FBI Accused of Executing Man Being Questioned, Buffett Buys Another Newspaper, Disney Has Another Safety Incident: P.M. Links


  • Disney would prefer you think about these explosives instead
    Credit: Express Monorail / Foter.com / CC BY-NC-ND

    The father of Ibragim Todashev, the 27-year-old Chechen killed by the FBI during questioning in Florida connected to the men allegedly responsible for the Boston Marathon bombing, claims his son was executed by agency.

  • Billionaire Warren Buffett's media company has bought another newspaper in Virginia, prompting rallies and protests of rich men's control of the press by absolutely nobody nowhere.
  • Not a good week for press about the Disney parks. A visitor brought a gun into Disney World in Orlando. It slipped out of his owner's back pocket during a ride, leaving it to be discovered by a subsequent passenger. Nobody was hurt. The man was allowed to return the next day without the gun.
  • A hotel strike in Chicago ended after 10 years essentially as a complete failure.
  • Sequestration be damned: The federal government is looking to fill 27,000 job openings.
  • Anybody who follows political scandals will not be surprised at the news that retired Army Gen. David Petraeus has landed a job as a consultant.

Spice up your blog or Website with Reason 24/7news and Reason articles! You can easily add a widget here.

Have a news tip for us? Send it to: 24_7@reason.com.

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


NEXT: Protection of Taxpayer Info Cited In Avoiding Answers on IRS Scandal

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. CA is at it again. There is a chance that Moonbeam won’t sign all of these, though:

    1. Gun Bills PASSING the CA senate yesterday include:
      -requiring a permit and a background check to buy ammunition
      – Requiring a safety certificate to purchase rifles
      – Banning the sale of rifles that accept detachable magazines

      And a couple other ridiculous ones.

      1. Between Oregon and Washington State, which has the better (more permissive) gun laws?

        1. Oregon. But may not be for long.

        2. They are both shall issue. Some of the municipalities in OR are pretty restrictive, though.

          1. And most of those provisions, particularly carry or transport in public, don’t apply to CHL holders.

            I should have added to my reply that there isn’t much of a difference except at the edges. Gun show background checks in Oregon, no SBRs in Washington, etc.

    2. Speaking of California, Plan Bay Area, perhaps the biggest threat to individual liberty that we’ve faced out here, is close to approval. Among other things, this will require fully-built small suburbs to build high-density subsidized apartment complexes, adding thousands of new residents with no additional revenues, and seriously strain local schools and infrastructures, not to mention their way of life. Disguised as a “global warming” plan, it distributes new apartment buildings based upon small towns’ public school test scores and property values (bet you didn’t know those had a role in global warming!) It allows for eminent domain and lax environmental impact restrictions to get these apartment complexes built. And if you live in a targeted area, if your house burns down, they can prevent you from rebuilding and mandate apartments on your lot instead (no chance for abuse there!)

      Though the local press has mostly ignored this issue, tonight there will be a full and fair debate between the pro and con sides. It will include Thomas Rubin of the Cato Institute, who has contributed to Reason in the past, speaking against the plan. Here’s the details if you are interested and can get to the Marin Civic Center (yes, that Frank Lloyd Wright building):

      1. The Great Planning Debate: One Bay Area…is it Good for the Bay Area, is it good for Marin, Thursday, May 30th, 6:30pm-8:30pm

        Marin Board of Supervisors Chamber, Marin Civic Center, San Rafael, CA

        Plan Bay Area stands to make significant changes to housing and transit across the Bay Area, encouraging cities and counties to plan high-density housing around transit – sometimes referred to as smart growth. The Institute for Leadership Studies at Dominican University is sponsoring a meeting of the minds on this subject, bringing together four leading figures on both sides of the plan.

        Panelists supporting Plan Bay Area are possibly the top two speakers on this topic: Steve Kinsey, MTC commissioner and Marin County Supervisor; and Mark Luce, Napa County Supervisor and President of the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). Both hold leadership positions in the two agencies that developed Plan Bay Area.

        Opposing Plan Bay Area are two of the strongest opponents to the transit-oriented development and smart-growth approaches proposed in Plan Bay Area: Randal O’Toole of the Cato institute, author of Gridlock; and Thomas Rubin, an Oakland-based transportation consultant and former Chief Financial Officer of Southern California Rapid Transit District (1989-1994).

        Thursday, May 30th 6:30pm – 8:30pm
        Marin Board of Supervisors Chamber, Marin Civic Center, San Rafael
        Moderator: Judge Verna Adams
        Entry: A $5-$10 donation is requested but not required.

        1. I can’t believe I haven’t heard of this until now. In the past, some city council members have been heavy handed and withheld permits until they got some of their “smart growth” demands, but nothing on this scale that I know of…

          1. How about they instead loosen the existing restrictions that prevent any apts from being built in certain places? I have lived in the Bay Area and you can’t tell me that the demand isn’t there.

            1. “How about they instead loosen the existing restrictions that prevent any apts from being built in certain places?”

              How about removing rent control so people will keep units on the market?

              1. Agree – I am all for removing all regulations and letting the supply/demand sort it out. The thing is, there are entrenched interests on all sides that won’t let that happen.

  2. “he father of Ibragim Todashev, the 27-year-old Chechen killed by the FBI during questioning in Florida connected to the men allegedly responsible for the Boston Marathon bombing, claims his son was executed by agency.”

    Father knows best.

    1. yes, but ‘why’ would the FBI execute his son? What kind of Chechen is he if he can’t even conjure up a good conspiracy theory in his moment to shine?

      1. He’s conspiracy theorizing all over the place. He says the FBI “executed” his son to shut him up. Because he knew too much. The (alleged) bullet to the back of the head was to make sure. I totally believe him. The FBI has nothing better to do than to execute the people they’re investigating, though it seems to me that it would have made more sense to take him out with a sniper. Less publicity. Good training exercise too.

        1. The FBI only shoots white people in Idaho with snipers.

          They should have put him into a complex that then mysteriously caught fire. That’s much more effective.

      2. Look, when the libertarians are saying a conspiracy theory involving the government is crazy, you’re in trouble.

        1. I’ve seen some reporting that make the case the evidence is weak that the boys killed the young off duty cop and do so by pointing to the contradictory events in the official reports. Yeah, law enforcement is very much prone to clearing the books whole sale when they can get away with it, but never attribute to malice that can be explained by the fact FBI agents are lazy as fuck.

    2. Yes, I’m afraid we’re finding out why the boys were so crazy.

      1. It’s just good old Eastern European conspiracy theorizing.

        On a par with the “Princess Diana was Assassinated” theories.

        1. I will say that it’s possible–maybe even likely–that the shooting was unwarranted, but why do they have to go to conspiracy land so quickly?

          1. In Eastern Europe “unintended” is the exception and the conspiracy is the norm, especially when the government is involved.

            1. To be fair, I don’t see how anyone from that area of the world wouldn’t be paranoid.

              1. It’s an area of the world that was mired for seven decades in authoritarian governments that murdered and imprisoned their subjects on the flimsiest of premises, treated people like chattel owned by the states, and instituted entire government agencies to spy on the populace and provoke dissidents to action that would get them imprisoned or executed. A bit of paranoiaof the “they really are out to get you” variety is certainly understandable.

                1. Agreed, though you’d think we’d have a better reputation. We certainly did during the Cold War, despite the nasty propaganda against us.

                2. Seven decades? Probably closer to seventy.

                  The Czars weren’t as bad as the communists, but that’s like saying pneumonia isn’t as bad as smallpox.

  3. The federal government is looking to fill 27,000 job openings.

    But in their defense, those added staff are needed to find new places to cut spending.

