Seems like a weird thing for the prosecution to assert.

                  Even if Z was the initial aggressor, FL’s self-defense statute is so, how to put it, fucked up, that Z might still walk. FTS:

                  The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:…(2)?Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
                  (a)?Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant;…

                  [Emphasis added] and (cont.)

                  1. So, if Z can show that he was in imminent danger of great bodily harm, and couldn’t get away, his use of deadly force is justified. This guy, who claims to be a criminal lawyer, goes into more details.

                    That you can start the fight, and still claim self-defense when you use deadly force, is so wrong it hurts, and a complete 180 from the common law. But that’s what it seems to say in FL. IANAL, though, and the things you read on the Internet are worth less than you pay for them.

                    1. Not that it really matters, but I wonder if You are still technically liable for the initial assault?

          2. Zimmerman didn’t confront anyone. He didn’t stalk anyone for half an hour.

            He saw someone acting weird and called the non-emergency line to let the local PD know.

        2. that bolsters Zimmerman’s defense.

          No it doesn’t. Zimmerman wasn’t reading those text messages or following Trayvon’s twitter.

          Was Zimmerman getting assaulted when he killed the kid? Yes or no. That’s what matters.

          1. Well since he was on his back, with Martin punching his face and banging his head off the sidewalk, then why are we even having a trial?

            Oh, because its a media shitshow and this is just the show trial.

            1. Well since he was on his back, with Martin punching his face and banging his head off the sidewalk, then why are we even having a trial?

              Because we know he shot a guy, and we don’t immediately know that this is true. If the prosecution fails to show that it isn’t, then Zimmerman should get off.

              1. No we know that’s true because the physical evidence proves it. Zimmerman’s injuries and the ballistics prove that.

                1. No we know that’s true because the physical evidence proves it. Zimmerman’s injuries and the ballistics prove that.

                  You keep saying that, yet you think the dead guy’s Twitter account is needed by the defense?

                  1. I think the defense gets to decide what is needed by the defense.

                    I love supposed libertarians thinking a judge is right to restrict the rights of a man accused of murder.

                    Holy fucking shit, step back and think about what you’re saying for a second.

                    1. You’re saying it should be OK to shoot someone because of something they said before you met them, and didn’t even know about when you shot them.

                    2. No, I’m saying that a criminal defendant should be allowed the widest possible leeway in making his defense.

                      The State has cops, lawyers, unlimited funds. Every single person in the courtroom excepting your lawyer and the crowd is an employee of the state.

            2. If Zimmerman approached Martin while armed and attempted to detain him without authority, Martin was perfectly entitled to beat him until he was physically unable to pursue him further.

              I expect Zimmerman to be acquitted, because without Martin dead it will be impossible to prove that Zimmerman decided he was going to apprehend Martin on his own. But you’ll never convince me that’s not what happened. But what the hell, Zimmerman has already done more time in jail than 99% of the murdering cops out there will ever do, so I guess you have to be happy for little things.

              1. If Zimmerman approached Martin while armed and attempted to detain him without authority, Martin was perfectly entitled to beat him until he was physically unable to pursue him further.
                _____________

                But you have not a shred of evidence to back this up.

                To believe Zimmerman was the aggressor, you have to believe that he pulled a gun on Martin, and then did not shoot until Martin had already won the fight. It doesn’t fit the facts. If Zimmerman was this gungho wannabe lawman, he would have shot Martin as Martin closed to grappling distance.

                1. Well, it’s like the Seth Adams shooting. Because one party is dead and can’t testify, there are inevitably gaps in the series of events you can prove. But there are a limited number of plausible narratives that fit the known facts.

                  Zimmerman might be able to convince a jury that he was chasing this kid, but then STOPPED chasing him just in time for Martin to chase HIM instead, but I just find that account less than credible. Zimmerman was chasing Martin and trying to make sure he was still there when the police arrived. I find it more reasonable to conclude that he succeeded than to conclude that Martin turned into a ninja.

                  He’ll almost certainly be acquitted, though, so you will eventually get to rejoice, don’t worry.

                  1. yeah crazy me rejoicing when an innocent man goes free.

                    But I don’t think he will. I think they’re going to railroad him, pick the jury carefully, and throw the man in a hole.

                    1. But I don’t think he will. I think they’re going to railroad him, pick the jury carefully, and throw the man in a hole.

                      Nah. This is just a much more elaborate version of “You can beat the rap, but you can’t beat the ride.”

                  2. Zimmerman might be able to convince a jury that he was chasing this kid, but then STOPPED chasing him just in time for Martin to chase HIM instead, but I just find that account less than credible. Zimmerman was chasing Martin and trying to make sure he was still there when the police arrived. I find it more reasonable to conclude that he succeeded than to conclude that Martin turned into a ninja.

                    Except that the recorded call shows that this isn’t true. At the time that call ended, Zimmerman had no idea where Martin was.

                    One of the things that people seem to forget is that this case was closed until someone found a race card to play.

                    Zimmerman cooperated fully in the intial investigation–even going so far as to help the police see what had happened on the scene within hours of it happening. When his level of cooperation was initially reported people thought he’d been stupid for being so helpful–particularly since he’d just gotten arrested for the ‘crime’.

                2. To believe Zimmerman was the aggressor, you have to believe that he pulled a gun on Martin, and then did not shoot until Martin had already won the fight.

                  This isn’t really true. He might have been dumb enough to get close to Martin (within arm’s reach) and then brandish the gun, thinking that would make Martin “halt”. Or show him that he was “serious”.

