Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

FBI Chief Denies Intent To Prosecute 'Criminal Co-conspirator' Journalists, NSA Faces Unprecedented Scrutiny, Number of Child Casualties Up in Afghanistan: P.M. Links

J.D. Tuccille | 6.13.2013 4:30 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
  • Exit sign
    Public Domain

    Under questioning on Capitol Hill, FBI Director Robert Mueller insisted that labeling journalist James Rosen a "criminal co-conspirator" should not be taken to mean that he was ever targeted for criminal prosecution. He also said the government is doing everything it can to get surveillance whistleblower Edward Snowden. Uh huh. Leather trenchcoats, all around.

  • The National Security Agency is squirming under unaccustomed scrutiny, as its surveillance of the public attracts wide attention for the first time, after the largely unsuccessful efforts of several previous whistleblowers.
  • A poll find that two-thirds of Americans believe IRS scrutiny of conservative groups was an intentional effort to punish political opponents. Hoping to channel that sentiment, Americans for Fair Taxation launched a campaign to abolish the feared tax agency.
  • Cafe owners in the Dutch city of Maastricht face prosecution for selling marijuana to foreigners — a business transaction now banned by officials who want to end the flow of pot tourists.
  • Fearing skyrocketing health insurance premiums under Obamacare, members of Congress and their aides consider heading for the exit early so they can keep their current coverage. Uh huh. What's sauce for the goose …
  • The number of child casualties in Afghanistan is up 27 percent over last year, with at least 414 children killed or injured in the first four months of 2013.
  • Nevada voters approved medical marijuana 13 years ago, and state officials have finally found time in their schedules to clear the way for dispensaries to open.

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!

The Rattler is a weekly newsletter from J.D. Tuccille. If you care about government overreach and tangible threats to everyday liberty, this is for you.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: US Surgeon General to Step Down

J.D. Tuccille is a contributing editor at Reason.

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (320)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Fist of Etiquette   12 years ago

    Under questioning on Capitol Hill, FBI Director Robert Mueller insisted that labeling journalist James Rosen a "criminal co-conspirator" should not be taken to mean that he was ever targeted for criminal prosecution.

    The FBI thinks everyone is a criminal co-conspirator.

    1. mad libertarian guy   12 years ago

      And if you look at our actions in juxtaposition of federal law, we are. And it's exactly the way they want it to be.

    2. Emmerson Biggins   12 years ago

      so, whoever said he was a criminal co-conspirator commited perjury then, when they were getting the warrant, right?

      1. Loki   12 years ago

        Wrong. Because FY, TW.

  2. A Serious Man   12 years ago

    Fearing skyrocketing health insurance premiums under Obamacare, members of Congress and their aides consider heading for the exit early so they can keep their current coverage. Uh huh. What's sauce for the goose ...

    Some animals are more equal than others.

    1. Fist of Etiquette   12 years ago

      Hopefully Obamacare covers Crocodile Tears Syndrome because I think I came down with a case. It's either that or a bad case of Schadenfreude.

    2. Tim   12 years ago

      They're getting older and they know the value of those gold plated benefits.

  3. Fist of Etiquette   12 years ago

    The number of child casualties in Afghanistan is up 27 percent over last year...

    A whole lot of not thinking of the children.

    1. Almanian!   12 years ago

      Stupid fucking kids should stop flinging themselves in the path of bullets and drones.

      Darwin at work, I'm afraid...

    2. mad libertarian guy   12 years ago

      We had to kill them in order to save them. Surely they would much rather be remembered as innocent children who were killed collaterally so that we might be free in America, than to be killed in the future because you are a terrorist, or in near proximity to one and be of age to be considered one yourself.

      1. Almanian!   12 years ago

        USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA!

    3. sgs   12 years ago

      We are going to free the hell out of them.

  4. fish   12 years ago

    The FBI thinks everyone is a criminal co-conspirator.

    I am.

    1. T   12 years ago

      Benn nice knowing you, fish. Write from Gitmo.

      1. HellsBells   12 years ago

        But didn't you hear? Gitmo is closing any day now...

        1. Bean Counter   12 years ago

          Gitmo is closing any DECADE now

          FIFY

  5. mad libertarian guy   12 years ago

    Cafe owners in the Dutch city of Maastricht face prosecution for selling marijuana to foreigners ? a business transaction now banned by officials who want to end the flow of pot tourists.

    Sort of.

    You can still buy weed in Amsterdam as a foreigner. They better not change that before next year.

    1. BigT   12 years ago

      My friends tell me you can only buy at sketchy coffee shops, not the more popular. I may need to investigate personally. Maybe Reason should send a contingent to research for a future dedicated issue.

      1. Apatheist ?_??   12 years ago

        My understanding is that the reversed on the national policy and instead let the cities decide. Amsterdam obviously chosen not to have the no foreigner policy.

        1. Eduard van Haalen   12 years ago

          I keep telling you, I am Dutch.

          Tulips and windmills and street-legal hookers
          Dikes and Anne Frank - now there was a looker!
          OTC pot with no DEA stings
          These are a few of my favorite things.

          1. Fatwa Arbuckle   12 years ago

            +1 Maria von Trapp.

          2. Damned Fool   12 years ago

            It's a Trapp!

  6. db   12 years ago

    Nevada voters approved medical marijuana 13 years ago, and state officials have finally found time in their schedules to clear the way for dispensaries to open.

    OMG!!! Marijuana induced apathy! !!

    1. Kaptious Kristen   12 years ago

      Well, with medical weed to the west and recreational weed to the east they finally realized how much money they would be throwing away if they didn't get off their asses.

    2. Robert   12 years ago

      Maybe now NY's health commissioner can activate the med mj program NY legislated ~35 yrs. ago.

  7. John   12 years ago

    http://jimromenesko.com/2013/0.....-brothers/

    Fascists at Duke University work to stop Koch's buying of newspapers.

    1. Almanian!   12 years ago

      *shocked face*

    2. Irish   12 years ago

      When you bully people into not speaking, you technically haven't violated the 1st Amendment. Welcome to the modern left.

      1. John   12 years ago

        Not unless you are the government. It doesn't necessarily make you anti-1st Amendment. It just makes you a fascist.

        1. Irish   12 years ago

          That's my point. Leftists claim they're 'in favor' of the Bill of Rights, then they use schools to indoctrinate people against the Bill of Rights. That way, if people all think like you do, the First Amendment is meaningless anyway.

    3. SugarFree   12 years ago

      I've been saying that Duke sucks for years. Glad to see the rest of you finally getting on board.

      1. John   12 years ago

        Duke is a shit hole.

        1. BigT   12 years ago

          Duke is a wannabe Ivy. All the smug, without the depth.

        2. BiMonSciFiCon   12 years ago

          No, it is not. A large contingent of the undergrads who go there are dbags, but it is definitely not a "shit hole."

          1. robc   12 years ago

            University of New Jersey-Durham.

            How can it not be a shit hole?

            1. BiMonSciFiCon   12 years ago

              I lived in Durham for three years. The campus is beautiful. Durham has some character as a city as well. Great food.

              If you take out the douchy undergrads (they probably make up 30-40%) it's a great place to go to school. At least for grad/professional school. I can't speak for the undergrad program.

      2. wareagle   12 years ago

        it's why my eldest's college money went to Carolina, not that it is better according to him.

      3. robc   12 years ago

        The biggest Rand Paul negative is that he went to Duke Medical School.

    4. Fist of Etiquette   12 years ago

      They will not tolerate those intolerant Kochs.

    5. DJF   12 years ago

      Why, was Koch a lacrosse player?

      1. Restoras   12 years ago

        I see what you did there...

    6. Killazontherun   12 years ago

      The left considers Koch buying a newspaper chain a potential abuse of corporate power where they will have a monopoly on what opinions get published; whereas, the Corporation for Public Broadcast is just democracy in action because the people are the government which gives you and I a say in what is on the air.

      1. C. Anacreon   12 years ago

        Plus, they have those delightful pledge breaks!