    1. Third. Ouch!

      1. I blame Shackford. These links are terrible.

        1. Don’t order the veal.

          1. I’ll be here all week. Tip the veal and try the waitress.

            1. Nice. I’m stealing that.

        2. I blame Shackford. These links are terrible.

          you know who else blamed others for their own failures?

          1. Douglas Shulman?

          2. you know who else blamed others for their own failures?

            Oooh! I know this one!

            The Former Junior Senator from Illinois.

            1. You mean blame(s) others…

              1. The question was phrased in the past tense.

                A full answer would have required past imperfect.

    1. I hate that they’ve separated #2: Cheaper and #4: Taxes. Its a pretty hard and fast rule that the lower the taxes, the cheaper it is to live there as taxes are always born by the consumer.

      I’ll always miss California, but I am fucking loving living in Texas. You should all try it.

      1. If I’m used to the beach life in CA, where is the best place in TX to move to?

        1. Corpus Christi

        2. Corpus Christi would be my choice – Padre Island and all.

          1. Padre’s about 2.5 hours from Corpus. The beach there is amazing and the water is incredibly warm, especially compared to CA. OTOH, the waves are meh at best. And we get tar balls on the beach every now and then.

            I don’t find parts of Galveston that bad, but consider that we do get hurricanes from time to time. Nothing like FL, but enough to be worrisome.

            Along with Spoonman, I think you’ll be pleasantly surprised to see how far your CA housing dollar goes in Texas.

        3. Galveston is an option too, but Galveston got owned pretty badly a few years ago by Hurricane Ike. Alternately there’s places in between Houston and Galveston like Texas City.

          1. Go with Corpus Christi. Galveston is just kind of sad.

        4. I am going to look into it. I assume the cost of living will be much lower?


            Oh. Yeah. Spend a little time on Zillow…

        5. Florida

      2. I tried it for 19 years. Colorado is better, even with the taxes and Californians.

      3. “It’s not Texas at all and that’s what I liked about it. I don’t know Texas very well, I grew up in Chicago, but Austin is not Texas because you think of 10-gallon hats and guys on horseback. It’s a clich? but Austin isn’t like that, it’s hip and in the now. The rest of Texas is very conservative.”

        Yeah because that’s how the rest of cities in Texas are…

        1. Yeah, you can’t swing a dead cat without hitting a 10 gallon hat in Montrose. (Well, maybe, but the wearer will probably be wearing chaps without pants and a bitchin’ mustache.)

          1. And were the ones with the lesbian Mayor goddamnit!

    2. Jesus Christ. I cannot, for the life of me, figure out why anyone would move TO NY or CA?

      1. Unemployment benefits?

        1. Correct. You can live a pretty leisurely life here if you are on unemployment or scamming worker’s comp.

      2. Believe it or not there are opportunities in New York. And I really like New York City- politics are not all there is to a city.

  4. A hotel strike in Chicago ended after 10 years essentially as a complete failure.

    Festivus yes, bagels no!

    1. This is actually freaking amazing. And probably means they won’t have the cheapest rates downtown anymore, since you won’t have to cross a picket line to get in. (Yes, the workers still picketed every day.)

      1. probably means they won’t have the cheapest rates downtown anymore

        Lame, someone needs to open a “conflict tourism” site so I can go places cheaply with only a minor worry of having rotten fruit thrown at me by angry picketers or being kidnapped by Islamic militants during the Egyptian revolution.

        This is just no good to me now that it’s over.

        1. I thought you were looking for Nicole to take you to the parts of Chicago where the buff guys are, not where the ratty union thugs are.

          1. The less money I spend on accommodations, the more money I can spend on quality personal lubricant and condoms to be used with the hot men playing beach volleyball…on a lake.

            1. WOuldn’t it be cheapest to crash on Nicole’s couch?

              1. Yes, it would, but then I’d be a house guest instead of someone coming out to visit. That immediately increases my chances of being an imposition.

                1. In reality, he’s just worried I might rape him. And by rape I mean “force to bake for me.”

                  1. Ah, bake rape. Classic case.

                  2. It’s not rape if I offer enthusiastic consent to bake. Although if you have an electric oven all bets are off.

                    1. Whatever you say, Jesse. I bet those burns on your hand are just from falling down the stairs.

                    2. Shhhh. We don’t question the Nicole’s baking narrative.

                      *huddles as far into corner as possible without jangling the ankle chains*

                    3. Yes, it is, if the enthusiastic consent is not continuous, from birth to death.

      2. And they managed to survive that long how?

        (I’m pretty sure I already know the answer, though I don’t want to)

        1. They all got jobs or crossed the picket line?

        2. I have no idea, but I might be able to find out. My bf knows some of the organizers who used to be involved, but I think haven’t been for a while.

          It wasn’t a lot of people, though. Maybe like a dozen on your average day. So not like the whole hotel staff or something. I’d think the union could just get that many people to show up at a different hotel on their days off or something eh?

      3. I am sure that the point they made by being on the picket line was worth the 10 years of lost wages.

        (Or did the unions front the wages as a means of setting themselves up as the bargaining agent? Possible as the story refers to the union as “Local # 1”.)

        1. $200 per week.

          Most of the strikers either got other jobs or crossed the picket line.

          1. “If any strikers choose to come back to Congress as part of the “unconditional” return, terms call for them to be paid the same as they did more than a decade ago.

            Tamarin said when the strike started, the standard wage for room attendants was $8.83 per hour — a wage contract workers still make. The city wide standard for room attendants is now $16.40 an hour, he said.”


            1. Is a room attendant anything like a maid?

              1. I believe it is union speak for maid, yes.

                1. I guess you need to pay a room attendant more than you would a maid.

                  1. Depending on how much they attend and what they attend to, yes.

  5. Obvious: Sochi Olympics a ‘monstrous scam’ – Russian opposition

    1. Obvious: Sochi Olympics a ‘monstrous scam’ – Russian opposition


      io9 just wrote about decaying olympic sites. I especially like that China is already looking raggedy.

      1. I doubt China ever had plans of maintaining a beach volleyball stadium and a kayak course.

    2. “”””He also questioned the wisdom of staging the games in a subtropical climate in the city on the Black Sea coast.”””

      Actually its only the indoor part that is being held in subtropical Sochi, the outdoor events are being held in the mountains where they get lots of snow.

      1. the outdoor events are being held in the mountains where they get lots of snow.

        Which are pretty much Right There next to the seashore, if I’m reading these maps correctly. Krasnaya Polyana, where a lot of the Alpine events will be held, is about 10 miles as the crow flies, from Sochi. And about 200 miles from Ossetia. Their security will probably be a bit overwhelming.

  6. Sequestration be damned: The federal government is looking to fill 27,000 job openings.

    If not for the evils of the sequester it would be 27,003 openings!

    1. well, not to be a dick, but 2% would be 540 gummint jerbz. So, TRAGEDY!

  7. The man was allowed to return the next day without the gun.


    1. I’m surprised they didn’t ask him to bring his dog.

    2. It is amazing that nothing happened to him. Leaving a loaded gun on a children’s ride!

  8. Are you a creative, motivated and responsible employee with a proven track record?
    Well that’s great, but the problem is, so is everybody else.

  9. So many jokes with this.

    1. The auto industry has been making cars that women want to drive for decades, its just that it was never their intention. When they try is when they fail.

      I can name a lot of girls off the top of my head that drove Jettas in HS and can’t think of one guy. The Jetta didn’t have a target demo when it came out, but it sure as hell got one.

      VW did it again to with the return of the bug which was not originally intended to be the 16 year old daughter’s default auto.

      The Jeep liberty certainly wasn’t meant to be a chick vehicle.

      1. Same with the Miata and the VW Rabbit.

        1. Damn, the Miata is exhibit A for this topic! Kicking myself for not thinking of that.

          1. Don’t do that! There are plenty of people here who will kick you for free!

          2. I would associate Miatas with gay men more than women.

            Saturn was significantly geared toward women. They even heavily advertised how ding resistant the doors were. They did relatively well for quite a while.