                  Because that would have made his cop LARPing that much more fun and exciting.

                3. Maybe he was a slightly less gung-ho wannabe lawman who restrained himself from shooting until he genuinely feared for his life.

                  1. Doesn’t fit the facts. If he was going to hold Martin at gunpoint, he would have shot at some point before he was pinned and being beaten in the face. Maybe as Martin closed, maybe during the struggle.

                    No, the gun was concealed right up until the point where he drew it and fired it.

                    1. While he’s pinned down doesn’t count as part of the struggle?

                    2. Sometime before he was pinned.

                      For the Fluffy/prosecutors scenario to hold up, Zimmerman would have had a gun in his hand, threatening Martin. Then held his fire while Martin closed the distance, held his fire while he got hit, held his fire when he went down, held his fire when Martin sat on him, held his fire when Martin began punching him, and then only fired when Martin was bouncing his head off the sidewalk.

                      Sorry, doesn’t hold up. At least one round would have been squeezed off during the fight at some point.

                    3. Or, as Fluffy already said, there was no “distance to close”. He was within arm’s reach already, and didn’t realize . Then he couldn’t get a shot off for a few seconds while grappling/falling/fighting/who knows where he hands are.

                      Completely plausible.

                    4. No, not really. If he had the gun in his hand, he would have used it as a striking implement, or fired it. Or dropped it to give himself another hand to fight with.

                      Him holding the gun and not using it doesn’t make sense.

                    5. “Him holding the gun and not using it doesn’t make sense.”

                      People have been known to do things that don’t make sense. Just sayin’.

                    6. For the Fluffy/prosecutors scenario to hold up, Zimmerman would have had a gun in his hand, threatening Martin.

                      I don’t think Fluffy’s scenario rests on Zimmerman’s having the gun in his hand, though perhaps Fluffy will correct me on that. I do remember him last year arguing that Zimmerman trying to “apprehend” Martin was an initial act of aggression in itself, regardless of where the gun was.

                4. Listen, I don’t think Zimmerman should get convicted, because I don’t think the state has enough evidence to prove that it wasn’t self defense. But that doesn’t mean it’s wrong to have the trial, or that it actually was self defense.

            3. why are we even having a trial?

              I think it is because the police and prosecutors decided that the shitstorm that would have happened if he hadn’t been charged with anything would have been much worse than what will happen when he is acquitted.

              1. Guys, Z doesn’t have to pull the gun to be the guy who unlawfully started the fight. (In fact, I don’t think he pulled it at all until the very end.) All Z has to do to be the provoker is to commit some action that puts Martin in imminent fear of being attacked or actually attacks Martin. My thought (again, I can’t prove this) is that Z accosted Martin (not sufficient provocation) and grabbed Martin when Martin tried to get away. No gun required.

                Again, Z wants to be a cop, and actually has a few minor crimes of violence in his history. I’m not finding it implausible that a guy who got out of his car to look for some strange dude in his neighborhood, despite being told that he didn’t need to do that, is also the kind of guy to go up and confront that kid in person.

                Finally, I am finding it hilarious that people, especially this crowd, are taking the statement of a criminal defendant, charged with murder, at face value. If Z were a cop, there isn’t a one of you here who wouldn’t think his statement was self-serving and completely full of shit. Even if it turned to be completely true.

                1. Or, what Nicole wrote at 11:12.

                2. Except that the recorded call clearly shows this to be impossible.

                  Zimmerman got out of the car before being told that the police didn’t need him to do that. The dispatcher, noting the change in Zimmerman’s breathing and voice, actually asked. When told he didn’t need to follow Martin, Zimmerman’s breathing alters again, and he actually says ‘okay’ when told not to follow. At the time the call ends, Zimmerman clearly does not know where Martin is.

                  1. I get a different take, having just listened to the call myself. Here’s a transcript, if you like.

                    I see where he says that he doesn’t know where the kid is, right about the time he tells 911 guy that he doesn’t want to give out his full address. He then tells the cops to call him back and he’ll tell them where he is. (What, he’s not going to be at the mailboxes where his truck is?) This by itself strikes me as weird. Every time I’ve called 911, they’ve been real specific about they getting to decide when to hang up, not you.

                    The shooting is about 80 yds from where he parked and on a line between Martin’s location where Z, sitting in his parked car, saw Martin, and Martin’s house. If he’s sitting in or on the way back to his car, how does Martin’s body end up 80 yds from the car? This picture lays out the geometry of the incident.

                    It’s raining, right? It doesn’t strike you as weird (or reckless) that Z’s getting out of his car, into the rain, to try and chase some kid who’s ‘running to the back entrance?’ (cont.)

                    1. Dying thread but, to buy Z’s story, you’ve got to assume that Z gets out of his car, follows Martin’s path down the long ‘cut-through’ towards the back gate, loses sight of Martin, turns around and goes in between two houses back to Twin Trees street. You’ve also got to assume that Martin doubles back, despite being just two buildings away from his own townhouse, and despite having lost Z, just so he can attack him.

                      Also, from his own words, Z decides to pursue a guy that he just before mentioned to the 911 operator as “he’s got a hand in his waistband” and “now he’s coming towards me.” (Jesus, did Z have a death wish or what? I’d have had the truck in reverse so fast, it’d make your head spin. And my pistol at hand.)

                      I think, given the previous paragraph, that Z tried to cut Martin off by moving through the gap between two houses (where Martin’s body was found) to get to the cut-through. He succeeded, confronted Martin, and things got out of hand.