        1. Enough About Palin   12 years ago

          Plus, they have those delightful pledge bait-and-switch breaks!

        2. Kaptious Kristen   12 years ago

          I don't know how they are able to raise any money given the shite they show during pledge drives. And is it just me, or are they running pledge drives more than regular programming now?

          1. Killazontherun   12 years ago

            My kid grew out of his Sesame Street phase, so I, thankfully, have no idea what they are doing now.

      2. Enough About Palin   12 years ago

        Didn't some BILLIONAIRE from Mexico buy the NYT?

    7. JW   12 years ago

      Can someone explain to me why the Tribune CEO wasted 40 minutes of his life talking to some piss-ant student?

    8. Enough About Palin   12 years ago

      Wouldn't the trustee have a fiduciary responsibility to sell to whomever makes the highest offer?

      1. John   12 years ago

        Yes.

    9. Irish   12 years ago

      "The conversation was fairly unproductive or negative," says Spangher, a former Duke Chronicle columnist whose interests include green energy technology. "His primary purpose for calling me [back] was to explain his side of the story rather than listening to my arguments."

      HAHAHAHAHA! I didn't even notice this part.

      'The son of a bitch should have just sat there and listened to me! Instead he tried to explain his side of the story!'

      The horror.

      1. BiMonSciFiCon   12 years ago

        "We strongly urge Karsh to reject the bid. Although we recognize that he has a fiduciary duty to shareholders in his company, Karsh has a more pressing social and moral responsibility to ensure that major American newspapers remain free from the corrupting influence that the Koch brothers have brought to nearly every sector of society."

        Paging barfman. Also, citation needed.

        1. barfman2013   12 years ago

          *barf*

        2. T   12 years ago

          Legally, that fiduciary one is the only one that matters.

          1. BiMonSciFiCon   12 years ago

            Yeah, like the president of Oaktree Capital Management is going to put his neck on the line for a bunch of idiot college students.

            I never read the Chronicle when I was there, and it looks like I made the right decision. This also validates not spending any time around the undergrads.

            I am considering writing an op-ed in response. Any suggestions/good one-liners I can steal?

            1. Irish   12 years ago

              "My belief in free speech is so profound that I am seldom tempted to deny it to the other fellow. Nor do I make any effort to differentiate between the other fellow right and that other fellow wrong, for I am convinced that free speech is worth nothing unless it includes a full franchise to be foolish and even...malicious."

              - H.L. Mencken

              ^ Use this quote somewhere if you do. This is one of the best free speech quotes because it blatantly says 'Yes, free speech exists for assholes, enemies and scum as much as for anyone else.' I think liberals protesting the sale of a newspaper to the Kochs would do well to read this quote, think about it, and then consider whether they want to live in a society where the sale of a newspaper can be stopped by the worst sort of heckler's veto.

              1. robc   12 years ago

                I like it, but what is the ...?

                Was Mencken doing a dramatic pause or is there more to the quote?

            2. Robert S   12 years ago

              Mention their support of the gay marriage bill in New York.

              1. BiMonSciFiCon   12 years ago

                I will definitely use that. I was thinking of listing the not-so-conservative things they've done, but I did not think of that one.

                I would love to write a snarky and derisive letter pointing out how the Koch bros hate is ignorant and unfounded, but that never works. I think I'm going to go the Russ Roberts/Kling route of killing them with kindness and thoughtfulness. Neither approach works on liberals but at least I won't come off as an asshole.

      2. Red Rocks Rockin   12 years ago

        Typical Milennial progtard--equates not changing his stance and completely agreeing with him to being "unproductive."

        Nuke universities today.

    10. Eduard van Haalen   12 years ago

      "Spangher is personally opposed to the sale"

      Personally opposed? Well, if that means the same thing in this context as in the context of abortion, it means Spangher will do nothing to stop the sale, will fight to keep it legal, and will support the sale with tax money.

  8. A Serious Man   12 years ago

    Incarcerated felon writes letter thanking the NRA for opposing background checks, says he can't wait to get an illegal gun after his release.

    1. Tim   12 years ago

      And I can't wait for him to get shot trying to rob an NRA member.

    2. Tonio   12 years ago

      Gee, I wonder how much he got paid for that, and by who?

      1. Episiarch   12 years ago

        Yeah, exactly. Pull a stunt much?

      2. SugarFree   12 years ago

        Pelosi sent him some boudoir photos.

        1. Matrix   12 years ago

          hmm, so he will be forced to view them until he goes and purchases said gun?

        2. Almanian!   12 years ago

          *barf*

          1. SugarFree   12 years ago

            At this point, Nancy has to use jumper cables as nipple clamps.

            1. Episiarch   12 years ago

              Don't start, NutraSweet. You know where this road leads.

              1. SugarFree   12 years ago

                A deep cycle marine battery?

                1. Episiarch   12 years ago

                  NOT AGAIN

          2. Matrix   12 years ago

            yeah... it might be even more effective than ipecac

      3. ant1sthenes   12 years ago

        Let's ask the NSA!

    3. Certified Public Asskicker   12 years ago

      Fuck, I read the comments:

      I don't understand NRA members and gun rights advocates in general who say that background checks won't deter people from getting guns but, then, are STILL opposed to background checks. If they don't deter, then why oppose them?

      And re. the argument that SOME criminals will STILL be able to get guns: That's true.

      But what law is 100 percent effective? People still drive drunk, even though it's illegal.

      And anyway, doesn't making the seller/ gun donator criminally liable for skirting background checks make it somewhat less likely that the background check will be skirted?

      1. Loki   12 years ago

        Fuck, I read the comments:

        You poor bastard...

    4. Suthenboy   12 years ago

      Huh? How the fuck does he think he will do that?

  9. SugarFree   12 years ago

    The number of child casualties in Afghanistan is up 27 percent over last year, with at least 414 children killed or injured in the first four months of 2013.

    And nothing else happened.

    1. Tim   12 years ago

      Smaller graves are better for the environment.

      1. Almanian!   12 years ago

        "How can you kill women and children?"

        "It's easy! Ya just don't lead 'em so much!"

    2. JW   12 years ago

      414 future terrorists prevented or unsaved.

  10. John   12 years ago

    http://www.washingtontimes.com.....lfillment/

    Nancy Pelosi, "late term abortions are sacred ground to her". Remember kids, all of the religious nuts are on the Right.

    1. Almanian!   12 years ago

      She's doing it....for teh childrenz...

    2. Rich   12 years ago

      Catholic women fired back at Mrs. Pelosi.

      Uh-oh. *Now* you've gone and done it, The Washington Post.

    3. lap83   12 years ago

      I like that line about "fulfillment". Is that what we're calling cronyism now?

    4. Heroic Mulatto   12 years ago

      Nancy Pelosi, "late term abortions are sacred ground to her".

      So just what death cult does Pelosi belong to? Kali-centric Thugee? Heaven's Gate? Palestinian cult of martyrdom?

      1. NeonCat   12 years ago

        Reformed Molochian

      2. Generic Stranger   12 years ago

        I wouldn't be surprised if she were involved in Heaven's Gate at some time or another...

        1. Episiarch   12 years ago

          Pelosi was involved with the movie that destroyed United Artists?!?

          1. Generic Stranger   12 years ago

            Also yes probable.

        2. Heroic Mulatto   12 years ago

          Hey, their website still exists in all its GIF-tastic glory.

          1. BakedPenguin   12 years ago

            That "G" still looks like a Packer's logo to me.

    5. ant1sthenes   12 years ago

      MOLOCH HUNGERS FOR INFANT SOULS

      Ceterum censeo Pelosia esse delendam

  11. Fist of Etiquette   12 years ago

    He also said the government is doing everything it can to get surveillance whistleblower Edward Snowden.

    I doubt he used to term whistleblower.

  12. John   12 years ago

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/.....35178.html

    Obama giving out bumper stickers to show your support of Obamacare. Coming to a Pius near you.