            1. I took a girlfriend Saturn shopping many years ago. She was very impressed when the salesman kneed the heck out of the door panel.

            2. Saturn could have reformed GM. Instead, GM learned all the wrong lessons, and eventually gutted it so they could focus on SUV’s and pickups.

            3. My first car was a Saturn SL1 handed down from my aunt who used it to drive all over PA on sales calls. Car ran great, transmission finally went but it’s not like I did anything for it other than oil changes, being an ignorant high schooler.

          3. I’m old. Chevrolet Camaro Berlinetta.

      2. The Porsche Boxster certainly was meant to be a chick vehicle. I think the Liberty was too, along with the CR-V, Rav4, and all the other tiny SUV’s.

    2. Cristy Canyonero: It’s a hard ride

  10. A hotel strike in Chicago ended after 10 years essentially as a complete failure.

    Did the new commerce secretary offer any comments?

  11. Nasa: Mars mission astronauts face radiation risk

    1. That’s always been a problem with planning manned missions beyond LEO.

    2. The article seems to suggest that they ran this analysis without expecting there to be any extra shielding or effort to avoid being caught in a solar flare. So this isn’t anything new, and it’s not a problem.

      1. I just love science reporting. When it’s not totally wrong, it’s out of date, reporting old news as exciting breaking news.

      2. Other than not launching them during a solar maximum, I’m not sure what they can do to avoid being caught in a flare. Huddle really close surrounded by the ship’s water reserves is all I can think of. Until we develop some kind of charged particle shield, or get enough energy to start riding around on hollowed out comets.

        66.2 rems isn’t great at all, and I’d think that before they go, they’d want to have all of their children they ever wanted, but it’s only a 1/3 of the lowest bounds for a lethal dose. And, IIRC, (jump in at any time, robc.) it matters a lot whether you get the dose all at once, or spread out over the course of a year or two like they will.

        See Xkcd’s great graphic on radiation, about the time of Fukushima.

    3. send someone with cancer. win-win

      1. Space-based radiation therapy! Genius!

  12. Patrick Stewart issues a clarification: He did not just eat pizza for the first time.

    “People misunderstood. There was a school of thought that I had eaten my first pizza, but of course how could that possibly be true? I would have had to have stayed locked up in a cellar,” the British-born actor and Brooklyn resident, best known as Captain Jean-Luc Picard in Star Trek: The Next Generation, told New York Thursday in response to his Wednesday Twitter post showing him enjoying, in his words, “My first ever pizza ‘slice.’ “

    “But nevertheless,” Stewart, 72, said in his own defense, “this was my first slice of pizza, which I was only eating because my fianc?e and I were a little hungover yesterday morning and she said what we need is pizza and a soothing drink ? and she was right. It solved the problem.”

    At least it wasn’t deep dish, amirite?

    1. He’s british, so he wouldn’t know better.

    2. “because my fianc?e and I were a little hungover yesterday morning and she said”

      Wait, I thought he was gay?

      Also I think it is arguable as to whether he is better known as Picard or Professor X

      1. Wait, I thought he was gay?

        No, but he played gay in a ’90s movie, and it was fabulous.

        1. he also played gay in an episode Frasier

          But no, Stewart is not gay, Rasilio. You might be thinking of Ian McKellen, who played Gandalf and Magnetto.

          1. He’s been married to multiple women and has kids.

        2. He also played a gay man in an episode of Frasier and was funny as hell.

      2. He’s british…

        1. British = gay

          1. Not quite. British = metrosexual.

            1. metrosexual = gay without taking erect penises in the ass

              1. I don’t know personally, not being gay or metrosexual, but I get the impression that’s not the full story. Though you could be right. I don’t know.

                Are there any metrosexuals in the house? Besides Episiarch, I mean.

                1. Do people still call themselves metro? I think they morphed into hipsters or something.

                  1. I don’t know what they call themselves, but they certainly still exist.

                  2. Do people still call themselves metro?

                    I don’t know, I’ve given up trying to keep up.

                2. Honestly, I probably count, if (as jesse points out) that’s still a thing.

                  1. Well, then you can comment on Francisco’s comment.

      3. Wait, I thought he was gay?

        Patrick Stewart is a 72-year-old man banging a 35-year-old woman.

        Compared to him, you, sir, are gay.

        1. He has to do stuff like that. He’s overshadowed by the Shat.

      4. He’s not gay, but Ian McKellan is going to marry him.

        1. I forgot about that. This is not a joke.

    3. I assumed he didn’t mean first slice of pizza ever, but I’m very unclear on what, exactly, he did mean. I’m saying that now, after reading his “clarification.”


      1. His first single-slice pizza order, I think. As in pizza-by-the-slice.

          1. That’s still really bizarre.

            1. I could see that in the UK, which apparently lacks slicing technology, but he’s spent quite a bit of time in the U.S. It’s not like you can’t buy by the slice pretty much anywhere.

              1. I mean, I guess I didn’t just buy a slice until college, but I grew up in the middle of nowhere. It was like a 15 mile drive to the nearest pizza place. You weren’t doing that for one single slice. He’s in NYC. Heck, nowadays I buy slices every Friday when the cafeteria at work does pizza.

                1. In my history of pizza-buying, I’d say I definitely have bought more whole pizzas than slices, but even so, I’ve been buying slices sporadically since I was a kid. How did he manage to avoid that? Back when journalists were all alcoholics, they’d get us answers to these questions.

                  1. I don’t know if I’ve ever bought a single slice of pizza, either. Not even in school. We didn’t have sliced pizza, we had squares of microwaved “pizza” with cubes of ham on top of cheese-like substance. How I love the Midwest.

                    1. Actually, no. I think they were circles. The ham was definitely cubed, though.

                    2. Velveeta melted on Pillsbury biscuits (or Wonder Bread) with Spam? Truly, Ohio is a culinary hellhole.

                    3. I used to have “pizza sandwiches” which were two slices of white bread, pasta sauce, mozzarella cheese and pepperoni cooked in this. I thought it was a delicacy.

                    4. I just threw up a little.

      2. Don’t be a stubborn fool. Everyone knows that pizza has 8 slices. I don’t understand how you can be so mistaken.

      3. He’s always eaten his pizza in totino’s roll form.

        Because he’s sophisticated and shit.

      4. He ate pizza squares, not slices.

        1. Who does that? Little Caesar’s?

          1. The Sicilians. So I guess Stewart is actually a mobster?

            1. You may be right. I knew a Sicilian family when I was in college, and they did cut their pizzas that way. Incidentally, real Sicilian cuisine is fantastic.

          2. Pizza Hut does and they have a special engagement package for the guys that really hate their girlfriends.

          3. Detroit-style pizza places.

            1. Well, I don’t approve.

    4. But nevertheless…this was my first slice of pizza,

      Huh? Is he saying he’s only ever eaten entire, uncut pizzas before?

      1. No kidding, that was my first thought. Which would be awesome, if true.

        1. He’s like the Rocky of sci-fi.

    5. HAHA! I like that he divides his follower’s twitter whisperings about his history of pizza eating into “schools of though.”

      1. Thought

        EDIT BUTTON!

      2. I thought you meant “schools of dough”.

    1. Here’s a couple who can beat that.

    2. That is a ton of people in the wedding party.

      The bride looks really attractive though.

    1. Like a boss.

  13. my fianc?e and I were a little hungover

    Cue swarming outraged busybodies.

    1. That’s so retarded!

      OK. You detonate the bomb. The asteroid fragments. Now instead of one discrete object, you’ve got hundreds of bits of shrapnel. And when they hit the atmosphere they deliver the same amount of energy!.

      Are these people retarded?!?