                      Had Z just been trying to get back to his truck, I think he’d have stayed on the line with the 911 operator, in case he spotted Martin again. Instead, he says he’ll call them back, because he knows he’s going to be somewhere else.

                      Still, it could have easily happened the way Z says it did, and as I wrote before, IMHO, ties go to the defendant. But if this jury convicts him of manslaughter, I won’t be shedding many tears. Re-reading the evidence, it amazes me how reckless he was while carrying a firearm.

          2. Well, only Zimmerman knows, and since it’s his freedom on the line, it would make sense for him to be able to at least suggest that Trayvon was capable of assault.

            1. I’m just glad that Martin received the justice he was due.

              1. It will have chilling effect on black teenagers thinking they can walk to 7/11, that’s for sure.

              2. It’s not just in a cosmic sense. That’s not what the legal system is about.

                Zimmerman is not guilty of murder in the second degree. Now, you might have made manslaughter stick, but the State wanted a murder case.

    2. School records and texts don’t seem all that relevant.

      Past history of fights though should be included, especially if he was habitually the aggressor. I also read somewhere else that they won’t allow the jury to visit the scene which seems important since a lot of Zimmerman’s story is predicated on situational/environmental factors (came around the corner, hid behind the bushes, hit my head against the sidewalk, etc.).

      It’s a show trial for sure, but the most damning inadmission of evidence is certainly not the texts or twitter accounts, yet thats the only part the news is focusing on.

      1. I also read somewhere else that they won’t allow the jury to visit the scene

        If that’s true, that is stupid. That’s one of the only things that actually matters.

        1. Not where I read it, but the first link on the google search:

          http://hamptonroads.com/2013/0…..erman-case

          Infuriating.

          1. Okay, that is bullshit. Excluding what he said on Facebook isn’t. What matters is what happened that night at that scene.

            1. Well, as a non-moron juror that I would be, anytime I wanted to see some evidence and was refused or even THINK that I am not being shown evidence that I believe is relevant then I am acquitting.

              Nothing to do with the case simply that the government has a burden to meet and if they are unwilling to or incapable of, in my opinion, doing so then I acquit. As long as there is no prejudice and I am a lone voice then they will get another shot.

      2. It’s a show trial for sure, but the most damning inadmission of evidence is certainly not the texts or twitter accounts, yet thats the only part the news is focusing on.

        That’s because the news folks are trying to make Zimmerman and his lawyers out to be big meanies.

      3. I also read somewhere else that they won’t allow the jury to visit the scene which seems important since a lot of Zimmerman’s story is predicated on situational/environmental factors (came around the corner, hid behind the bushes, hit my head against the sidewalk, etc.).

        Only because the defense also requested the identities of the jurors be kept anonymous until after the trial, and the judge pointed out they can’t very well keep the identity of the jury a secret if they get taken to the crime scene. They told the defense to choose one or the other and the defense chose the request for anonymity.

        1. That’s ridiculous. Just off the top of my head, they could: visit the scene in a blacked-out large van, wear masks if they want to walk around, slap a gag order on the press as relates to the jury pool’s individual identities, etc…

          The judge just didn’t want to. Which is fine, the judge should be able to run her courtroom as she sees fit. Juries don’t usually get to visit the scene of the crime or tort, even for murder, so why makes this an exception?

          1. the judge should be able to run her courtroom as she sees fit.

            I disagree.

    3. I would think that the relevant evidence for the defense is Zimmerman’s injuries. The social media stuff doesn’t seem terribly relevant. If a perfect angel was bashing Zimmerman’s head on the ground, then he was probably justified in shooting him. If a tough guy thug was not, then it probably wasn’t justified. I don’t think that the outcome is quite so fixed as you make it out to be. We’ll see, I guess.

      1. The fact Zimmerman was injured in a fight doesn’t tell us anything about who started the fight or who was winning. By your logic, Martin’s injuries prove he was just defending himself.

        1. No, that’s not what I said. It is relevant evidence. It doesn’t prove anything on its own. What it might do is raise reasonable doubt about whether it was murder. I don’t much care at this point. It’s a mess and a shitty situation for all involved.

    4. They can’t bring this stuff up in the OPENING Statements. The second the prosecutor talks about how Martin was an fine young man, it’s all fair game.

      This should be the easiest defense ever.

      1. It should be, but it won’t. Like the OJ trial, the actual evidence and the case is irrelevant. Everything is going to depend on how afraid the judge and jury are of setting off an LA riots-type of scenario if Zimmerman walks, not the question of whether he’s guilty or innocent.

        The media have done a fantastic job of whipping up the populace into a frenzy over this, and with morons like LeBron and the Miami Heat, to say nothing of Allah Hussein Obama, displaying their solidarity with Martin, the real chilling effect on the jury is going to come from the realm of public opinion.

  28. ‘He was my hero, my Superman’: Tearful widow of Kentucky cop killed in mysterious ambush pays emotional tribute as police say he WAS lured to his but still don’t know why

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..w-why.html
    I kinda sorta feel bad for his family, but I find it impossible to feel any sympathy for a dead cop.

    1. Although he was wearing a bulletproof death, Officer Ellis, who would have celebrated seven years in Bardstown Police on Thursday, was killed.

      See, there’s the problem (typo in original).

    2. I have no problem with rural cops – it’s the city cops and feds who get me riled up.

      1. I haven’t had to deal with rural cops, so I can’t say.

        1. Most of them will behave better – everyone knows them and their families have to shop, go to church, kids in school, etc with everyone else. No anony power trippin’ like CPD, NYPD, etc.

