A.M. Links: Zimmerman Not Guilty, Greenwald Says Snowden Has More Information Damaging To US Government, Dozens Killed in Iraq Bombings

|

Credit: VOA/wikimedia
  • George Zimmerman was found not guilty of second-degree murder in the shooting of Trayvon Martin on Saturday. The Justice Department is working on determining whether federal prosecutors should file criminal civil rights charges against Zimmerman. After the verdict was announced Obama called for calm.
  • Glenn Greenwald, the journalist who first reported on Edward Snowden's revelations, has said that the NSA whistleblower has enough information to cause more damage to the American government than anyone else in the history of the U.S.
  • At least 38 people have been killed in coordinated bombings in predominantly Shiite cities across Iraq.
  • Egypt's public prosecutor has frozen the assets of Islamist leaders.

Did you write about liberty between July 1, 2012 and June 30, 2013? Reason welcomes you to enter this year's Bastiat Prize for Journalism, with a total prize purse of $16,000.

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: Obama Calls for Calm After George Zimmerman Verdict

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. I would have secured Zimmerman’s conviction had I been the prosecutor.

    1. As Gabriel implicated, I never would have guessed that my aunt’s brother’s husband’s mother-in-law’s grandson would be able to make $87 hourly being a pallbearer simply because he was also a Cleveland Brown, and the deceased wanted the Browns to “let him down one last time”.

      1. +50 years.

          1. And that easily the NAP veil falls to the floor. I truly feel let down.

    2. Ooh, multiple people beating Fisty to the punch!

    3. Doubtful. There wasn’t any evidence. As it was, the case should have been dismissed by directed verdict before it went to the jury.

      1. BTW, that judge had to have been very emotionally vested in the case; she practically blanched when she read the verdict. Her stuttering after the fact was entertaining too.

        1. “Good evening, Ladies and Germs.”

          1. Try the veal, and tip your bailiff well!

      2. The system failed in multiple ways. Never should have gone to a special prosecutor. Prosecutor never should have brought charges. Judge should have thrown it out. It took a jury of 6 legal system outsiders to finally make the right call. I think we can call it a draw regarding my faith in humanity. Now let’s see what happens at the Federal and civil levels. Frankly, I could see Zimmerman having a little bit of liability when it comes to wrongful death. I don’t know the Florida laws for wrongful death, though.

        1. Humanity did fine. No one ever claimed that lawyers (and judges, but they are all lawyers too) were human.

        2. Could the prosecutor have pursued a much less serious charge, something like reckless endangerment or ?? that would have provided a more likely conviction, hence satisfying the blood-lust of the mob and at least given Zimmerman some punishment?

          1. That might have been risky, because then you’d have to bring the fact that Zim was carrying as an element that contributed to the “reckless endangerment” angle. If, as he said, he just followed Martin at a distance and was then confronted by him, then he was acting in a pretty reasonable way in his capacity as neighborhood watch.

          2. I’ve been wondering if GZ could have been charged with assault, saying that he actually initiated the fight. Reckless endangerment would have been more reasonable too. Maybe some sort of stalking charge. I don’t think any of these would make it past a jury either, but at least they are more reasonable with regard to the known facts.

          3. Heh, they did, at the end – when it was obvious that they didn’t have enough evidence for murder.

          4. It now looks like Trayvon may have been trying to gay bash Zimmerman, because the human wrecking ball of a girl friend told him Zimmerman must be have been gay since he was following Trayvon.

        3. Angela Corey frankly deserves to be disbarred.

          1. Yep.

        4. “It took a jury of 6 legal system outsiders to finally make the right call.”

          That Trayvon Martin received the justice he so richly deserved?

          1. No, that the government didn’t have enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman was guilty of murder.

            Sheesh, its like you don’t even understand the basics of American jurisprudence.