      1. Silly, you nuke the fragments, too.

          1. From orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.

            1. I’m mildly annoyed that no one has told me how KMW invested in Planetary Resources. Can I own an asteroid or not? If I have to figure this out on my own, I’m going to move up from mildly annoyed to slightly inconvenienced.

        1. It’s nukes all the way down.

          1. Exactly. Finally, a man with vision around here.

      2. Depending when and how you nuke it, they probably just miss the planet.

        1. It’s rather imprudent not to track all of the stuff that can clobber us, because we could fairly easily deflect asteroids and comets from colliding with us, assuming we got to them early enough.

          Of course, this capability is a weapon, too, and a serious one.

        2. I think the best bet would be to detect the asteroid early and then give it a little push so it accelerates in another direction away from Earth.

          1. What fun is that? Nuke it fifty times!

            1. Pro Lib, nuking it fifty times is accelerating it in another direction away from Earth.

              1. If you use nukes, yes. I think he was suggesting landing some little ion engine on the asteroid and slowly and undramatically shifting its orbit.

                1. He’s joking about the huge difference in energy expended between shifting it laterally so that it misses vs. pushing it back the direction it came from.

                  1. On second reading he wasn’t. BUT HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN.

                    1. We should put giant fusion motors on a whole lot of asteroids, put them in orbit, and move them around to make pictures and spell words.

      3. Except not all the fragments will hit the atmosphere. Ideally, only a small number will.

        And more importantly the nuke will accelerate the whole cloud of fragments so the system of fragments crosses our orbit well before we reach that point in the orbit.

        So, yeah, it works. Not perfect, but much better than nothing.

        1. Our current strategy is to sit and wait for something to knock us out of contention for the sole technological intelligence in the Sol system.

      4. If you break it up more of it burns up in the atmosphere. Global warming, but less kinetic impact.

        What I’m completely unclear are the effects of nuclear weapons in vacuum for this sort of thing.

        1. Don’t worry, Zak, it will get the job done at completely negligible risk to earth (compared to asteroid impact).

          And if the detonation is visible from the night side of our planet there will be a little dot of light for a fraction of a second.

        2. A guy who’s thought about this a bit more than I have, had the idea of placing the bomb next to a lump of low z matter, like polyethylene, and the whole thing to the side of the rock. The thought was that the bomb would turn that lump to gas and then the gas would push on the rock.

          Evidently, that’s more efficient that placing the bomb on the rock and blasting pieces off of it.

          We’ve also got to put together the heavy lift booster and PAMs to get the payload to the rock in time. Evidently it’s not as easy as just strapping an old SS-18, Cheyenne Mtn-killer warhead to a Delta-Heavy and sending it on its way.

      5. “Are these people retarded?!?”

        Dunno, seems they have a much better grasp of surface area and thermal dynamics than you do.

        But, KINETIC ENERGY!!!

        or something…

      6. Depends on how far out you nuke it, since the nuke will also change the trajectory of the center of mass and cause the volume to spread out meaning that you would not necessarily get hit with the same mass as the nuke could cause some or even all of it to miss.

        Also there is value in breaking up the object if you can break it up into small enough pieces. Sure the same total KE will be delivered to the atmosphere the difference is that each of the smaller impactors will now (if small enough) lack the energy necessary to penetrate the earths crust and expose the mantle neither will they have the ability to eject mega tons of molten rock into the upper atmosphere where it will rain back down.

        Basically it is like the atmosphere is a bullet proof vest, a single large impactor is like a .50 caliber round, going through it with no difficulty and tearing up what is underneath. Breaking that same round up into .00 Buckshot you will break every bone in the guys body but are unlikely to get any penetration.

    2. Wouldn’t it just be easier to teach drillers to become astronauts?

    1. What is the talking point today? Is it what the IRS did was wrong but was the result of low level rogue staffers and an overworked agency or is it that the Tea Parties got what was coming to them?

    2. To be fair, they’re college students.

      No one is dumber than a college student. They’re smart enough to think they’re smarter than they are, but don’t know enough about anything to have their opinions be of value.

      1. I was a fucking moron at that age. A moron. With the credentials of an intellectual, which made it worse.

        1. Well that’s not your fault. They didn’t even have the wheel when you were in college.

          1. They had the wheel, but my FORTRAN class involved mainframes.

            1. Lucky you. When I went to college we only had THREETRAN.

        2. Pfft, I was smart enough to know that no one cared what I thought and no woman wanted me.

          Oh, college…

  14. http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2013/0…..six-times/

    Rookie cop shot innocent homeowner six times. Looks like that is one rookie who is adapting to the police culture quite well.

    1. Some people just come into the profession in a full on sprint. He’s got captain written all over him.

    2. This is one of those cases the gun grabbers like to cite, as proof that owning a gun makes you more likely to die from a gunshot. They’ll never understand that, instead of banning guns, we should ban cops. No cops, no more cop-shootings. It’s just logic.

    3. I’m betting promotion.

    4. One from this morning – may be a repost. But if I didn’t see it here before, it’s news to me. The ‘spoon’ shooting.

      Michael Gomez, the father of Alan Gomez, told The Associated Press on Wednesday that he was “gravely disappointed” about the district attorney’s decision but not surprised. “She’s just there to cover up whatever they do,” Gomez said. “She’s ruled that all police shootings are justified, so I’m not shocked at all.”

      Wallace, now a K-9 officer with Albuquerque police, was a New Mexico State Police officer when he shot and killed Leo Lopez of Chimayo in 2004. He was cleared by a grand jury, but the state paid $235,000 to settle a wrongful death lawsuit.

      In January 2010, he shot Wayne Cordova, who was on an Albuquerque rooftop crying and asking to be killed. Cordova survived.

    1. The Scottish make even the UK look restrained and intelligent.

    2. Paging barfman…

  15. ‘A disaster in slow motion’: Wine country latest California region to face fiscal crisis

  16. Amanduh was fired from the Edwards campaign for her anti-Catholic blog posts? You don’t say!

    When I say “human sacrifice”, I am not exaggerating. The Catholic Church has responded to the surge of feminist energy around the world in no small part by doubling down on their denunciations of contraception and abortion, and making it clear that women should put being subservient baby-makers over every other consideration, even their own basic survival[…] The misogynist longing for female death isn’t even really subtextual at this point, but right there on the surface.


    1. Wake me when Amanda starts getting concerned over women’s rights in Islamic countries. Oh that is right, women’s rights is all about abortion. Everything else is negotiable.

      1. When I started posting here and found out about Jezebel, I started running a tally of what was on their front page, and how many days running they would go without having a post on meaningful posts regarding non-abortion womens’ rights in the Middle East, Africa, and East Asia.

        Needless to say, I ran out of fingers and toes to keep track of that particular statistic awful quick.

        1. Feminists, like gay rights advocates, are nothing but leftists who have coopted a cause to their political ends. Criticizing women’s rights in Islamic countries doesn’t advance the leftist cause and is therefore not important.

          1. Feminists, like gay rights advocates…

            Um…fuck off and die in a fire Red Tony.

    2. Also, I realize that I have yet to get my Merit Badge in Misogynistic Othering — but isn’t the whole point of misogyny to get women in subservient roles? Kinda hard for a gal to make me a sammich when she dead.

      Help a brother out, here.

    3. I like how every few weeks a liberal discovers that the Catholic Church actually believes the things they’ve been saying for 1500 years.

      1. I’m not a Catholic, but the more I look the more the fringe benefits of nominal Catholicism appeal to me.

        I can piss off feminist harpies, it’ll help me land Brazilian chicks, *and* I can booze up during Communion? Sold!

        1. It just shows how totalitarian they are. When you or I or any normal person looks at the Catholic Church we think “I don’t agree with that so I won’t be joining”. When they look at the Church they think “it is something outside the collective and must be assimilated or destroyed”.