          1. Yeah. Since they have to wait for backup, unlike city thugs, it stands to reason that rural cops must rely more on cooperation than intimidation.

            1. That’s been my experience with small town cops vs city cops

              They’re usually decent folk who realize that their job pretty much entails giving tickets for speeding and responding to lost pet reports. Occasionally, you’ll get the small town cop that thinks he’s the first, last, and only line of defense against lawlessness and chaos and goes on a power trip. Those types don’t last long in small town america, they move to cities where there are more targets to take down.

              1. Occasionally, you’ll get the small town cop that thinks he’s the first, last, and only line of defense against lawlessness and chaos and goes on a power trip. Those types don’t last long in small town america, they move to cities where there are more targets to take down.

                Because rural cops live in rural areas and know that virtually everyone is armed. They also know crime statistics for their town or county which show that there has been less than 10 violent crimes per decade for decades.

                I still get nervous thought when getting stopped by rural cops, even if only because they still approach the truck with their hand on their gun and that fucking light reflecting off of the mirror, blinding me.

                I would prefer to avoid all cops all of the time. But if I have to have an encounter, a cop from a small county sheriff’s office is my first choice.

                1. Before the town where I grew up got big enough to become a county, the cops were pretty decent guys. Except for a rare murder, the worst they typically had to deal with were domestic disturbance calls, which can be a bit hair-raising because you never know if it’s some asshole beating their spouse or just an argument over who was supposed to vacuum the living room.

                  They started becoming a lot more prickish around my junior year of high school, as their patrol responsibilities grew along with the city boundaries. My buddy works for their dispatch now, and he says it’s now about a 50/50 mix of really good cops and power-tripping assholes who care more about their paycheck and pension than the community.

                  1. When did LE turn into a revenue source for the town? That might be a reason for the shift in focus.

                    I’ve been followed by city cops, and over the years, dealt with polite ones and power-tripping ones. I’ve been followed by rural cops when I was passing through their town, and dealt with a similar mix. It seems like luck of the draw.

                    The thing is, there’s so many laws to keep track of these days, and no way of knowing that ‘alles in ordnung’, that any contact with the cops is nerve-racking. Cause it just takes you running into the one who’s having a bad day…

  29. That’s just pants! Lana Del Rey gets the Tom Jones treatment as fans throw their knickers at her on stage in Dublin

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs…..ublin.html
    She’s nice to look at, but have you heard that stuff she passes off for music? She sucks. Not in a good way.

    1. That first song “Video Games” was good.

    2. you got me curious, so I found a few songs and listened. Ack, what dreck. Thanks a heap.

    3. If you must listen to pop, her voice is a nice break from all the other female vocalists. Or maybe I used all my hate for the gf’s Radiohead fetish and could only muster token dislike of Lana del Rey

  30. I’m glad our new improved and oh so friendly drone program is now in effect.

    7 killed in Pakistan drone strike, security officials say
    http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_…..s-say?lite

    A U.S drone attack early Wednesday killed seven people and injured four others in volatile North Waziristan tribal region, Pakistani security officials and local tribesmen said.

    It was the first attack by the unmanned U.S. spy planes on Pakistani territory since the election of the new civilian government two weeks ago.

    1. Obama felt a heaviness in his heart when he learned of the drone strike from media reports.

    2. yeah but they got the number 2 taliban dude…so all that collateral damage is a shame, nothing more.

      1. yeah but they got the number 2 taliban dude…so all that collateral damage is a shame, nothing more.

        Of course if you look at drone strikes in the past year, they claim to have killed the #2 guy at least 3 separate times (including this report). The #2 guy is simply the guy who was #3.

        Either that or every single one of these “we killed the #2 guy!” reports is fucking bullshit meant to appease a forgetful crowd.

    3. 7 killed in Pakistan drone strike, security officials say

      They’re not Americans. They don’t matter.

      1. Well, that we know of, yet.

      2. even if you are American you night not matter, Just ask Abdulrahman al-Awlaki

          1. Abdulrahman is the son, bro. Jes’ sayin’

  31. 25 Funniest Anthony Weiner Headlines

    http://www.smosh.com/smosh-pit…..-headlines

    What’s your favorite?

    1. Mayoral Edition

      http://www.thelmagazine.com/Th…..lText=true

    2. Ooh, images only with no description in the alt/title text.

      At least it doesn’t force you to click through to multiple pages.

    1. I thought they only killed with odor.

      1. I’m amazed that you didn’t go with a vagina dentata joke.

        1. Well, beavers spend a lot of time in ponds and streams and live in mud and twig hobbitholes. They probably smell pretty darn funky.

          1. You’re probably right. I know they’re very oleaginous, which keeps their skin dry, and their fur very soft. Oily, oily beavers.

            1. oleaginous

              Pretentious dick.

              1. He was just preening, hoping that someone would point out that penguins are also oleaginous little fuckers for the same reason.

    2. Beaver Clamps Main Vein; Fisherman Slain.

    3. Why do you want to kill Jerry Mathers?

      1. You know Ward, you were pretty hard on the Beaver last night.
        -June Cleaver

    4. I posted a video taken by the guy in Belarus who was killed a few months ago. Crazy shit.

  32. I’ve seen a lot of people here make a typo when intending to write “hypocrisy.” I propose the following definition for a neologism:

    hypocracy, n. – the condition of having minimal governmental interference in the daily matters of individuals and businesses, characterized by liberty of thought and deed; prosperous economic activity; and lack of corruption.

    Anything to add without becoming too burdensome?