        5. None of those in the system brought this to trial for any reason other than quelling the liberal community who were calling for Zimmerman’s head. It was an elaborate crowd control scheme to make it seem as if the state is doing its due diligence, because your average layperson saw only white hispanic on black crime, and cried racism. There was never enough evidence for a trial. The judge et al could never have dismissed the case before verdict without the masses crying foul. Of course now that he’s been acquitted (rightfully), they’re still crying foul.

          Liberals never wanted a real trial, they simply wanted blood. It’s fucking medieval. Literally. And the price set on Trayvon’s death was conviction. Nothing less settles the feud, and so it goes on.

          1. Do you think beyond that they also wanted this issue to dominate national media, both to distract from real issues and to polarize voters? (“The war on young black men”)

    4. With the evidence they had, Perry Mason would’ve lost. In fact, if this had gone to the grand jury, probably no trial at all, even though grand juries are more or less run by prosecutor’s.

      1. Think about how extraordinary it is that Zimmerman received an aquittal. Damn near the entire legal deck was stacked against him, with everyone from the DA all the way to the President looking to crucify him for the White Man’s Sins (even though he’s Hispanic), and an entire media machine twisting public perception of the case into a social meta-narrative that hardly existed.

        The prosecution revealed how bankrupt their case was when they appealed to the jury’s emotions in their closing argument rather than the evidence.

        1. The good thing to take from this case is the understanding that in most situations, hammering the jury with the heavy burden of proof that the prosecution has works. At least for serious crimes.

          People of pretty obvious actual guilt have walked because of this, but we still have this protection of even the guilty from an overreaching state built into our system.

          No one really knows whether Zimmerman is actually guilty, so the jury probably had an easier time of it than in, say, the Anthony trial. She had something to do with the death of her baby–I think most people believe that.

          1. The Anthony trial is a good example of the burden of reasonable doubt. The jurors thought she was probably guilty, and certainly felt she was lying about her actions. I think one of them said they were sick over having to return a not guilty verdict, but the state just didn’t make its case.

            1. It’s a really high burden, and it’s an absolute fact that guilty people can and do get away with crimes. In an ultimate sense, this is wrong, but it’s less wrong than the government having the power to put away people who we reasonably view as possibly innocent. History has shown that we need to curtail government power in this manner.

      2. Why the apostrophe, PL? I hold you to a higher standard!

        1. I dunno, possibly brain damage.

      3. What about Matlock or Lionel Hutz?

    5. Would you have also fired the employee who dared tell the defense that you were withholding potentially exculpatory evidence?

      1. Good god, this case just keeps getting worse at every step.

      2. Not that prosecutors adhere to this rule, but they are legally and ethically constrained to turn over potentially exculpatory evidence to the defense.

        1. As anyone who’s seen My Cousin Vinny knows.

        2. No, they are legally and ethically *obligated* to turn over exculpatory evidence. But since not doing so has no real repercussions legally or ethically it seems they don’t actually feel constrained to do so.

      3. “Your egregious lack of regard for the sensitive nature of the information handled by this office is completely abhorrent,” Peek wrote. “You have proven to be completely untrustworthy. Because of your deliberate, wilful and unscrupulous actions, you can never again be trusted to step foot in this office.”

        The letter said Kruidbos “apparently questioned the ethics” of de la Rionda, who has been an assistant state attorney since 1983. “His record as an honorable and respected attorney is unblemished and beyond reproach,” Peek wrote.

        Kruidbos said the question of de la Rionda’s ethics “is not really my place to decide.”

        How dare you question the any action of your bettors!

  2. Car-eating squirrel chews fist-sized chunks from family’s SUV

    The Zeigler’s of South Florida thought they were the targets of vandals. A squirrel they’ve nicknamed Munchy was was the real culprit

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

    1. Our comments just couldn’t satiate the little beasts any longer.

  3. Clap On, Clap Off: Remove This Bra Simply By Clapping Your Hands
    http://betabeat.com/2013/07/cl…..our-hands/

    If there’s one bone-deep pubescent terror that stays with dudes long after their first sloppily successful makeout sesh, it is this: the back clasp of a bra, just two tiny pieces of metal, becoming a goddamn Rubik’s cube in the heat of the moment. Women are forced to stoically stare at a blank spot on the wall, as if time is frozen, while partners inexpertly fumble to unclasp it before finally just giving in and doing it themselves.