          1. To be fair, the Catholic Church is collectivist as fuck and I despise an awful lot of their teachings as much as I hate progressive idiots. The Catholic Church telling Africans that condoms don’t stop the spread of AIDS is one of the most inexcusable things I’ve ever seen.

            1. Then don’t join and argue against them.

              1. But how are the negative things we say about feminism or leftists any different than the negative things they say about the Catholic Church?

                Marcotte is a moron for somehow thinking this is news, but her criticism of the Catholic Church is pretty much the only thing she’s ever said that actually has some basis in fact.

                1. I just enjoy laughing at feminists.

                  FTR, telling falsehoods is a moral wrong no matter who you are, at least in my book. That includes what the Catholic Church has said about condoms — but I have to say, I don’t see a hell of a lot of feminists sacking up and doing something to help in Africa. Sorry, but tweets don’t count and the next time I run into an American or European feminist in Latin America actually doing something to deal with the issues they find so pressing will be the first.

                2. As a lapsed Catholic, I have to say the US Leftists are even bigger whackjobs that religious people. As bad as the Catholics are, the Protestants and Baptists are even crazier.

                  The sad fact is even atheists and agnostics are friggin’ nutjobs too and usually turn their lunacy to political causes instead of easily-ignored religious beliefs. For the most part, the Catholic Church stays OUT of politics, whereas most other Christian sects happily stick their beaks in. IOW, Catholic busybodies (in the last century or so) are the most easily ignored busybodies.

                  1. I have a bunch of catholic friends, family, and acquaintances and they are not even close to crazy about religion. For most of them it’s a private thing and I don’t really hear about it. Granted a good majority of them aren’t super into their churches.

                    The people I get fucking tired of hearing their crap is the atheists. A lot of idiots think that not believing in god is all it takes to be a super-genius, and they let the world know just how clever they are.

            2. I once had a (Catholic) Sunday school teacher tell us that condoms don’t stop sperm or HIV because they’re small enough to get through the “holes in latex.” I didn’t think that was actual doctrine, though.

              1. If sperm can get through them, then the catholic church should have no objection to people using them.

                1. She might have been the same one who while showing us examples of how Jesus looked in the religious art of other cultures called one of them an “African-American Jesus.”

                  1. That’s the most absurd thing that I’ve heard today.


          2. Basically. Back when I was an atheist/agnostic, I found that the atheists that I got along with best were the ones who passed on the communion wafer and slept in on Sunday and not so much the guys haranguing adherents to an organized religion on their free time.

            It says a lot about a person when they feel the need to impose on others a belief that they know that other person won’t benefit from in the slightest. Say what you will about the Mormons, but they genuinely believe there’s some benefit to the information they’re passing along and are generally nice about it; what benefit do I derive from believing in climate change or feminism such that I need to be browbeaten into believing it?

            1. Gah, my first paragraph was positively Marcottian in its unreadability; sorry everybody.

            2. Nothing. But they feel the need to control everything. That is what being a totalitarian is. Everything is either part of the collective or some outside entity that must be assimilated into the collective and destroyed.

            3. Say what you will about the Mormons, but they genuinely believe there’s some benefit to the information they’re passing along and are generally nice about it; what benefit do I derive from believing in climate change or feminism such that I need to be browbeaten into believing it?

              Wait, what? Those kinds of beliefs are compared here to religion all the time. I’m sure their adherents are getting the exact same kinds of benefits.

              I don’t understand how people think it makes sense to argue against some incorrect beliefs but not others. I’m not interested in getting into a whole religion argument by any means, but if you argue for libertarianism, against big government, for individual rights, etc., I don’t see why you would think it was any different for people who believe in the importance of X, for any X, to argue for X.

              1. Sure you can argue it Niki. But there is a difference between arguing it and actively trying to destroy anything you disagree with.

                If you want to say the Catholic Church is wrong about birth control, go for it. Argue with them all day. It is what a free society is all about. But if you want to go to Georgetown just so you can sue and bitch and moan because your birth control isn’t paid for all in the hopes of forcing Georgetown to change to your liking, you are a totalitarian.

              2. But that’s the thing — people believe wrong things all the time, and other people argue against those things all the time. The major world religions today promise meaningful benefits in exchange for believing what they espouse, and — with the exception of Islam — don’t have large numbers of believers trying to force people to believe what they believe at gunpoint. There are no such benefits to be had with progressive beliefs (how does believing in Marxist economics help me one bit from the point of view of a Marxist?), yet many Marxists dedicate the areas under their control to proselytizing their views using all the tools under their control, including coercion.

                Progressives have appropriated the worst aspects of organized religion (and then some) for a cause that has a bad track record and which according to them brings no individual benefits to its adherents — that’s fucked up.

                1. TIT

                  yeah. I can’t think of a single way that I am effected by my neighbor believing the world is 6,000 years old. But let my neighbor believe in AGW or some other environmentalist bullshit and my life will be affected in a lot of ways.

                2. I think they think it benefits them to believe these things (just as Mormons think it benefits them to believe what they believe, but I don’t think it does, because I don’t believe it). They’re getting some kind of psychological comfort out of it or whatever.

                  1. The Mormon church doesn’t say “join our church and get psychological comfort” — they say, “join our church and become a god someday”. As far as I can tell, the guys in the white shirts and ties actually believe that if they get someone else to believe this, then that other person is going to be better off.

                    Marxists and progressives, in contrast, hold to no explicit individual benefit for their beliefs and yet they spread them with a militant fervor that would make the Teutonic state gaze in wonderment. This way of thinking baffles me — why impose a belief on someone else if it won’t make that person better off? My conclusion is thus that proselytizing for such people has nothing to do with making someone else better off — it’s about making the proselytizer feel good about themselves and for that person to signal their status. Fundamentally, it’s about getting a merit badge and gaining power — and I doubt that the little 20-something kids riding their bikes around the neighborhood in the white shirts and ties are getting quite the same benefit.

                    1. join our church and become a god someday

                      I’m already a god. At least my dogs think so.

                      And I think you’re right, signal their status. Power over others feels good. If I can talk myself into “I’m gaining power for their good”…even better.

                    2. “… if they get someone else to believe this, then that other person is going to be better off.”

                      You could say the same about Libertarians.

                    3. You could say the same about Libertarians.

                      The difference is one is willing to use force and the other is not.

                3. don’t have large numbers of believers trying to force people to believe what they believe at gunpoint.

                  Southern evangelicals sort of use the power of the state or at least want to.

                  Despite what we want to believe about the power of knowledge, the truth is cultural feelings take a looong time to die off completely. It isn’t by complete accident that the west cost is loaded with anti-religious leftist totalitarians; the remnants of the violent missionaries is still all around them. The only thing that’s really changed is the specific beliefs and specific rituals, but the methods and goals are essentially unchanged. Strongarming a bunch of Hispanic workers into a labor union is the modern equivalent of the missionaries.

                  1. Southern evangelicals are a ripoff of an old breed of progressive Christianity which cares less about getting people saved and more about having government use its power to make us all good little boys and girls and bring about the Kingdom of God on Earth without all that inconvenient “getting them saved” stuff.

                    No one in a Southern government is going to walk up to Mrs Robinson and ask her to fill out a questionnaire about her faith.

                    1. Southern evangelicals are a ripoff of an old breed of progressive Christianity

                      More likely just old-fashioned feudalists with a shroud of religiosity as a defense shield.

              3. I don’t see why you would think it was any different for people who believe in the importance of X, for any X, to argue for X.

                What people believe, as far as religion goes, doesn’t affect me. Believe whatever you want, just don’t force your shit on me (or others).

                What they believe WRT politics, usually boils down to them attempting to force me (or others) to their will.

    4. The misogynist longing for female death

      wait, wut?