    1. TIL that hypocracy is the new “minarchism.”

    2. nice

  33. Nightmare fuel or Fapulous? You decide.

    1. The graphic has a weird distortionary effect on the lady’s body. She looks like a particularly diesel GI Joe.

    2. The shirt with the thousand-yard stare Asian…I’m not going to be able to sleep tonight.

      1. She’s waiting in an air duct for your eyes to close.

        1. That’s the second reference to that movie in the AM links.

    3. Why does Sarah Palin look as if she has a hand around her neck?

    4. Would anyone be pleased to find out their eyes are nipple mimics?

      1. in all my years, I’ve never heard the phrase “nipple mimics”. Some strange aussie slang?

        1. nope. I once saw a UK clothes historian analyse the Queen’s clothes and he referred to her decorative buttons as nipple mimics, and then went off on a riff about the sexual signalling involved. I was naturally appalled by the disrespect, yet intrigued by the notion.

          1. I was naturally appalled by the disrespect

            You’re a royalty fetishist? I’m appalled that the concept is still in practice.

            1. You’re a royalty fetishist?

              I haven’t tried that yet, but it’s an idea.

              I just like the idea of outsourcing my head of state to a foreigner. The main arguments for Australia becoming a republic are just so state-worshipping* that monarchism seems the only proper libertarian response. If only i had the balls to go full anarchist.

              * they usually boil down to some variant of “our identity depends on the trappings of the state!” Statist maggots…

  34. FORT WORTH (CBSDFW.COM) ? A grandfather checking on his neighbor is shot and killed by Fort Worth police. The shots rang out early Tuesday morning near Woodhaven Country Club, in east Fort Worth.

    Those close to the family say the victim lived nearby and heard his neighbor’s burglar alarm. Neighbor Jerry Wayne Waller then apparently went outside to see what was going on.

    The 72-year-old man didn’t even make it to the house across the street before he was shot. He died on his own property.

    1. CBS 11 has learned that the two officers involved were not hurt and have been placed on administrative leave.

      After a long paid vacation they will quietly be reinstated, likely awarded with a promotion or medal.

    2. Totality of the fact pattern, bigorati, 90 percent of the people love me because they never see stories like this, yada yada yada hth.

    1. You should know your place.

      You should dress to blend in.

      You shouldn’t think things are just going to happen for you.

      Is she sure she knows what audience she’s writing to?

      1. You act as if conformity wasn’t the highest virtue within the feminist movement.

        1. Sure, but they pretend it’s not.

      2. You should dress to blend in.

        Does a metal band tee with cowboy boots work?

    2. But when that dude walks by who you’re not working with directly but happens to share the same physical building space as you, you need to know who that person is ? or figure it out. Learn the names of everyone in the building or newsroom or office you work in.

      I’ve been at this company for 2 years now, and I don’t know the name of everyone on my floor. That doesn’t seem to have been an issue.

      Even if you have fantastic legs and love wearing short things and can truly pull it off, just don’t. If you think your Nickelback shirt is a good thing to wear to the office, these rules won’t even begin to help you unless you work at some super-cool company that gets that you’re being ironic.

      So if you think it might not be a good idea to wear, don’t wear it, but if you think it is a good idea to wear, don’t wear it?

      1. band t-shirts and “short things.” This post was truly written by someone who works at a blog that nobody should take seriously but is propped up and inflated by a small band of strident supporters who deem their work necessary for the cause.

        Basically, a person as far away from the real world gave herself permission to give advice to other people trying to get into the real world, which she knows nothing about. I’d be perturbed, but its really just about par for Jezzie.

        1. Ahh, I clipped that quote a little short. It should have included “If you think for one second the skirt might be too short, it is.” at the start.

          1. As if that isn’t the fucking point of having ignorant college-aged interns around.

      2. If you think your Nickelback shirt is a good thing to wear to the office

        How about my Negura Bunget shirt?

  35. More nonsense from Scotland:

    Every child born gets a state-approved bureaucrat to protect them from their parents:

    Unfortunately, this dystopian future has arrived a little faster than I imagined, as last week the Scottish Government’s plan to give every child a state guardian from birth was launched. This state-appointed overseer will be a specific, named individual, and every child will have one, from birth. The responsibility for creating this named guardian will fall on the heads of the health boards for the first five years of a child’s life, before being transferred to councils. Perhaps the most worrying aspect of this development is that it clearly comes in large part as a mechanism to target and prevent child abuse.

    1. Yet another reason to never set foot in the UK.

    2. What the fuck? I though Scotland was supposed to be the cool part of the UK.

      1. Don’t let the Adam Smith/David Hume heritage fool you; today their politics are rather more socialist than England proper.

        1. Exactly–look at that commie shitstain George Galloway.

          1. He may be Scottish, but he’s MP for… somewhere in east London, I believe?

        2. Isn’t the separatist movement mostly some variety of the “the English don’t give us enough free shit”?

    3. That is pretty disturbing.

    4. It’s been downhill ever since they banned swords.

  36. James Lipton, Pimp (ret.)

    I was. It was only a few years after the war. Paris was different then, still poor. Men couldn’t get jobs and, in the male chauvinist Paris of that time, the women couldn’t get work at all. It was perfectly respectable for them to go into le milieu.

    Young women desperately needed money for various reasons. They were beautiful and young and extraordinary. There was no opprobrium because it was completely regulated. Every week they had to be inspected medically. The great bordellos were still flourishing in those days before the sheriff of Paris, a woman, closed them down. It was a different time.