    1. bone-deep pubescent terror

      Indeed.

    2. ” it is this: the back clasp of a bra, just two tiny pieces of metal, becoming a goddamn Rubik’s cube in the heat of the moment”

      Just two?? Why the hell has every boulder-holder I’ve had to remove had fucking three of the lil’ cock blockers on them?

      1. or where I’m struggling to find the back clasps… turns out to be a front clasp. (my defense: it was dark!)

      2. Whenever you have trouble with a bra just remind her that you have about as much experience with them as a 13 year-old girl. Wait, don’t do that.

      3. You gotta work from the bottom clasp up. Then if you get stuck on the last one, just use a box cutter. Chicks dig getting undressed by guys with sharp metal objects.

        1. Pinch the overlapping pieces where the bra clasps with your finger, front and back, and oppositionally slide your fingers. Tada!

          Fucking amateurs.

          1. If you really want to impress her, remove the bra without removing her shirt first.

            1. My females disrobe upon my knowing gaze.

              Of course, I fucked up the instructions: …clasps with your finger AND thumb.

            2. I still love doing that magic trick at home. And now, *drumroll* I’m bra-less!

          2. Who do I look like? the Fonze?

    3. just two tiny pieces of metal, becoming a goddamn Rubik’s cube in the heat of the moment

      Somebody reads XKCD.

    4. I might not have been great in bed, but I ruled at bra removal. Houdini ain’t got shit on me.

    5. I applaud this invention.

    6. Don’t wear it at the theater or a State of the Union Address.

    7. Except by the time you find a woman wearing this, you don’t need it anymore.

  4. Maybe I’m confused. How in hell can the Justice Department bring civil suit here.

    Is it just FYTY or did I miss something?

    1. The flacks at National Party Radio this morning were already lowering expectations that the DOJ will ultimately decide to bring charges.

    2. I never understood how Florida brought criminal charges in this idiotic case.

      1. Sum Ting Wong.

        1. That’s what she said!

        2. “Sum Ting Wong”

          We Way Tu Low

    3. Let me answer that question by posing another: Whose administration is this?

    4. Not a civil suit, a civil rights violation criminal case.

      Basically he’ll be accused of violating Martin’s civil rights.

      Now how this would not be thrown out as double jeopardy is the FYTW element

      1. Not agreeing with what I’m about to say, but it’s pretty well established that it’s not double jeopardy if the feds come in and prosecute you after you’ve been tried for the same or similar offense at the state level.

        1. Of course, with the facts at hand, the federal government has no business even threatening an investigation, let alone doing anything additional.

        2. Yep, that’s how they got the cops in the Rodney King case after the state jury voted not guilty.

          1. While I think it should be double jeopardy, in theory, those situations are why it isn’t–to intervene in unjust or illegal state action. It’s supposed to be a check on unconstitutional activities at the state level.

      2. Because the feds have been playing this trick since the 60s. Of course, Zimmerman isn’t an agent of the government, so he has no duty to repsect Martin’s civil rights. All the civil rights cases I can think of were applied to state agents by the feds. A private individual not acting under color of law would be different, but IANAL.

        1. Civil Rights violations where how the Feds prosecuted people that killed blacks in the 60s and were then found not guilty by all-white juries. Jury nullification has an evil side as well.

          1. Nullification was usually at the cop or prosecutor level. Even in the infamous Beckwith case (murder of Medgar Evers) the first jury had to deal with two or three alibi witnesses who were policemen.

      3. Now how this would not be thrown out as double jeopardy

        Because the USA and the State of Florida are both sovereign entities. Double jeopardy only protects you against one sovereign from prosecuting you multiple times for the same action. Each sovereign which can claim jurisdiction can prosecute you for any given act.