      1. When you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you.

      2. It’s so much more dignified than a male death. I take anxiety meds from thinking about my impending male death while my wife sleeps like a fucking baby.

      3. TIT elided the part that explains this: “anti-choicers frequently spread slobberingly worshipful propaganda exalting death in childbirth as the best thing that ever happened” with a link to what Marcotte thinks is “a typical example.” I don’t actually think it’s particularly misogynist but it does exalt a mother dying “for her child.”

        Chiara’s husband, Enrico, said he experienced “a story of love on the cross.” Speaking to Vatican Radio, he said that they learned from their three children that there is no difference in a life that lasts 30 minutes or 100 years.

        1. Left it out for brevity; sorry about that. It’s fairly uncontroversial in Christian and Christian-influenced societies to have respect for people who selflessly and willingly sacrifice themselves for others’ well-being and has nothing to do with hating women or forcing them to do something they don’t want.

          I suspect that most people would consider a mother dying for her child heroic, even if the child lived only a few minutes after.

          1. I also suspect that such would hold true for a father dying for his children (I would note that the examples of such sacrifice in the Bible are almost exclusively male, after all).

          2. Marcottee wouldn’t. Being that radically for abortion does bad things to your moral bearings.

          3. I didn’t think you were being sketchy or anything, and yes, “[i]t’s fairly uncontroversial in Christian and Christian-influenced societies.” Like I said, I don’t think it’s misogynistic, only wrong-headed.

            1. Ah, gotcha — thanks.

        2. that helps. Of course a reasonable person might also exalt it as an example of a parental sacrifice with the survivor simply trying to rationalize some meaning in it all. But Marcotte-normative interpretations make sense if one is…Amanda. 🙂

    5. making it clear that women should put being subservient baby-makers over every other consideration

      As a Catholic, I’m pretty sure Catholicism says it’s OK for women to avoid having babies by just not having sex.

      1. I’m not Catholic, but isn’t abortion also justified in saving the life of the mother?

        1. Abortion is never justified. In certain circumstances, removal of the fetus is (even if it leads to the fetus dieing). However, the effort must be made to preserve both lives.

  17. A hotel strike in Chicago ended after 10 years essentially as a complete failure.

    My girlfriend and I stayed in the Congress Plaza Hotel a few years ago. I remember the strike going on outside, but had no idea it had been going on for that long. We had an excellent stay, despite not having top class unionized staff on hand. {insert shocked face}

  18. Actual male gaze in Denmark.

    “…it seems a little surreal to be back in Denmark now to talk to the same broadcasting company about their new show, called Blachman, in which a woman – aged 28-85 – is required to stand naked in front of fully-clothed men and to remain silent as those men talk about her body.”


    1. You can watch the shows on their website (Video will be NSFW)

    1. Thought this was going to be a CBS drama at Henry Ford hospital. Turns out its just an idea to turn most of the city into top soil… yeah that sounds better.

    2. So the solution to Detroit’s problems is to demolish whole blocks of housing so they can get rid of blight ?

      But then wouldn’t the people who burnt, looted and robbed the now empty parts of town just move to the other parts and continue to burn, loot and rob?

      What most urban renewal proposals forget is that most problems are people problems and while changing the architecture can affect things it does not trump people problems.

      1. Only the socialist parts of town.

    3. The only thing that can save detroit is capitalism.

      Of course, that notion is rejected out of hand. Even now.

  19. you won’t have to cross a picket line to get in. (Yes, the workers still picketed every day.)

    I started shopping at Meijer specifically because the Fruit Polishers and Grocery Baggers’ Union had pickets milling around in the entrance to the parking lot. Sometimes I’d wave at them (or give them the finger).

  20. Oh look, a Luddite thinks Steve Jobs ruined the world.

    Steve Jobs is considered an amazing genius and made billions of dollars. Sure we overlook that he didn’t pay his share of taxes and didn’t believe in charity. But other than these occasional rumblings of dissent he is pretty much held in high esteem. We celebrate him because he invented incredible computers and phones to interact with the Internet and supposedly fix our mundane lives. And now we are addicted to these machines with most people under the age of twenty hardly remembering what the world was like without them.

    The dirty little secret that nobody likes to talk about is that things just might have been better before the Internet. We had more time to ourselves before cell phones, and text messaging, and Facebook consumed our lives. But you don’t hear many people making the argument that Steve Jobs could have ruined the world. That just isn’t sexy on the technology blogs.

    1. Steve Jobs is considered an amazing genius and made billions of dollars. Sure we overlook that he didn’t pay his share of taxes and didn’t believe in charity. But other than these occasional rumblings of dissent he is pretty much held in high esteem. We celebrate him because he invented incredible computers and phones to interact with the Internet and supposedly fix our mundane lives. And now we are addicted to these machines with most people under the age of twenty hardly remembering what the world was like without them.

      The dirty little secret that nobody likes to talk about is that things just might have been better before the Internet. We had more time to ourselves before cell phones, and text messaging, and Facebook consumed our lives. But you don’t hear many people making the argument that Steve Jobs could have ruined the world. That just isn’t sexy on the technology blogs.

      Instead we hear the purveyors of modern thought preach about how the Internet and social media have brought people closer together and changed the world for the better. About how it has freed oppressed people in Egypt and in other places. But are we in the Western world even as free today as we were twenty-five years ago? How can we be free when we are prisoners to social media, in a world without privacy? How can we be free when our every movement is tracked and every conversation is recorded and can easily be held against us? How exactly are we free if we are tethered to our cell phones?

      1. How exactly are we free if we are tethered to our cell phones?

        You could not get one or turn the damned thing off.

        1. I find it quite easy to avoid logging in to facebook and put my phone down far enough to away to miss message but not phonecalls as soon as I get home from work. SOOOOO hard.

        2. I’ve been without cellular service for a week or so due to a misunderstanding with StraightTalk wireless — who neglected to mention that due to a contract dispute with AT&T, from whom they rent their cell towers, you cannot currently bring your AT&T iPhone over to their network. Which is annoying, but at a savings of $75/month, buying a new iPhone unsubsidized, I come out ahead in less than a year.

      2. A guy presumably getting paid to write stupid drivel on a web site is complaining about the Internet.

        You just can’t make shit like this up, but irony and self-awareness were never strong suits of the lefties.

        1. Tom Green sucking on a cow’s teat however, leaving the world a much better place.

          J/K btw, fuck Tom Green.

    2. Yeah, things were so great when you could only buy the books available at the local Walden books, when you could only get your news from the local fish wrap or Walter Crankcase and you could call your relatives long distance for ten minutes a month because that is all you could afford.

      Go fuck yourself Tom Green you moron.

      1. I was wondering if it was THE Tom Green that made stupid shit in the late 90s. Yup, it’s him. Maybe this is just another joke of his…

    3. The dirty little secret that nobody likes to talk about is that things just might have been better before the Internet. We had more time to ourselves before cell phones, and text messaging, and Facebook consumed our lives.

      How did you have more time before any of those things? You used to have to make a fucking phone call to make plans for the night, and you’d have to call multiple people in order to get a group together.

      I send out one text to 10 people, tell each of them to text some of their friends, and I can get a party together with a text I wrote in 45 seconds.

      1. And you had to get somewhere early or wait around forever when meeting anyone, because you couldn’t get an updated ETA. And it had to be thoroughly planned in advance.

        1. Shit, the movie time we wanted is sold out! Better leave a message at the house in case they haven’t left yet then wait close enough to the pay phone to hear it ring but within view of the entrance and parking lot… yeah, fuck that.

          “Please dial number you wish to call collect… please leave your name … HEYMOVIESSOLDOUTILLMEETYOUATYOURHOUSE… beeeeeep.”

        2. As for even getting somewhere: Google maps on my android and its built in GPS.

    4. The dirty little secret that nobody likes to talk about is that things just might have been better before the Internet.