    1. I knew he was a pimp. He never could have outfought Santino.

  37. Things I was not taught in law school:

    From the Founding until the Civil War, the federal government was thought to have an eminent domain power only within the District of Columbia and the territories ? but not within states. Politicians and judges (including in two Supreme Court decisions) repeatedly denied the existence of such a power, and when the federal government did need to take land, it relied on state cooperation to do so. People during this period refused to infer a federal eminent domain power from Congress’s enumerated powers or the Necessary and Proper Clause because they viewed it as a “great power” ? one that was too important to be left to implication. And they refused to infer it from the Takings Clause either, because the Clause was not intended to expand Congress’s power beyond the District and territories.

    1. I used to kinda/sorta know this guy when I was living in DC. It’s nice to see a “right-of-center” guy teaching at an ?lite law school.

      Maybe he’ll be a federal judge one day!

  38. CBS 11 has learned that the two officers involved were not hurt

    All’s well that ends well.

    1. keep fightin’ the good fight Brooksie…I got your comment reference.

  39. Former EPA head Lisa P. Jackson becomes Apple’s top environmental adviser
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..l-adviser/

    Jackson, who will join the firm as vice president for environmental initiatives, wrote in an e-mail Tuesday, “I’m incredibly impressed with Apple’s commitment to the environment and I’m thrilled to be joining the team.”

    “Apple has shown how innovation can drive real progress by removing toxics from its products, incorporating renewable energy in its data center plans, and continually raising the bar for energy efficiency in the electronics industry,” she said. “I look forward to helping support and promote these efforts, as well as leading new ones in the future aimed at protecting the environment.”

    yep… crony capitalism to the rescue. Forward, comrades. Forward.

    1. Good catch.

    2. This crap really needs to end. A condition of accepting federal office as an appointee should be no working for the industry you regulate for some amount of time. At least a year, though longer would be better.

      1. I’ll take Glenn Reynolds 100% surtax on incomes for the first 5 years after leaving federal employment.

        1. Well, to be sure, people need to have some source of income. I think part of the problem stems from hiring the regulated to regulate in the first place. It makes sense on some level, but, at the end of the day, the corruption that ensues is enormous.

          1. 100% surtax on whatever they earn in excess of their Fedgov salary? The point is to keep them from enriching themselves through the revolving door.

            1. 100% surtax on whatever they earn in excess of their Fedgov salary?

              That was my first thought, but that would only guarantee that fedgov salaries would skyrocket within seconds of the bill being signed in to law.

              1. Or they get even more bribe money in different forms.

  40. Looking out the window of my office, I just saw a local police SUV speeding through our parking lot. Technically the township claims the loop around our building as a road even though our landlord is responsible for maintenance. There is parking on either side of the “street” but it’s really just a parking lot that surrounds the buildings. The posted speed limit is 5 mph. This ass had to have been going 30 just now.

    1. there was an emergency. Somewhere a doughnut was going stale. Somewhere a pet dog was drawing breath. You’re not going to risk your life to fix these situations, you miserable coward

      1. +1 whimpering, bullet-riddled puppy

  41. Who’s Checking the Fact Checkers?
    http://www.usnews.com/opinion/…..epublicans

    Now comes a study from the George Mason University Center for Media and Public Affairs that demonstrates empirically that PolitiFact.org, one of the nation’s leading “fact checkers,” finds that Republicans are dishonest in their claims three times as often as Democrats. “PolitiFact.com has rated Republican claims as false three times as often as Democratic claims during President Obama’s second term,” the Center said in a release, “despite controversies over Obama administration statements on Benghazi, the IRS and the AP.”

    The ‘pubs are always lying – duh.

    1. Well PolitiFact under reports the lieing on both sides.

  42. So apparently Andrea Rossi is still drawing in the marks with his cold fusion con. I wonder how much money he’s made off of these suckers.

    1. My dad (a research physicist) looked into this a while back.

      He basically said that the math for what you would get out of cold fusion was sound, assuming that there existed some way to have the nuclear equivalent of a catalyst in chemical reactions.

      But, he stressed, the big name researchers all behaved like frauds. The lack of replicability was causing his physicist sense* to tingle.

      *he was bitten by a radioactive physicist when he was a young grad student.

      1. I like that this guy wouldn’t let the ovservers unplug his device while it was running. OK, dude. Sure it works.

        1. I smell con. Why won’t he just let them measure gamma radiation if its okay to measure heat. I can think of lots of chemical reactions that can produce heat reliably at 6:1 output to input, but none would put off gamma.

          1. I can think of lots of chemical reactions that can produce heat reliably at 6:1 output to input, but none would put off gamma.

            Yeah, but given the volume of the box, it would have stopped producing energy long before the test was over. It could be some hidden system to replace used fuel, or some other elaborate hoax, though.

            1. I say he had an electrical heater in the device, and used a coiled wire or some other clever method to fool the ammeter they attached to it. If it worked, any sane person would the observers unplug it and measure it however they liked.

              That said, hope he’s telling the truth. Truly clean, cheap energy would be the best thing to happen since…I dunno, antibiotics, maybe?

              1. Oh, I surely hope that Rossi is just being paranoid and protecting his invention. It would be the best thing to happen since antibiotics. Unless there’s some rare or hard to produce material in the catalyst, energy would become so abundant and cheap that power companies would have to shut down. Every house could just get equipped with an e-cat and feed into the grid. (or just keep all the energy for yourself)

                Unplugging the device would stop the reaction even if it is completely legit. Such a reaction is not a self sustaining reaction like fission and requires outside input.