    1. Episiarch   12 years ago

      Oh, they've had those for a while now. The first time I saw one I knew the person in the car was potentially retarded so I kept my distance in case they decided they wanted cake. They all want cake.

      1. John   12 years ago

        Yes. They will go across a highway median and into oncoming traffic if they think cake is over there. Give them a good distance and keep them in front of you if you can.

        1. Episiarch   12 years ago

          I once saw one on a car with Oregon plates, and I knew I had to get away immediately before the driver decided I was cake. It was quite frightening.

          1. JW   12 years ago

            You see the I (HEART) OBAMACARE stickers all over DC. Depending on my mood, I just flip them off as I pass.

            1. mad libertarian guy   12 years ago

              You see the I (HEART) OBAMACARE stickers all over DC.

              You wouldn't think would be the case being that Obamacare is going to make them all quit to avoid having to pay much higher premiums.

        2. Tim   12 years ago

          WHO'S GOT CAKE?

          1. BigT   12 years ago

            My bumper says: "F the President"

            1. Apatheist ?_??   12 years ago

              Best part is you never have to take it off after each election.

      2. Loki   12 years ago

        Actually these bumper stickers could serve a useful purpose in telling you which cars are being driven by people who are functionally retarded.

    2. NeonCat   12 years ago

      I always want to stop the people with Obamacare bumper stickers and ask them if they own stock in health insurance companies but I don't know if I would laugh uncontrollably or shake my head sadly when they'd say no.

  13. Episiarch   12 years ago

    a business transaction now banned by officials who want to end the flow of pot tourists

    I'm kind of wondering why you would want to discourage tourism by people who want to go get stoned and chill out. Do they discourage tourism from English hooligans who get wasted and loud and puke in the streets?

    1. Tim   12 years ago

      Yeah, why not ban pints?

      1. Tonio   12 years ago

        Because, dirty hippies, or something?

      2. Whahappan?   12 years ago

        Already been done in England. Although they only banned glass pints, you can still get plastic pints. Yeah, you thought the world couldn't get any more retarded.

    2. Almanian!   12 years ago

      FOKIN' MAN UUUUUUUU....WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

      *BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARF*

      *punches nearest person in the face*

      FOKIN' MAN UUUUUUUUUUUUU!! WOOOOOO!!!

    3. Auric Demonocles   12 years ago

      When I would go to Montreal as an undergrad, I always thought it was weird when the guys at the border tried to question and intimidate us. I always thought "It's pretty obvious that the 5 of us are going to go spend about a day and a half in your country while spending hundreds and hundreds of dollars".

      1. John   12 years ago

        What did they hate the strippers on St. Catherine's Street? Did they not want those girls to make living?

        1. Restoras   12 years ago

          Dude, come on. The term is Canadian Ballet.

        2. Auric Demonocles   12 years ago

          While full contact lap dances are an interesting novelty, we were more interested in being able to drink in public.

          1. Nikkis enthusiastic dissent   12 years ago

            What do you mean by "in public"? Because when I lived there, open containers were one of the few things you might actually get ticketed for.

            1. Dagny T.   12 years ago

              I am guessing the younger drinking age. I went to college in a border-ish town and tons of Americans would come up to enjoy the extravagant relative freedom of a less-insane drinking age.

              1. Nikkis enthusiastic dissent   12 years ago

                Yeah. We got Ontarians too!

      2. Episiarch   12 years ago

        Well, that's because the border guards don't care about tourism. They're not politicians or local business owners. They took that job to question and intimidate people. And they did.

        1. Loki   12 years ago

          They took that job to question and intimidate people.

          And they don't have the stones to become actual cops. Cops sometimes have to deal with people who are actually dangerous, not college kids looking to have a good time.

    4. Apatheist ?_??   12 years ago

      Do they discourage tourism from English hooligans who get wasted and loud and puke in the streets?

      No, and the marijuana doesn't chill them out either.

    5. Robert   12 years ago

      Apparently they weren't good for the other businesses in town. Like they would zip in from over the nearest border, buy, and zip back, presumably to Belgium.

  14. Fist of Etiquette   12 years ago

    Cafe owners in the Dutch city of Maastricht face prosecution for selling marijuana to foreigners ? a business transaction now banned by officials who want to end the flow of pot tourists.

    Tourist dollars are yucky.

    1. Francisco d Anconia   12 years ago

      ALL dollars are yucky.

      1. T   12 years ago

        Mainly because you filthy heathens won't wash properly.

    2. BigT   12 years ago

      Half the Italians between 16 and 25 fill up the place and act like soccer hooligans. It ain't pretty, or safe.

      1. Fist of Etiquette   12 years ago

        I don't care how many dago, guinea, wop, greaseball, goombahs come out of the woodwork!

  15. itsnotmeitsyou   12 years ago

    NSA Chief drops hint about ISP web and email surveillance.

    This is one of those "not wittingly" moments that are very telling. We know what they can do with metadata from phone calls, imagine what is possible from knowing every email header and website that you've visited.

    1. John   12 years ago

      If they can get cell phone calls, they can certainly get all of that.

      1. itsnotmeitsyou   12 years ago

        I am certain that they are capable of getting much more than just cell phone metadata. And honestly, I'd be more surprised to find out they aren't already.

    2. Rich   12 years ago

      "I don't want to make a mistake" and reveal too much, Alexander said, adding that disclosing details about such surveillance would cause "our country to lose some sort of protection."

      Do these guys realize *at all* how ridiculous they sound?

    3. Ted S.   12 years ago

      This is why I visit porn involving all genders and races instead of focusing on one particular fetish.

    4. ant1sthenes   12 years ago

      Headers? Shit, I thought Congress was trying to pass a law saying that the 4th amendment covers email. I'm guessing that they get the whole thing.

  16. John   12 years ago

    http://blogs.cbn.com/thebrodyf.....ar-on.aspx

    Ron Paul says there is a war on Christianity. heh.

    1. Tonio   12 years ago

      Rand Paul, John. And you wonder why you're not taken more seriously. And I say this in pity, not in anger.

      1. John   12 years ago

        Yeah Tonio, I lose so much sleep worrying about whether you take me seriously. Project much?

        1. Ted S.   12 years ago

          Don't worry, John. Nobody takes you seriously.

      2. Tonio   12 years ago

        Don't want to be fact checked? Post accurate info.

        1. John   12 years ago

          You just stay on the job there Tonio. You are out there in America's toughest neighborhoods doing God's work.

      3. RBS   12 years ago

        Are yall still having your little cat fight from this morning?

  17. Irish   12 years ago

    Via Instapundit:

    Washington Post writes article about how expensive it is for the president to go to Africa...

    ...Josh Marshall claims it's because they're racist.

    Wapo has story on the immense costs of taking black presidents on trips to Africa

    These people are insane.

    1. John   12 years ago

      I can't remember a President R or D who didn't at one time or another get called out in the media for taking expensive trips. And Marshall isn't insane so much as he is stupid and vile.

      1. Irish   12 years ago

        Cardinal ACK! ?@megapotamus 47m

        @joshtpm That nigger ran for office strictly for the bennies. No surprise there since he has no understanding of anything more weighty.

        Indeed, Cardinal Ack! Indeed.

        1. Brandon   12 years ago

          I may have to re-think my total Twitter ban...

    2. Loki   12 years ago

      Will one of our intrepid DC area commentariat please track down Josh Marshall and punch him right in his smug douchey little face? I'd do it myself but I don't live in Der Cesspool and I'm too busy to take off work and fly out there no matter how much I may want to.

      1. Kaptious Kristen   12 years ago

        EJ Dionne is my top priority. This Marshall character will just have to get in line.

        1. Whahappan?   12 years ago

          Beware the fists of fury!!

        2. ant1sthenes   12 years ago

          Challenge him to put up his dukes first, just so everyone nearby can laugh at his tiny, baby hands.

    3. Let Me Ride   12 years ago

      Josh Marshall. If there were a God, Josh Marshall would've had the onset of ALS symptoms by now.

      I bet this guy doesn't even have the aggressively metastasizing case of cancer he so richly deserves!