        Muhammad and Malvo (the Beltway Snipers) were prosecuted by the feds and multiple states.

        IANAL, etc.

        1. That is the rationale spoon fed to law students and copiously regurgitated by judges.

          However, the rationale was not a founding principle. We did not secede from the british empire so that the state could end run the principle of double jeopardy.

        2. I’m not defending it, LM; I’m just explaining the current state of law as I understand it.

        3. Actually, IIANM, Muhammad and Malvo were tried by the feds because some of their killings were in DC. IOW they were being tried locally for crimes separate from the onees MD and VA tried them for.

          1. The DC govt is also a sovereign (sorta) for this sort of thing. I just reviewed the Wikipedia article and the only places they were tried were MD and VA. Pretty much once Muhammad got the death penalty, and Malvo got multiple life-without-parole sentences they stopped prosecuting.

            1. As I understand it the criminal code for DC is created by Congress. Home rule only gives local governemnt to set up traffic courts etc.

              IIANM, DC criminal cases are tried in federal court but are not federal cases in the normal sense.

      4. Not double Jeopardy; like with the Rodney King case. [I’m not saying I agree, just that precedence is set.]

        However, in the previous case, there was at least some ground to stand on, based on using their police power to suppress civil rights.

        I didn’t agree with that case, and I don’t think there is any leg to stand on in this case.

        A civil suit could be brought by the family. They’ll likely go after any book orr media deals that are in GZ’s future.

      5. Its not double jeopardy.

        Of course the real question is how do you convict a guy for murdering someone based on his race if he just went through a court case and there wasn’t enough evidence to convict for simply murdering the guy in the first place?

      6. I think Zimmerman should sue the Martin estate for a violation of civil rights as an attempted gay bashing.

    5. They won’t bring any charges.

      It’s to quell liberals who are out for blood. This case has made them lose their fucking minds. They felt he was guilty, and by god they’ll see him pay whether the state can do its job of actually proving guilt or not.

  5. Earth To Keynesians, Government Spending Isn’t Demand
    http://www.realclearmarkets.co…..00472.html

    Keynesians continue to claim the recent recession and weak recovery have as their root cause a shortage of demand. If only the government would spend more money in the short run to augment demand from the private sector, we could fully recover. At that point, miraculously, the economy begins to generate sufficient demand on its own to replace the temporary government stimulus spending and the government can go back to business as usual.

    The problem with this scenario is that it misunderstands the role of demand in an economy and it also equates continuing, private sector demand with temporary government spending. Unfortunately, these two sources of demand have very different economic impacts.

    1. Unfortunately, these two sources of demand have very different economic impacts.

      That’s right! Government has a multiplier! Unlike KKKorporashuns!

      1. Yes, you can multiply by fractions and get a division, so there is a multiplier there…

        1. You can also multiply by negative numbers.

          1. However harmful, I doubt government spending actually inverted economic activty to cause less than zero circulation of captial.

            1. On the whole, no. But I’m sure we can find specific examples of spending that had a net negative impact. For example, paying someone to destroy perfectly good computer equipment on the erroneous belief that it was irreversibly damaged by a virus.

              1. Or paying them to destroy perfectly good cars.

                1. C’mon now, a lot of people bought cars a month or two earlier than they otherwise would have because of that economic work of genius.

                  1. And a bunch of people *didn’t* buy cars at all because it drove the price of used cars up.

      2. The government multiplier is i.

      3. +10 to Graft

    2. Krugman claims that the stimulus effect would kick in if the government would just spend more. But the Keynesian multiplier is supposed to have a linear effect on increasing GDP. So, even if we’re spending half of what Krugman wants, we should see half of his expected benefits. Which we aren’t seizing.

      1. Which we aren’t seizing.

        Freud is at work again, in unexpected and revealing ways.