      2. For Pons and Fleischmann, wasn’t part of the problem (besides their rushing to publish way too early) that it’s really tough to make the Pt electrodes in just the right way to have the reaction work? What did the Navy Labs in San Diego ever come up with? I thought they had been looking at Pons-type cold fusion for awhile, building the electrodes and reaction wells via PVD?

        As for the Italian guy, couldn’t he have just put some really thermally energetic isotope like Pu-238 in the box? That could churn away for a long time (just ask Voyager and Pioneer).

    2. If it’s a con, it’s a damn good one and a long con. Last time I looked, he hadn’t taken any money in private investment. He’s put all his own money on the line.

      I’m still extremely skeptical of his claims. We’d be talking about an absolutely revolutionary energy source.

      I wouldn’t invest any of my own money at this point, were the option available. However, I am hopeful that his “fraud like” behavior is just him protecting his invention a bit too closely. Time will tell.

    3. Seems like it wouldn’t be terribly hard to confirm or deny that fusion is happening. Is that in question, or is it just the net energy production that is in doubt?

      1. The energy output has been measured as far exceeding the known input, so SOMETHING is happening inside that box. However, the issues arise because Rossi won’t let anyone take the thing apart or test it in an offsite, controlled environment.

        There could be a hidden power source that is actually creating the heat instead of an actual reaction. During earlier tests, it was calculated that, given the volume of the box, it wasn’t any known chemical reaction. There isn’t any known chemical reaction that has that high of energy density.

        We have no idea what the catalyst is, either. This could just be Rossi being paranoid that someone will steal his tech. (a very real possibility)

        The whole thing could be bunk, we won’t know until he patents the damn process and lets people under the hood.

  43. Australia is running a large deficit, but not so large we can’t increase public funding of political parties. And backdate it.

    1. The Military Channel did a good show on this several years ago. Bletchley Park was the scene of some valuable bugging.

      Be sure to stick around for the comments to the linked article.

  44. Brad Pit not doing love scenes anymore.

    Good for Pitt for being so sensitive to the needs of his relationship (although the gesture seems oddly fussy for a pair of professional thespians). That said, as an A-list actor, he can better afford the luxury of turning down roles than most older actresses. The majority of roles for women in the top 100 grossing movies released in the United States in 2012 were for characters 39 or younger. Even actresses with similar profiles to Pitt’s?mega-stars in presumably high demand?have continued to do sex scenes. Kate Winslet shot sex scenes for both Revolutionary Road and The Reader. Julia Roberts got in bed with Bryan Cranston in Larry Crowne. And Charlize Theron has done sex scenes in a significant number of her movies, from serial killer drama Monster to Diablo Cody and Jason Reitman’s Young Adult. Maybe substantive, juicy roles for women are simply more likely to include sex, whether it’s because audiences enjoy seeing attractive actresses naked or because great female parts usually revolve around domestic life and relationships. In any case, it’s hard to completely divorce Pitt’s promise from the privilege that makes such a move possible.

    And how many of those actresses were in their 50’s with 6 kids?

    1. Uh, how is “with 6 kids” relevant for an actor? I get it for an actress, at least.

      1. Because feminism is capable of almost astoundingly retarded levels of false equivalence.

      2. Because they want to see daddy’s movies?

        1. I guess I am just too wrapped up in his sex scenes to have ever imagined Pitt as an actor in movies for kids. But then I also try to forget about his whole family situation thing too.

          1. To be fair, I did throw that in there for a bit of false equivalence to mirror the article. That was a rationalization on my part. But their kids, being adopted, have as much relevance to his wife as to him.

            1. She had three out of six of them, actually, but yeah.

  45. So I stumbled across this post about how The History Channel’s WWII Show has a totally unbelievable plot.

    [T]here are some shows that go completely beyond the pale of enjoyability, until they become nothing more than overwritten collections of tropes impossible to watch without groaning.

    I think the worst offender here is the History Channel and all their programs on the so-called “World War II”.

    Let’s start with the bad guys. Battalions of stormtroopers dressed in all black, check. Secret police, check. Determination to brutally kill everyone who doesn’t look like them, check. Leader with a tiny villain mustache and a tendency to go into apopleptic rage when he doesn’t get his way, check. All this from a country that was ordinary, believable, and dare I say it sometimes even sympathetic in previous seasons.

    1. If Hitler’s rise to power as well as his rule were fiction, no one would consider it plausible.

      1. Not to mention the part where the US pulls a superweapon deus ex machina to prevent having to invade the unbreakable fortress of the Japanese homeland. “Oh, we’d lose too many troops invading? Good thing our scientists magicked up this superbomb off screen!”

        1. Mythbusters verdict? Implausible.

          1. I mean, at least The Right Stuff was fiction!

            (Don’t punch me, Dr. Aldrin.)

            1. It’s okay. There were no moon landings in The Right Stuff.

              1. The landing in ’71 was real. They just weren’t ready yet in ’69, so they faked that one on a soundstage.

                1. So, was Apollo 8 supposed to have been faked, too? And all of the photographs of the landing sites and equipment left there, part of an entirely new hoax with entirely new government officials?

                  1. Do I look like Ron Howard? Ask him.

                    1. That was Apollo 13. Not fake. I think.

                    2. I’ve been assuming you’ve watch season 4 of Arrested Development. But clearly you are the worst.

                    3. I haven’t watched ten seconds of Arrested Development, so I’m worse than you can possibly imagine.

    2. The full link is on livejournal:

      http://squid314.livejournal.com/275614.html

  46. Antigovernment extremism.

    I don’t even know where to start here. Maybe this.