  18. A Serious Man   12 years ago

    Feminist writers wonder why the gaming industry is sexist considering that half of video gamers are women.

    For some reason, rationality and the profit motive don't seem to apply to women and people of color when it comes to the entertainment industry. There's nothing wrong with wanting to squeeze more profits out of international audiences, and out of young men, who seem pretty comfortably served themselves by blockbusters' takeover of Hollywood. But apparently when it comes to women and non-white people, once again, we're the tapped-out exception, rather than a potentially profitable rule.

    Um, racist, sexist, market failure?

    1. Irish   12 years ago

      Probably because they buy the games anyway. Why would I change what I'm doing if the people who might be offended buy my product regardless?

      1. mad libertarian guy   12 years ago

        It's most likely because the vast majority of said people who ought to be offended, aren't.

    2. Almanian!   12 years ago

      we're the tapped-out exception

      So...she wants to "get tapped" more.

      THIS IS WHY THERE ARE NO FEMALE...something.

    3. SugarFree   12 years ago

      Gee, someone doesn't want to spend millions to make a video game for a market that overanalyzes everything and seem to be looking for any excuse not to buy a product?

      Must be racism.

    4. Episiarch   12 years ago

      Are half of video gamers really women? Wow, if that's true, that's a huge increase from just probably 10 years ago. Of course, I probably don't know what the fuck I'm talking about. But if I do, isn't the fact that women have fully matched the market share of men mean that game companies have gone out of their way to produce titles that attract women?

      1. John   12 years ago

        If you count every woman who plays Farmville on Facebook or bejewelled or Angry Birds on their iphone, that is probably true. But making up half of the population of gamers is not the same as making up half of the "market" for video games. Maths is just really a brutal mistress for feminists.

        1. Nikkis enthusiastic dissent   12 years ago

          Yeah, all the stats I have seen on this (and I just investigated those cited, and they don't give enough info to say if this has changed) indicate that if you count social, mobile, and casual online games, women make up half. But if you're talking console gaming or "real" PC gaming, it's still a guy thing.

          1. John   12 years ago

            IN other words, men are where the money is.

        2. RBS   12 years ago

          Yeah, what John said.

        3. itsnotmeitsyou   12 years ago

          Yeah, they are probably getting their data from something like this which includes mobile and web browser games in the data. I'm sure if it were just console and actual installed PC games the numbers would be way different.

          There are an increasing number of girl gamers out there, but I just can't put the angry birds/farmville people in the category of "gamer"

          1. Episiarch   12 years ago

            I'll make a rule: if you're not killing things and blowing shit up on at least a 22" screen, it's not "gaming".

          2. Enough About Palin   12 years ago

            Can Fifty Shades of Grey be turned into a game? I'm not a gamer, so I have no idea.

            1. SugarFree   12 years ago

              Fifty Shades of Grey would be easy to make into a video game. Just take the Twilight videogame and re-skin all the characters.

              1. Matrix   12 years ago

                Just take the Twilight videogame and re-skin all the characters.

                FIFY

              2. Episiarch   12 years ago

                There's a Twilight video game?!?

                What am I saying, of course there is. When does the GoT game come out?

                1. Mad Scientist   12 years ago

                  There's a Twilight video game?!?

                  Sure there is!

                  1. JW   12 years ago

                    Hey Ash, Whatcha Playin?

                    Girl Games.

                2. SugarFree   12 years ago

                  http://www.gameofthrones-rpg.com

                  1. JW   12 years ago

                    Game of Thrones: The GameGame of Thrones: The GameGame of Thrones: The GameGame of Thrones: The GameGame of Thrones: The GameGame of Thrones: The Game

                3. Damned Fool   12 years ago

                  Crusader Kings 2 came out a while ago.

      2. Matrix   12 years ago

        they probably count shit like angry birds and words with friends.

      3. Francisco d Anconia   12 years ago

        Perhaps, just perhaps, it's because NORMAL women don't think like feminists think they should think?

        1. Dagny T.   12 years ago

          Thank you. I am already sick of this bullshit "50% of women are gamers HURR DURR" statistic that you just know they are going to cram down our throats for years to come. Just because more men tend to like Activity X than women is not cause for concern in the mind of anyone sane.

          If not liking video games is another thing that makes me a thoughtcriminal to feminists, however, I can live with that.

      4. Loki   12 years ago

        isn't the fact that women have fully matched the market share of men mean that game companies have gone out of their way to produce titles that attract women?

        Yes. And they produce plenty of games that appeal mainly to women. See John's comment re: farmville and all those other stupid social media games

    5. A Serious Man   12 years ago

      My favorite comment on the subject was from a Slate article where some woman wrote that the only reason games like Mass Effect allow you to choose the protagonists' gender is so you can get some lesbian sex scenes.

      1. Ska   12 years ago

        Fuck, I can't believe I didn't have a female Shepherd character just to have lesbian sex with that blue chick in ME1 and hot, hot whatever her name (Miranda?) is in ME2.

    6. Nikkis enthusiastic dissent   12 years ago

      blockbusters' takeover of Hollywood

      Takeover? What was there before?

      1. Loki   12 years ago

        Her panties are just in a wad because they don't make enough movies like The Notebook or The Lakehouse or some shit for her tastes.

    7. Restoras   12 years ago

      Not suprisingly, this comes out at around the time of E3. Sure half of the gaming public may be women, but women don't play console games which is what E3 is all about.

      Go back to serving me coffee in CafeVille or whatever stupid Facebook game you play, Alyssa.

    8. Enough About Palin   12 years ago

      "or some reason, rationality and the profit motive don't seem to apply to women and people of color when it comes to the entertainment industry."

      They need to come up with a plantation game where you can beat and rape the slave women and go off hunting the runaways.

      For the diversity.

      1. Loki   12 years ago

        Django Unchained: The Video Game.

    9. Coeus   12 years ago

      Men spend over $300 a year on games. Women spend about $80. Fuck bejeweled and farmville. This 50 percent bullshit is so tired. Like, wage gap tired. Debunked so often that it's ludicrous we're still hearing about it.

    10. ant1sthenes   12 years ago

      The industry gives a shit about where its money comes from. If half of gamers are women, but they spend about $20 a year for games on their phone and Facebook, then they don't matter as much as the teenage brodude who spends $600 a year for every iteration of Call of Doody and Madden that the industry shits out.

      There's also the fact that the industry is sexist because there aren't a lot of women in it. Maybe to some extent that's because it is already sexist, but if that were enough to stop women from entering an industry, they'd all be barefoot and pregnant. But game production is mostly technical trades, and often has shit life/work balance, so the people most drawn to it are going to be smart young men, who for any number of reasons may have acquired fairly misogynistic attitudes over the course of their lifetime.

  19. The Immaculate Trouser   12 years ago

    If I were to chart out what pro-harassment as a political movement looks like, therefore, it's this:

    Belief: Bitches ain't shit.
    Goals: To feel free to put any random woman in her place both for the immediate pleasure of doing so and for the long-term gain of women feeling stuck in second class status.
    Tactics: Inundate any woman who pushes back against harassment with even more harassment, hoping to make the price of speaking out so high that women give up.

    Fun.

    1. Almanian!   12 years ago

      So Ms. Marcotte's talking about Palin, Bachmann, Ann Romney, et al? Right?

      RIGHT?

    2. Nikkis enthusiastic dissent   12 years ago

      Does anyone who says "bitches ain't shit" actually mean "women"? I mean I am constantly dealing with bitches and at most half of them are women.

      1. SugarFree   12 years ago

        In the original source, "bitches" clearly refers to all women:

        Bitches ain't shit but hoes and tricks
        Lick on these nuts and suck the dick
        Get the fuck out after you're done

        -William Carlos Williams

        1. Nikkis enthusiastic dissent   12 years ago

          Plenty of male tricks out there, yo.

          1. SugarFree   12 years ago

            But are male tricks "bitches"?

            There needs to be more rap lyrics analyzed the pages of Explication.