      Children walked barefooted to school uphill – both ways! – and learned to like it!

      I must’ve missed the employment notices on the Huff post asking for old, reminiscing fuddy-duddies. I guess I have been off the wire for some time…

  21. Beaver kills man in Belarus.

    An Angry Beaver.

    1. They taste like chicken.

    2. Was it Dag or Norb?

  22. So in some encouraging news, I was wearing a rubber Obama mask today to promote a drug war forum at my school and only one person directly accuse me of engaging in blackface/racism. Everyone else seemed to find it amusing.

    1. He’s a funny president. I remember lefties talking about how hard it was to make fun of Obama, but he’s possibly the easiest president to mock in a long time. Only Biden could be funnier.

      1. Yeah. That was always one of the most absurd talking points. The guy is Steve Urkel. He is a skinny, has big ears, a penchant for saying really stupid things. How could you not mock him?

      2. he’s possibly the easiest president to mock in a long time.

        With the possible exceptions of Ford and LBJ, every president since Hoover has been extremely mockable.

        1. Certainly. He’s merely extra-mockable.

          1. More mockable than W, Clinton, HW, Nixon, JFK, FDR? I’m going with average-for-presidents-but- extremely-high-for-normal-people mockability.

            1. Really, there’s so much talent in that group, I can’t argue. He’s definitely a contender, I’ll insist on that.

              1. I’ll allow it.

    2. You’re a funny guy, A Serious Man. I like you. That’s why I’m going to kill you last.

      1. He’s lying ASM!

  23. Billionaire Warren Buffett’s media company has bought another newspaper in Virginia, prompting rallies and protests of rich men’s control of the press by absolutely nobody nowhere.

    He’s one of the GOOD one percenters like George Soros, not the evil kind like those teabagging Kochsuckers!

  24. I’ve found your next exercise fad, bronies of H&R. Who’s ready to Prancercise?

  25. This is a music video. It contains music and video.

    1. Re: Warty,

      This is a music video. It contains music and video.

      Well, put some wheels on me and call me a bicycle! You mean to tell me that they still make those???

      1. It makes something something, all right.

    2. NSFW-ish.

      1. Also, those girls aren’t for John. They’re for the rest of us. You wouldn’t like those girls.

      2. You guys think everything is NSFW.

        Where the hell do you work? The Mormon Building? Pffft.

    3. Looks promising. Hope it is as good as this or this.

      1. more skin in the other one.

      2. If you’re a dude and you buy those little tiny shorts (like the guy in the video) do they come with some sort of strap or cup so that you balls don’t fall out?

        1. If they are anything like the track shorts I used to wear, they have a netting. Mine were shorter too.

          1. Another one of life’s little mysteries is solved.

        2. I think that’s what briefs are for, GBN.

          Nobody went for this video?

          1. Pfft. Briefs are for everything.

            But faithful viewers of Reno 911 know this won’t prevent your balls from falling out anyway.

            1. Pfft. Briefs are for everything.

              You don’t really mean that. Especially for those of us that look like we have Buckwheat in a scissor hold when we wear briefs.

          2. First of all, briefs are for kids.

            Secondly, when the boys escape, which they’ll inevitably do, they’ll be right there for the whole world to see. That might be fine for when you’re hanging out at rest stops, but I’m a high powered business executive and can’t have my balls on display at important business-type meetings.

            1. If your balls are big enough and enthusiastic enough to escape whatever you’re doing to imprison them, wouldn’t you want that on display at your business meetings?

              This is why *sets scrotum on conference table* I think you should invest with us.

        1. Haha, cute. I can’t think of any videos that objectify men quite the way the above videos do women. The ones that do seem to be tongue-in-cheek like Shania Twain – Man! I Feel Like A Woman or Robbie Williams – Rock DJ

          1. Full disclosure: Those guys were my classmates.

    4. It’s a video. But that’s not music.
      /GeT OFF MY LAWN

    5. and girls throwing like…girls

    6. “This is a music video. It contains music and video.”

      What music?

    7. Sort of dodge ball, like we played in grade school.

      Sort of.

    8. I didn’t hear any music or see any video … just lotso delicious underboob.

      Bless you, Warty, bless you.

  26. Possibly not completely stupid idea: a magazine for the latest generation of young dads. But also hilarious, because hipsters.

    But then there’s the sleek urban tone. “In New York, that’s normal,” Dr. Husni said. “But if I work with a guy who says he’s seeing a shrink because he has a baby, in Mississippi we call him crazy.”

    1. when did your name change again and what does it mean this time

        1. Why are Jason Bateman and Vincent Price in a band?

    2. Does the beardo on the right have any choice but be a stay at home dad? Who would hire that guy? And I doubt his arsenal mayonnaise or graphic design businesses really make any money.

      1. The combover. Look at it. Why does he have Hitler’s hair?

        1. He looks like Woody Allen’s special needs son.

        2. I meta guy two days ago who had a comb forward. I…I couldn’t stop staring.

        3. Who did he steal that kid from?

      2. BTW, beardo on the right is a creative director at J Crew.

        1. That answers the question of who would hire him. What the fuck a creative director does I have no idea.

    3. I should get my dad to start a magazine. DAD magazine. With cover stories like, “No, I asked for a 5/8ths socket, this is 9/16!”, and “Goddammit, son, mix that gasoline 50/50 with kerosene before you throw it on that fire.”

      1. “We are going out, be quiet and don’t embarrass your mother or I will slap the shit out of you”

      2. “Take the lighter and the solarcaine can out back and see if you can do something about that wasp’s nest.”

        1. ‘Hey, look son, I taught Pepper how to drive. That is one talented dog.’

        2. “Cut you down from that tree? You shouldn’t have let your brothers tie you up there in the first place!”

        3. ‘I didn’t know there was anyone in that duck blind when I started shooting. Those decoys were pretty real looking, weren’t they?’

          1. Your dad can teach you many important lessons, but only so long as you obey the admonition that always precedes these gems: Don’t tell your mother.

            1. Hard to keep from moms ears what the entire town is talking about. The man was a legend.

              1. That first sentence reads like a good country music lyric.

                My dad, because he was a criminal, always said, “Watch the heat.” He loved that phrase, and talking about how Thailand had the best women and food. That motherfucker loves himself some thailand.

                1. Pa was a coonass spic straight out of Hank Williams’ imagination.

          2. Man, how I can laugh about it now.

      3. “Shut up, you’ll scare the fish.”

        1. The only ice cream that would qualify as “Artisan” is Blue Bell.

  27. Sequestration be damned: The federal government is looking to fill 27,000 job openings.

    And to imagine that Fox News’ resident lesbian (Sally Kohn) blamed the attack on an Oregon woman by her very pissed ex-boyfriend (which happened last year, after the 911 dispatcher pretty much wished her good luck) on sequestration cuts.

  28. This is an article explaining why accidental gun deaths involving children are foreseeable and preventable.

    Of course the solution crafted is to regulate the crap out of guns in the home. But when you think about it, if the possibility of losing your child isn’t enough to make you lock up the guns, why would the threat of a fine/prosecution after the fact make you think twice?

    Needless to say, this logic was not welcome in the comments section because I wasn’t thinking of the children.

    1. Shit happens. And when you lock up your guns, they become well neigh impossible to use them for home defense. I grew up with guns accessible in my house and somehow managed not to shoot myself. I see no reason why other kids couldn’t manage the same thing.

    2. Is it a proposal to force everyone to keep their guns in safes and have yearly in home inspections?

      1. The author doesn’t go that far, he just thinks the state should make examples of the parents via prosecution.

        Some of the commentators, on the other hand, are batshit insane.