    1. Wow it’s almost like the Constitution and the Declaration are two separate documents. In fact if you look you see only six men signed both of them.

      The men who ended the Articles of Confederation and instituted the Constitution were betraying the American Revolution, not strengthening it.

      1. Hey it’s no big deal. Just let the government tell everyone how the Tea Party is rally anti-government extremists and we can just rely on the juries to decide if it’s relevant or not.

    2. “As University of Virginia historian Brian Balogh noted in his book, A Government Out of Sight, Southerners asserted an extreme version of states’ rights in the period from 1840 to 1860 that included preventing aid to disaster victims.”

      Yes, that’s why they supported a Fugitive Slave Act in 1850 by which the federal government, based on a one-sided administrative determination, could designate a resident of a free state as a fugitive slave, and call on the free state’s citizens to assist in sending the person into slavery, while forbidding any habeas corpus or judicial review. That’s why the federal authorities repeatedly overruled the authorities of the free state who tried to protect the alleged fugitives, even indicting state authorities for violation of the 1850 Act, and…

      Oh, heck with it, the narrative can’t be refuted. Yes, the South was all about states rights and limiting the federal government.

  47. http://www.latimes.com/busines…..4526.story

    So how many of these “bredwinners” are actually on various forms of government benefits?

    1. Really, we’re all bred winners, as we are the end result of billions of years of evolution.

  48. What gets me is the blatant double standard here between the Martin/Zimmerman case and the Adams/Custer case. Both have nearly the same events: busybody starts following a “suspicious” person, who he ends up shooting even though the victim had every right to be where he was. The shooter claims that the unarmed man attacked them for no reason and forced them to shoot him, but of course that’s easy for them to say since they’re the only surviving witness. How come everyone believes Zimmerman, but no one believes Custer?

    1. I thought Seth Adams was killed by a cop?

    2. A) Custer was on his own property, and the cop admits he was told to leave first, but then got out of his car and advanced on him

      B) Zimmerman was actually wounded, and had just as much right to be there as Martin.

      C) There is a bit of defensive reaction towards Zimmerman because of the way the facts were intentionally distorted.

      1. Make that Adams instead of Custer for A)

      2. Ah so apparently dragon shit is made up of false equivalencies. Good to know.

      3. A) Martin, as a guest of one of the homeowners, was on his own property too. Does your neighbor have a right to tell your kids to leave since their names aren’t actually on the deed?

        B) Custer was actually wounded too. He had bruise marks in the shape of Adam’s fingers on his neck and Adams had Custer’s skin under his fingernails.

        C) Yes, I’m aware much of the defense of Zimmerman is based more on tribal loyalties than the actual merits of the case. It ultimately doesn’t matter if he’s guilty or not, you just care about winning the political battle.

        1. Neither one was on their property. Fact remains that Custer was in the wrong from a property rights perspective, and there is no such equivalence with the Zimmerman case.

          I did not know about the bruising, however. But tribal loyalties? What the hell are you on about? It’s a reaction to the statist media distorting the truth.

          1. It’s a reaction to the statist media distorting the truth.

            Statist media has nothing to do with whether it was a legitimate self defense or not. Rachel Maddow wasn’t there that night beating up Zimmerman. But if they’re taking Martin’s side, he must TEAM BLUE. Zimmerman, by process of elimination, must be TEAM RED, and therefore we must all defend him whether he’s guilty or not.

            1. Custer may or may not be guilty, but we know cops are going to reflexively defend him because he’s “one of them”. Likewise the people on this board are going to reflexively defend Zimmerman because they’ve decided he’s “one of us”.

              1. Likewise the people on this board are going to reflexively defend Zimmerman because they’ve decided he’s “one of us”.

                Bullshit. Show me one piece of evidence that Zimmerman’s story is untrue. One.

                This isn’t a situation where people here are defending someone who is clearly guilty. We’re defending someone in a situation where there isn’t nearly enough evidence to convict him.

                I realize you can’t go one day without looking down your nose at people and trying to show how intellectually superior you are, but this sort of inane contrarianism doesn’t make you smart. It makes you Tulpa.

                1. Show me one piece of evidence that Custer’s story is untrue? Why is Zimmerman’s self-serving unverifiable story presumed to be true, but Custer’s self-serving unverifiable story is presumed to be false?

          2. Fact remains that Custer was in the wrong from a property rights perspective

            Custer was in the publicly accessible parking lot of a store. If I’m in the parking lot of a Walmart and the greeter suddenly starts choking me, am I “in the wrong from a property rights perspective”?

        2. It ultimately doesn’t matter if he’s guilty or not, you just care about winning the political battle.

          1. Come off it. The case facts of the case were actively distorted by the media and leftists who wanted to make it look like Trayvon was an angelic being who was too good for this world. That gives me some sympathy for Zimmerman’s situation.

          2. Everything Zimmerman has said has been borne out by later evidence. He had injuries consistent with being attacked. His story has held up under immense scrutiny from the press.

          I don’t know for a fact that Zimmerman is innocent. I do no for a fact that he should not be convicted given the evidence.

          1. And no one is trying to cast Seth Adams as an angelic being? Where are all the comments speculating about Adams drug use? Or if he ever got in trouble at school? What was Adams posting on twitter and facebook in the days leading up to his shooting? I’ve seen photos of Seth Adams in a hoodie. Does that prove he was a no good thug that Custer was justified to be suspicious of?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.