          2. RBS   12 years ago

            Also, Ice Cube girl with a b.

            1. RBS   12 years ago

              *spells.

        2. Heroic Mulatto   12 years ago

          From the same poem:

          I used to know a bitch named Eric Wright
          We used to roll around and fuck the hoes at night
          Tight than a motherfucker with the gangsta beats
          And we was ballin' on the motherfucking Compton streets

          You fail at Modernist poetry.

          1. SugarFree   12 years ago

            So was Eric Wright a hoe or a trick? And what does "ballin'" involve in this context? Ot "tight"?

            The death of Eazy-E is starting to make more sense.

            1. Heroic Mulatto   12 years ago

              I'm going to propose the Bitch Uncertainty Principle. It seems bitches are quanta and exhibit hoe-trick duality. Check out the gender shift in the stanza:

              I used to know a bitch named Eric Wright
              We used to roll around and fuck the hoes at night
              Tight than a mutharfucka with the gangsta beats
              And we was ballin' on the muthafuckin' Compton streets
              Peep, the shit got deep and it was on
              Number 1 song after number 1 song
              Long as my muthafuckin' pockets was fat
              I didn't give a fuck where the bitch was at
              But she was hangin' with a white bitch doin' the shit she do
              Suckin' on his dick just to get a buck or 2
              And the few ends she got didn't mean nothin'
              Now she's suing cuz the shit she be doin' ain't shit
              Bitch can't hang with the streets, she found herself short
              So now she's takin' me to court
              It's real conversation for your ass
              So recognize and pass to Daz

              1. Nikkis enthusiastic dissent   12 years ago

                Yeah that verse is wild. Strangely I can't think of people like Wu-Tang or Biggie actually using bitch anywhere near as interchangeably, and a quick look at some lyrics suggests they did not. Is this the REAL East Cost/West Coast division?!?

                1. Heroic Mulatto   12 years ago

                  Granted, this was during Dre's "I'm obsessed with the idea of Easy E getting fucked in the ass" days.

                  1. Nikkis enthusiastic dissent   12 years ago

                    If you have something bad to say about "Dre Day," I think you should say it to my face, HM.

                    1. Heroic Mulatto   12 years ago

                      Just an observation.

                      The only "bad" thing I have to say is that it's no "Nuthin' But A "G" Thang"

                    2. Nikkis enthusiastic dissent   12 years ago

                      Acceptable.

              2. SugarFree   12 years ago

                Maybe if you are a bitch long enough you become a bitch physically.

                That's why Tulpa's scrotum split down the seam and his balls fell out.

                1. Episiarch   12 years ago

                  Did he really have any balls in the first place?

                  1. JW   12 years ago

                    I'm using them off-label for a 3rd testicle.

                  2. SugarFree   12 years ago

                    I think Tulpa was born male, but I accept that his balls might have been artificial fro a long time.

      2. HellsBells   12 years ago

        Seems like "bitch" is a favorite term of endearment for each other among my gay friends.

  20. Enough About Palin   12 years ago

    SEQUESTER JESTER: The Obama Family Trip to Africa to Cost $60 to $100 Million

    1. Enough About Palin   12 years ago

      Fuck the Irish!

      1. jesse.in.mb   12 years ago

        I thought Dora was latina or something. I wouldn't have guessed Irish.

        1. Calidissident   12 years ago

          *slow clap*

    2. Tonio   12 years ago

      Nothing left to cut!

  21. John   12 years ago

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/the.....me_in.html

    People are totally misunderstanding the significance of white deaths outnumbering births. The significance is not "the brown people are taking over" (insert horror or glee depending on which side you are on). It is that white people tend to make up the bulk of the middle and upper classes. The statistic has nothing to do with race and everything to do with class. It means our upper and middle classes are not having kids, which by implication means most of our next generation is coming from the poor. That is not a good thing. And worse still, it is a situation the government has pretty much created by making it so damned expensive to have a kid. Kids are luxury items for the middle and upper class.

    1. Irish   12 years ago

      I like that liberals think this is a good thing, despite the fact that it means the wealthy are disappearing and won't be there to rob anymore.

      What do they think will happen to their grand socialist utopia when the upper class no longer exists to plunder?

      1. John   12 years ago

        They don't think. It shocks them every single time socialism turns into hunger and misery

      2. Episiarch   12 years ago

        Then they will become the upper class. I once saw someone describe class warfare as primarily the upper middle class waging war on the upper class, because they wanted to replace them and move up to the top spot. Considering the college-educated good-salary-making makeup of a lot of class warriors, there might be some validity to that.

        1. JW   12 years ago

          But then, the new upper-middle class will wage war on them! It's a never ending cycle of class warfare!

          The only winning move...

          1. Episiarch   12 years ago

            No. Then you ruthlessly suppress the formation of a middle class so there is no upper middle class to do it to you.

            1. JW   12 years ago

              The winning move!

              1. Episiarch   12 years ago

                FINISH HIM

          2. seguin   12 years ago

            Is to nuke them from orbit?

            It's the only way to be sure.

        2. Boisfeuras   12 years ago

          I once saw someone describe class warfare as primarily the upper middle class waging war on the upper class, because they wanted to replace them and move up to the top spot.

          Orwell? From Emmanuel Goldstein's The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism:

          "The aims of these three groups are entirely irreconcilable. The aim of the High is to remain where they are. The aim of the Middle is to change places with the High. The aim of the Low, when they have an aim?for it is an abiding characteristic of the Low that they are too much crushed by drudgery to be more than intermittently conscious of anything outside their daily lives?is to abolish all distinctions and create a society in which all men shall be equal. Thus throughout history a struggle which is the same in its main outlines recurs over and over again."

      3. Francisco d Anconia   12 years ago

        it means the wealthy are disappearing and won't be there to rob anymore.

        I suspect the definition of "wealthy" will expand to maintain the entitlements they've come to expect.

    2. The Immaculate Trouser   12 years ago

      That's always been the way of things: births in the lower classes have always been out of proportion with births in the higher classes. In America, this has worked out fine up till now because there was sufficient economic liberty and industry that someone from the lower classes would, in all likelihood, end up as part of the middle class in due course.

      The more redistribution and less economic liberty we have, the more ossified the classes become (as is the case in parts of Europe), as redistribution and welfare tend to raise the reservation wage and regulation imposes entry costs on would-be entrepreneurs.

    3. T   12 years ago

      You get subsidized for kids if you're poor, not if you're middle class or better. So what happpens?

      1. John   12 years ago

        Yup. Add to that poor people are under little or no social pressure about kids. If you are poor, you can raise a kid cheap and no one will care. If you are middle class, the whole world will be up your ass if the little snowflake suffers so much as a single privation.

        1. Matrix   12 years ago

          indeed. and they all think you should have your kids involved in 10 activities, or you're a bad parent. And that shit is really expensive.

          1. HellsBells   12 years ago

            ^^THIS! You should see how shocked the other soccer moms are when I tell them I just want my kids to play outside after school.....then they hear my politics and I never see them again. Wonder why?

      2. Mad Scientist   12 years ago

        How is the middle class not subsidized for having kids? They still get tax credits and free schools that I have to pay for.

        1. Matrix   12 years ago

          heavily subsidized food (food stamps), free lunch programs at schools, subsidized daycare, medicaid.

          There's a lot

    4. Calidissident   12 years ago

      It's natural for birth rates to decline in wealthier nations, it's not just government policy driving it. Also, it's important to note that the Asian population (which is also mostly middle and upper class) is the fastest growing in the country, as is the mixed race (research shows that white-Asian couples make more money than white couples regardless of gender configuration, and that white-black and white-Hispanic couples make more when the man is white, and less when the woman is white)

    5. paranoid android   12 years ago

      As one of the middle-class white people contributing to this trend, I think I speak for a lot of my peers when I say that one of the primary reasons for this is that getting married and having a kid seems self-evidently insane to me. If I were to make a list of the pros and cons of entering into the absurd socio-legal institution known as marriage, the "pros" side would say "Uh...some tax breaks, I guess" and the "cons" would run off the page.