      2. That’s the view of many REAL libertarians that aren’t glib, cosmo, or anything like that at all. So I’ve been told.

        1. Nah, REAL libertarians support laws that force firearms owners to purchase liability insurance.

    3. That brings up a different point. There is a reason why people on farms used to beat their kids. Farms are full of dangerous animals and dangerous equipment. They are basically giant attractive nusences for kids. So parents had to have kids who listened and did what they were told or said kids would end up being run over or worse. Perhaps we have more gun accidents now because parents don’t make their kids listen in the way they did in the past.

      1. And there’s the whole business about more exposure to germs and allergens at a younger age, which apparently builds stronger immune systems. Perhaps children should be sent to farms for their first ten years. Instead of public institutions.

        1. Perhaps children should be sent to farms for their first ten years. Instead of public institutions.

          What you’re proposing is revolutionary! A revolution of culture, one might say!

          1. No, no, no, not going there. Not mandated farm living. I was just thinking that kids would be better off raised on farms.

            1. I think kids would be better off razed on farms.

          2. A friend of mine in HS always joked “the farm would’ve taken care of that one” whenever anyone did anything asinine.

            OT: I made wild cherry phosphate per that recipe you posted a week or so ago. It’s quite tasty.

            1. Excellent! Welcome to the club!

              “Once you go Phosphate, you never masturbate!”

              –W. K. Kellogg, 1906

              1. Now I’m going to have to rub one out while sipping a refreshing wild cherry phosphate, just to spite that self-righteous prick!

                1. Cherry Phosphate Rub Out would be a great neo-fedora folk band name.

      2. There’s something to this. My granddad would beat the hell me and my brothers when we’d go to visit him and did something stupid. Guess what — I never had an accident on his plantation and I’ve never had any sort of accident while shooting or doing any of the other things that we learned while we were with him, and neither have my brothers. Given how clumsy I was as a child, that is in and of itself a minor miracle.

      3. It’s true, none of my hoez have ever shot themselves with a gun due to my strong pimp hand.

      4. Accidental deaths from firearms have been going down for decades thanks to better firearm safety education, in part driven by the NRA and other shooting organizations.

  29. So long Twerking, hello Prancercise

    1. All these years I’ve been getting good exercise and never knew! Whooda thunk it?

    2. Geriatric cameltoe! Not good!

    3. You’re late!

  30. A hotel strike in Chicago ended after 10 years essentially as a complete failure.

    Hopefully it will NOT take another 10 years for the unions to realize that we’re on to them.

    1. So, that makes Obama what, God? What other biblical analogues can we find in this government? Biden must be Jesus, then.

      1. If this is how this is gonna go, can I play the romans that puts these motherfuckers up on crosses and in with the lions?

        1. So you’re thinking he wasn’t going religious so much as Jewish? So the president is whoever the greatest Jew ever was, then? Jesus? Einstein? Marx? Spinoza? Woody Allen?

          1. Mel Brooks.

          2. Pre-2000 Adam Sandler.

    2. I think the attorney general should step down to off of that plateau where he resides on high principle and whip some head. But he shouldn’t give up his office. What he should understand is that he is the chief law giver of the United States so to speak. He’s the Moses of our time and at least for this administration

      Jesus Christ. Holder could be exposed as a goat fucking pedophile and these sycophants would trample each other to defend him. What a sick fucking way to live.

      1. And “whip some head?” WTF?

      2. What in the goddamn fuck does any of that even mean.

        And do any of us really need to see Eric Holder “whip some head” — this is a family blog, for crying out loud.

        1. Unless “Whip some head” means resign. I could get behind that.

      3. What he should understand is that he is the chief law giver of the United States so to speak

        So to speak… falsely? inaccurately? with great obfuscation?

      4. An appropriate use of whip [some] head.


  31. lol, they are all smoking crack!


  32. I’m a stay at home dad. I’m a feminist. I have erotic thoughts about random women I pass on the street. How can I stop this?

    I’m a stay-at-home dad to twin 4-year-old girls who are already smarter than me, and my wife is a brilliant doctor who kicks ass and saves lives every day. I grew up with big sisters and a mom whose authority was unbreachable. I celebrate every inroad that women make into business, technology, science, politics, comedy, you name it, and I get angry about “slut-shaming” or “stereotype threat” or whatever is the affront du jour. And yet, in the caveman recesses of my imagination, I objectify women in ways that make Hooters look like a breakout session at a NOW conference.

    I can’t even think of a joke here.

    1. I’d tell him to cut his balls off, but I think he’s already done that.

    2. I’m a stay-at-home dad to twin 4-year-old girls who are already smarter than me

      It was kind of him to spend the rest of the letter proving that in abundance.

      1. What I don’t get is why. My wife would not be pleased if I stopped being a man in temperament. I mean, yes, guy stuff can annoy her at times, but that’s part of the reason she’s with me instead of some chick.

        1. Why is it that, without fail, Louis CK is the go-to comedian for dumb dildos? Not a big fan of Louie, but he deserves a little better of a fan base than the Jezebel harpies and their castrati.

          1. I think it’s because he’s not an uptight PC-weeny, so naturally all of the uptight PC-weenies claim fandom to show the world just how not uptight PC-weeny-ish they are.

    3. I feel good about myself at the end of the day, in the way that only fulfilling the bare minimum requirements of being a decent human being can make me.

      Tell me again how these people are different than the puritans. Please, because I can’t see it.

      1. Their catechism is longer?

        1. I don’t know if that’s even true.

          Christ man, self-flagellating over impure thoughts is about as crazy, religious nut job as you can get. This guy probably thinks he’s enlightened when his thinking is actually pre-enlightment age voodoo.

      2. I picked the wrong racket…. maybe I should start selling testosterone offsets.

    4. the affront du jour.

      Even this whipped douchebag can’t bring himself to take the grievance-mongering seriously.

    5. His great aspiration:

      “The male ceratioid lives solely to find and mate with a female. They are significantly smaller than a female angler fish, and may have trouble finding food in the deep sea. Furthermore, the growth of the alimentary canals of some males becomes stunted, preventing them from feeding.[9] These features necessitate his quickly finding a female anglerfish to prevent death. The sensitive olfactory organs help the male to detect the pheromones that signal the proximity of a female anglerfish. When he finds a female, he bites into her skin, and releases an enzyme that digests the skin of his mouth and her body, fusing the pair down to the blood-vessel level.[9] The male becomes dependent on the female host for survival, receiving nutrients via their shared circulatory system, and provides sperm to the female in return.”


    6. I believe it but still find it hard to imagine this kind of organism exists outside of some worthless sitcom. I bet his own hand is embarassed to be involved with him when he jerks off.

    7. Sexually repressed guy with low self-esteem and serious mommy issues — not the best stay at home dad for twin girls IMHO.

  33. Futurama is beginning to mirror present day reality.

    Chilling article, to say the least.

    1. “The creators of the ET3 say the system could be up and running within the next decade, although there are some certain grisly safety problems builders need to get around, namely not turning vacationers into bloody Rorschach blots during emergency stops.”

      The next Solyndra?

  34. “My only interest is making sure that when I look back 20 years from now, I say I accomplished everything that I could while I had this incredible privilege to advance the interests of the broadest number of Americans and to make sure that this country was stronger and more prosperous than it was when I came into office. That’s my only interest.”–Barack Obama

    What an amazing, humble man.

    1. That’s his only interest, and he is failing miserably at it. What a depressing retirement this man is going to have.

  35. As it turns out, Hitler was gay. I imagine that his “homosexuality” was as real as his Christianity.

    1. Merl’s notes further confirm other post-war interviews with Hitler’s caretakers that he was “hysterical,” a “megalomaniac,” and suffered from several ailments, notably flatulence for which he took drugs to stop passing gas. He also suggested that Hitler had Parkinson’s disease.

    2. You know who else…oh, damn it!

      1. Hitler’s evil extends even to today, to thwart a popular running gag.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.