      1. Acosmist   12 years ago

        Darwin 1 paranoid android 0

  22. The Immaculate Trouser   12 years ago

    Honduran charter cities are moving along nicely.

    1. Marc F Cheney   12 years ago

      OK, posting a link about something already covered in the comments is understandable, but if you post a link about something that Reason already covered on H&R earlier in the day, you should have to wear the Cone of Shame.

      1. T   12 years ago

        But then he can't fit through the door to pee and he'll just whimper and pee on the floor!

  23. Enough About Palin   12 years ago

    "And worse still, it is a situation the government has pretty much created by making it so damned expensive to have a kid."

    [citation needed]

    I'm middle-class and have no kids, so I don't get the multi-thousannd dollar deduction on my income taxes.

    1. Francisco d Anconia   12 years ago

      I don't get the multi-thousannd dollar deduction

      That's because you don't deserve one. You are truly evil for choosing not to have children.

  24. Random NPR Proglodyte   12 years ago

    Another gem from the comment boards at NPR:

    I keep reading posts by people who are positive that this NSA program is unconstitutional but, I am reminded that there were lots of people who said for 3 or 4 years that Obamacare was unconstitutional and turned out to be WRONG. So, lets just have one of your libertarian organizations file a case and let it work its way up to the Supreme Court and find out. OK?

    Goddamned fools...the whole stinking lot of them.

    1. Auric Demonocles   12 years ago

      Reality is contingent on what 9 lawyers in robes say.

      1. Nikkis enthusiastic dissent   12 years ago

        The problem is that it is. Sorry, unfortunately the constitution is largely worthless.

        1. Auric Demonocles   12 years ago

          No, someone with a gun to your head saying that the sky is green doesn't change the color.

          1. Episiarch   12 years ago

            When "reality" is just a bunch of words on a piece of paper, it is. Nicole is correct.

            1. Auric Demonocles   12 years ago

              No, what is constitutional is independent of the Supreme Court's opinion. They only affect what the government is going to treat as constitutional.

              1. Episiarch   12 years ago

                Which, in practice--as in how it affects you--is the reality.

                Once again, words on a piece of paper only mean something as long as enough people think they do.

          2. Rich   12 years ago

            Citation

    2. John   12 years ago

      Everything the Supreme Court says is the final law. They are like Gods up there.

    3. Tonio   12 years ago

      And the ACLU which is usually the darling of the NPR crowd has filed suit about the NSA program. The ignorance and team hackery are worthy of [redacted] here.

    4. JW   12 years ago

      I am reminded that there were lots of people who said for 3 or 4 years that Obamacare was unconstitutional and turned out to be WRONG.

      All those idiots who argued against blacks riding in the same train car as whites must feel awfully foolish right now.

      1. JW   12 years ago

        ...blacks not riding...

        Ah, fuck it.

      2. Calidissident   12 years ago

        I'm sure they also feel the same way about Citizens United

  25. Tim   12 years ago

    Where is the cake everbody was talking about? 🙁

    1. T   12 years ago

      Lies, Tim. All lies.

      1. Marc F Cheney   12 years ago

        Man, I loved playing Borderlands.

    2. Almanian!   12 years ago

      I WANT MY GODDAMNED ROCKET BACKPACK! I WAS PROMISED A ROCKET BACKPACK FROM A 1950's POPULAR SCIENCE!

      YA'LL CAN HAVE YER CAKE WHEN I GET MY ROCKET BACKPACK!

      AND FLYING CAR!

  26. Enough About Palin   12 years ago

    BANK ROBBERY SUSPECT WANTS NSA SURVEILLANCE RECORDS FOR DEFENSE

    Terrance Brown, 40, is on trial in South Florida for allegedly conspiring with four other men to hijack armored trucks delivering cash to banks in 2010. All have pleaded not guilty. But now Brown has come up with a unique defense: he wants the National Security Agency to turn over his phone records to the court to demonstrate his innocence.
    The case, which is taking place in federal court, involves phone records ? the FBI and prosecutors have been using cellphone records to demonstrate the men's locations near the robbery attempts. The prosecution said that it was unable to get cellphone records from the time before September 2010 because the phone carrier had destroyed the records.

    1. Tonio   12 years ago

      Nice.

      1. Enough About Palin   12 years ago

        This defense could be used by thousands and thousands of people and not just for criminal cases. This is quite the can of worms.

    2. Juice   12 years ago

      That...that's awesome.

  27. Coeus   12 years ago

    Some retarded shit from Rolling Stone.

    Freshman Republican Jim Howell, a trim 46-year-old Air Force veteran who represents suburban Wichita, has now introduced a bill that would force nearly all public buildings in the state to allow people to carry concealed weapons inside ? unless those buildings hired armed security guards and install metal detectors, which, of course, would be prohibitively expensive for most cash-strapped municipalities. Gun-free "safe zones," Howell insists, should actually be rechristened "dangerous zones."

    Howell is soon joined by an ally, freshman Republican Allan Rothlisberg of Grandview Plaza, a retired 30-year Army veteran who is the approximate shape and shade of a Red Bartlett Pear. Rothlisberg goes even further than Howell, arguing that public buildings which banned guns should be held liable for any shootings. When one incredulous Democrat asks if Rothlisberg is familiar with a recent "slaughter of 10-year-olds in Connecticut," Rothlisberg drawls, "I've been familiar with slaughters of people in gun-free zones for years." Later, he adds that the 2007 mass shooting at Virginia Tech had been "absolutely [the school's] fault."

    There is zero argument presented as to why he's wrong. You're just supposed to take it as a matter of faith.

    1. Irish   12 years ago

      When one incredulous Democrat asks if Rothlisberg is familiar with a recent "slaughter of 10-year-olds in Connecticut," Rothlisberg drawls, "I've been familiar with slaughters of people in gun-free zones for years." Later, he adds that the 2007 mass shooting at Virginia Tech had been "absolutely [the school's] fault."

      Democrat asks. Republican drawls. Fucking culture wars, man.

      1. itsnotmeitsyou   12 years ago

        The DERP! IT BURNS!!!

        Seriously, you're in a discussion about gun-free zones and you bring up ANY school shooting??? How retarded do you have to be to not realize that it was a shooting IN A GUN FREE ZONE? Jesus, this is Tulpa levels of stupid.

    2. Tonio   12 years ago

      Well, all right-thinking people can just see that this is common sense.

    3. Auric Demonocles   12 years ago

      Well, he is wrong. The shooter is "absolutely at fault".

      Though the schools sure as hell made it easier on him.

    4. John   12 years ago

      There doesn't have to be argument. These people are living examples of the old adage about the danger of people not believing in God is not that they won't believe something it is that they will believe anything. This is nothing but a religion. People go insane and pick out some totally irrational scapegoat for their problems every few years. In the 1980s it was child molesting satanic cults. In 17th Century Massachusetts it was witches. Now for liberals, it is guns.

      1. Killazontherun   12 years ago

        That 80s hysteria was started by religious groups like Jim Baker's organization. I remember seeing a newsletter they published in my grandmother's living room claiming infiltration of the military by pedophile Satanist as early as 1981.

        1. Mad Scientist   12 years ago

          But they DO have priests in the military.

          1. Killazontherun   12 years ago

            Oh yeah, good point.

        2. John   12 years ago

          Oh yeah. But it was picked up on by all sorts of others. It took on a life of its own. The people who were prosecuting the McMartin preschool and the Amirault case were not fanatical evangelicals. They were crazy cops, DAs and social workers. One of the worst offenders was Janet Reno.

        3. itsnotmeitsyou   12 years ago

          And don't forget teh ebil Dungeons and Dragons!

          Anyone else get told they were messing with the powers of the occult and that Satan was trying to brainwash them? All because that damnable Gygax made us roll the bones.

          1. John   12 years ago

            And running your Led Zeppelin record backwards. Late 70s and early 80s evangelical preachers were the best. Those guys had style. It was some fun shit being 11 years old and thinking, hey, I have got the word of Satan right here!!

            1. Mad Scientist   12 years ago

              Shit like that may have been amusing to you and me, but I had friends who's dumbshit parents confiscated their music and comic books and whatever for fear of satan. It sucked to be those kids.

              1. itsnotmeitsyou   12 years ago

                Trust me, I know. I WAS one of those kids. There were certain friends that I was not allowed to hang out with simply because they played D&D. Little did my mom know that I had satanic cult meetings (read: RPing) out in the woods by our house all the time.

                Playing "The Temple of Elemental EVIL" at 2 am in the creepy woods is quite fun.

                !drol si natas

                huh, where did that come from?

          2. Killazontherun   12 years ago

            Worse than that. One former school councilor had his career sidelined by manic depression. He is a long time friend of my extended family due to growing up being high school buddies with my uncle. His kid was a friend of mine. Went in to the Marines, married a pretty Japanese girl, had a beautiful daughter, and moved back after the service. A year later, he commits suicide.
            I ran in to his dad at a gathering a few years after that. He blamed the suicide on D&D, not knowing that I was the one that organized our local group and DMed it (still doesn't know). It was obvious to everyone his suicide was the result of inheriting his dad's mental affliction, but I really don't blame his old man for wanting to deny it.

          3. jesse.in.mb   12 years ago

            We weirdly had a Legend of Zelda instruction book in our house. I asked where the game was and my parents realized the book had been passed around their church as an example of how children were playing with the occult.

            1. Warty   12 years ago

              When I was little, I sometimes felt left out because everyone else went to church and we didn't. It's good to be reminded of how little I missed.

              1. Episiarch   12 years ago

                I never felt left out. The few times I had to go to a church or slept over a friend's house and then went to Sunday School with them, I hated every second of it. I taunted them for having to go.

                1. Warty   12 years ago

                  I said "sometimes". Then I'd go spend a weekend at grandma's and get dragged to church, and I'd remember that church fucking sucks. Although it was pretty funny when the Sunday school teacher would ask me questions about Jesus, and I would stare blankly at her.

                  1. Episiarch   12 years ago

                    Yes, going to a Sunday School class and having no fucking clue what the hell they were talking about was hilarious.

                    "So in Ecclesiastes 7 through...where's your bible?"

                    "My what? I don't own a bible."

                2. jesse.in.mb   12 years ago

                  Our services were two hours and often ran long. I went to church to placate my folks until the pastor told me that I shouldn't have picked up the Eucharist because my heart was not right with god, so I tossed it in the trash and haven't been back.

    5. Auric Demonocles   12 years ago

      Also you Sugarfreed that shit.

      1. Coeus   12 years ago

        sorry. Here it is.

        1. Irish   12 years ago

          How far right fanatics hijacked Kansas? Are they still on that 'What's the Matter With Kansas?' train of bullshit they've been riding for 20 years now?

          1. Coeus   12 years ago

            Yep. And getting increasingly panicked that it's doing fine.

    6. Nikkis enthusiastic dissent   12 years ago

      Hm, I am not familiar with a recent "slaughter of 10-year-olds in Connecticut." I thought they were in kindergarten.

      1. SugarFree   12 years ago

        Facts only get in the way.

        1. John   12 years ago

          They really do get a hard on from dead kids don't they?

          1. SugarFree   12 years ago

            The younger and blonder the better.

            1. SugarFree   12 years ago

              Which is what Omaba's ambassador to Belgium was into as well.

            2. John   12 years ago

              Yeah. Suppose that instead of Newtown that shooting had happened in North Philadelphia and the shooter rather then some depraved Aspy had been a black man or some foreign brown person. Maybe I am cynical, but something tells me they wouldn't have cared so much about Newtown. Dead black kids just don't count as much.

              1. Episiarch   12 years ago

                The really fucked up thing is they've made this a Pavlovian response for themselves now. They got so addicted to the feeling of the possibility that this shooting might get them a ban that they're now preternaturally excited at the prospect of murdered children. I guarantee that many of them would, deep down, love to see another Newtown.

                1. Mad Scientist   12 years ago

                  They've been saying for years that you gotta break a few eggs.

                2. John   12 years ago

                  I would say most of them. The kids at Newtown are not real to these people. The kids are just props in the liberals' little morality play. If the dead kids actually meant something to them, they wouldn't act like they do.

                  1. Episiarch   12 years ago

                    Of course. But what I was saying is that it's gone further than they just don't care about the kids, I think it has moved into, deep down, "I hope we have another Newtown because if we do than we can finally ban those guns once and for all". Actively wishing for death and terror.

                  2. itsnotmeitsyou   12 years ago

                    Of course they don't actually care about those kids. That would require a conscience. Literally, as the news was breaking, several of my lefty friends started ranting on various social media sites about how we need to ban guns because they kill children.

                    Those same people were the ones that acted all outraged over the "politicization of dead kids" when the NRA released a statement on how they thought we could best defend the children A WEEK LATER!

    7. Warty   12 years ago

      a retired 30-year Army veteran who is the approximate shape and shade of a Red Bartlett Pear

      Cute.

      1. Tejicano   12 years ago

        When I read that I thought - "why is it that you never hear similar comments about legislators like DiFi?".

        The obvious answers are 1) wrong team to deride and 2) most people's stomachs are too sensitive for that kind of verbal torture.

  28. lap83   12 years ago

    Obvious research finding of the day:

    http://blogs.wsj.com/economics....._Video_Top

    Elderly Americans living with children are more unhappy.

    1. Acosmist   12 years ago

      dat selection bias

  29. Coeus   12 years ago

    This article has all the highlights.

    A) equating lack of desire for marriage on a males part as equal to women yelling "slut" at each other

    B)No recognition of the virgin shaming (apparently, there's nothing wrong with that. Just ask Marcotte)

    C)Tying it together with rape.

    Seriously. The entitlement in this article is insane. Check this out:

    Slutty Joan is just another statistic tossed onto the mounting pile of evidence of girl on girl crime, in which sexism is inflicted on women by other women. But lately, the public fascination with female infighting has threatened to let men?and really, the society we all live in?off the hook for hating on ladies who get around.

    Can't have that, now can we?

    1. Nikkis enthusiastic dissent   12 years ago

      Where does your (a) come from there?

      1. Coeus   12 years ago

        The Cornell study itself didn't rate male attitudes about promiscuous women (or vice versa), but as lead author Zhana Vrangalova told Science, that's partly because "study after study has found that sexually permissive women are discriminated against by potential romantic partners."

        Is feminist code for "he'll bang me, but won't settle down". Notice that this is the attitude that they feel needs fixing. Men must conform to their wants.

        1. Nikkis enthusiastic dissent   12 years ago

          Okay. I guess I just didn't take that as being about marriage per se. I would say "romantic partner" is "someone I bang," but I may well not know all the codes.

          1. Coeus   12 years ago

            It's a very common feminist complaint. I've seen all the euphemisms. "Discriminated against by potential romantic partners" is the most common. They use "romantic" and not "sexual" there for a reason.

            1. Nikkis enthusiastic dissent   12 years ago

              Hm, yeah, that's definitely weird to me, just in terms of my own personal usage, because like I said, "romantic partner" sounds like nothing more than a euphemism for "sexual partner" to me.

              1. Dagny T.   12 years ago

                Well, that is because you are probably used to banging people you like, who like you in return (Wild guess! Not meant to be Othering!). The feminists and PUA's seem to mostly dislike the opposite sex and their sex lives seem to involve a lot of shame and weirdness which could not properly be described as "romantic."

                1. Nikkis enthusiastic dissent   12 years ago

                  I like that take on it. I was thinking I was just being old-fashioned.

                  Wait, I guess I am!

                2. Coeus   12 years ago

                  It's the Madonna/Whore dichotomy. Old as recorded history. PUAs and feminists have nothing to do with it.

                  And this false PUA/feminist dichotomy has been cropping up a lot her lately. PUA has absolutely nothing to do with men demanding that women change their ways. As exemplified in this article, feminism is very dedicated to making men change their ways.

                  If you've never had sex with someone you met that night at the bar, that's fine. But it doesn't make you superior, it just can't be properly qualified as "romantic".

                  Here's a comment from the article, further reinforcing my point:

                  LettersatLarge
                  A lot of these brilliant people who would say a promiscuous woman is only worth 'using' for sex and that they would prefer a more chaste woman to marry don't realize that shaming or ostracizing women for their personal intimate history can cause a woman to feel she has to hide, choose not to disclose, or lie about their number for fear of being judged....so....

                  Hah, nevermind, its not important. Carry on being double-standard perpetuating garbage.

                  1. Dagny T.   12 years ago

                    Coeus, I think you don't like the comparison because it's unflattering, not because it's not valid.

                    It depends on your definition of "demanding change." PUAs have their panties in a bunch over women supposedly wanting to "marry up," right? How is that different? They don't like the women that do this, and do like the women they can trick into complying with their desires despite of this. Same goes with the sluts (NTTAWWT!), some feminists have their jockstraps in a bunch over people not liking sluts (in some contexts... they wouldn't be sluts if no one liked them in any context). They are pissed off that (some) men are exhibiting a preference and like to loudly whine about it.

                    Now, if you can find more examples of the feminists whining for government intervention (and I wouldn't necessarily be surprised), that is another level of shitty. But the root of the butthurt is the same.

                    1. Coeus   12 years ago

                      PUAs have their panties in a bunch over women supposedly wanting to "marry up," right?

                      Wrong. They get agitated when people continually deny it. I have never heard of anyone with any following at all demand that women change. The whole damn point is that some behaviors, (whether due to genetics or socialization, doesn't matter which) are hardwired, and prevalent over the majority of a population. They might say "if you want us to act differently, then you have to change your behavior as well", but it's not serious, cause they already know the vast majority will never change.

                      In libertarian terms:

                      Feminism: "give me what I want."

                      PUA: "Fine, how are you going to pay for it?". (jokingly, since they know they will never receive any incentive whatsoever, and any actual change is met with derision and disdain.)

                    2. Dagny T.   12 years ago

                      I disagree. Both sides have ridiculous and unrealistic views and expectations of the opposite sex, which cause them to say lots of remarkably derogatory things about the supposed objects of their sexual attraction. The PUAs may have resigned themselves to the fact that the behaviors they don't like will not change, but that is about the only difference I can see. They both have a fundamentally shitty and fucked up view of the opposite sex.

                    3. Coeus   12 years ago

                      Both sides have ridiculous and unrealistic views and expectations of the opposite sex, which cause them to say lots of remarkably derogatory things about the supposed objects of their sexual attraction.

                      The difference is that the unrealistic views of the feminists are the ones that the PUAs used to share. They're the same rediculous views. PUAs are typically bitter for a few years when the blinders come off, due to the magnitude of the con. Imagine if almost every man that you trusted in your life (father, brother, friends)gave you rules and tips for dealing romantically with men that were not only unhelpful, but actively counterproductive? Would you not be a little bitter? It wears off fairly quickly, and they just become resigned to it after awhile.

                      Feminists stay bitter, because they wear the blinders for life, and if people don't work like they are told that they're supposed to, they blame men.

                      A more accurate pairing would be feminists/Nice Guys (another feminist coined phrase). You know, those guys who are bitter because they act exactly how feminism has trained them to act, and all they receive from women is active disdain.

                      That's what makes guys bitter, and it's merely a residual in the PUA community that wears off over time.

                    4. Coeus   12 years ago

                      The PUAs may have resigned themselves to the fact that the behaviors they don't like will not change,

                      And libertarians have resigned themselves that people with money and power will not change. We believe that one has to remove the ability of government to cater to people.

                      Progressives believe that they can change fundamental behaviors, and in doing so, keep the ability of Government to cater.

                      Are progressives and libertarians basically the same, then?

                    5. Dagny T.   12 years ago

                      Well, I would argue that libertarians' complaints are valid in that they are opposed to actual acts of coercion or force. PUAs' complaints are not about their being coerced or forced in any real sense of the word. Their complaints that cause them to hold such low opinions of women are coming from a whole different set of entitlements/expectations.

                    6. Coeus   12 years ago

                      Their complaints that cause them to hold such low opinions of women are coming from a whole different set of entitlements/expectations.

                      Exactly. Feminism. Already addressed this above.

                    7. Coeus   12 years ago

                      PUAs' complaints are not about their being coerced or forced in any real sense of the word.

                      No, as previously addressed, their complaints are that they have been and continue to be lied to by friends, family, media and whole branches of academia, in direct contradiction to observable fact.

                  2. Nikkis enthusiastic dissent   12 years ago

                    Coeus, I just want to be clear that I'm not saying the issue of "complaining about how guys won't marry me because they think I'm a slut" isn't real, I just 100% would never have thought anything involving the phrase "potential romantic partners" was talking about marriage, because for me that's a euphemism for "potential sex partners."

                    1. Coeus   12 years ago

                      I just 100% would never have thought anything involving the phrase "potential romantic partners" was talking about marriage, because for me that's a euphemism for "potential sex partners."

                      Ahh, understood. No it's a very common euphemism with them. It can also mean "long term" as opposed to just marriage. But they never mean just sex. Remember, if most men felt that "sluts" weren't potential sex partners, how the hell did they get their numbers so high?

          2. jesse.in.mb   12 years ago

            Is it this one

  30. Coeus   12 years ago

    It's time for, "misrepresent a study that you disagree with." And the best part is that any criticism that they levy, whether it's true or not (several of them are untrue) applies to the majority of the studies they point to when demanding legislation and money.

  31. Nikkis enthusiastic dissent   12 years ago

    How in the f did Michael Lind write a third column about what idiot children libertarians are? Seriously?

    1. Damned Fool   12 years ago

      Damn it, I just ate.

    2. Irish   12 years ago

      Because no one had heard of anything he's done in about a decade. He wrote a dumb article that got his name out there. So he wrote a bunch of follow ups to the only article of his that anyone has paid attention to in years.

      It's not that hard to figure out. He's trolling because he has no actual career.

      1. Tejicano   12 years ago

        "It's not that hard to figure out. He's trolling because he has no actual career."

        ^^^This!^^^

        (And I also hope some of the bite from comments here in Reason left a mark!)

    3. Coeus   12 years ago

      My god:

      Writing in Reason, Ronald Bailey cites the spread of particular liberties since the eighteenth century as evidence that the entire world is becoming libertarian. But he ignores the fact that the welfare state and business regulation have grown up together with democracy and civil liberties.

      So has prohibition and intrusive spying. Guess they're essential as well. Christ, this guy is an idiot.

      1. Nikkis enthusiastic dissent   12 years ago

        My favorite part is where he's like "no, Will Wilkinson's completely 100% logical takedown of my post is wrong, because libertarianism is a 'system' while women's suffrage is only a 'policy.'" Doh.

        1. Irish   12 years ago

          Well, Democracy is a 'system' and Wilkinson's criticism relating to women's suffrage applies equally well to Democracy.

          His entire argument is basically special pleading. There's not much point in arguing with someone so dumb.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Judge Orders Tufts Grad Student Rumeysa Ozturk Be Released on Bail From Immigration Detention

C.J. Ciaramella | 5.9.2025 3:17 PM

Georgia Man Who Spent 6 Weeks in Jail on a Kidnapping Charge Says He Was Helping a Falling Child

Autumn Billings | 5.9.2025 2:05 PM

Newly Released Documents Show What the Feds Knew About the New Jersey Drone Scare

Matthew Petti | 5.9.2025 12:31 PM

New York's Biggest Budget Doubles Down on the Mistakes Driving People Out

Gregory Lyakhov | 5.9.2025 12:15 PM

Trump Is Wrong. Cheap Goods Are Awesome.

Emma Camp | 5.9.2025 11:15 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!