    3. Wait. I thought there was a “slow but firm recovery.’

      As for the stock markets, I’ve my suspicions why it’s rising but earnings isn’t one of them I reckon.

      1. As for the stock markets, I’ve my suspicions why it’s rising but earnings isn’t one of them I reckon.

        It’s growing because of unending QE. Without QE, the stock market would be hurting just like the rest.

      2. Don’t forget the devaluation of the dollar also pushes up value of assets, which then results in stock values going up. Those numbers are higher, but they are not really higher.

    4. “Earth To Keynesians….”

      At first reading I thought you said “Earth to Kenyans….”

      So please let me self report to the nearest birtherist deprogramming camp. 🙂

  6. Kelly Osbourne is engaged. Is it just me, or does this guy look like a total homo?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs…..liday.html

    1. No, you look like a homo also.

      1. He said it was just him…

    2. He’s a vegan chef apparently. An odd occupational title, but I don’t find it surprising.

      My initial guess was aspriing dubstep artist.

      1. Vegan chef? Isn’t that an oxymoron?

        1. Well, vegans eat something.

          Actually, you probably have to be fairly skilled to be a vegan chef since you’ve basically sworn off using most of the ingredients that normal chefs use to make food taste good.

          1. The worst thing vegans and vegetarians do in cooking, hands down, is torture some poor vegetable to try to make it resemble meat. It won’t ever work, so stop trying.

            1. Yeah, I don’t get that. Especially for vegans. If you are so horrified by the thought of eating meat, why would you want to eat something that resembles meat?

              1. I had a vegan roommate who made a dish that was really really good.
                For prep he’d puree some chipotle in adobo and mix it into black beans. Then he’d make some pico de gallo and some whole grain rice.
                At serving time he’d crush some corn chips into a pie tin, slop on some beans and rice, and throw it into the oven until hot. Then he’d top it with cold veggies and eat.
                Damn that was good. Spicy enough to make your scalp sweat, and tasty too.

                1. That does sound good. But it could use some cheese.

                  1. Would sound even better with some shredded beef.

              2. If you are so horrified by the thought of eating meat, why would you want to eat something that resembles meat?

                Because even vegans, deep down, know that meat tastes wonderful.

                I understand vegan objections to the factory farm-type production of most of our grocery meats, but ultimately their “meat is murder” anthropomorphism is simply a denial of biological reality. Humans are designed by nature to eat an omnivorous diet, and no amount of tofurkey consumed is going to change that.

                1. I understand vegan objections to the factory farm-type production of most of our grocery meats

                  Being that there are various places one can procure one’s meat that don’t use that particular model of farming and slaughter, this argument doesn’t mean much.

                  1. It does mean something if you object to the practices of industrial farming on a moral basis. Which I think is how many vegans think about it. It’s not that they don’t want to eat meat produced that way, they don’t want it to happen at all (though vegans don’t want any kind of meat production to happen at all).

                    1. if you object to the practices of industrial farming on a moral basis

                      Which is why they should be eating as much free-range, ethically slaughtered meat as they can possibly get their hands on (unless they fall under the all meat is murder category). If people who are conscientious about the issue aren’t going to fluff that sub-section of the economy than nobody will and they’ll never be able to compete with factory farmers. Market forces, how do they work?

              3. If you are so horrified by the thought of eating meat, why would you want to eat something that resembles meat?

                In college, our local vegan place was a Chinese restaurant that had surprisingly passable faux-beef. The chicken would’ve been fine, but it was designed to look like raw chicken, bumps and all. It was delicious if you could get past that.

            2. I’ve never really seen this.

              Most vegetarians don’t ahve the skill or equipment to replicate the “faux meat” that is sold frozen such as chik patties or veggie burgers.

              In my experience, vegetarian home and professional cooking tends to revolve around protein sources such as beans, tofu, tempeh, and seitan alongside an assortment of vegetables and grains.

              1. Does chewing on your own armpit hairs and beards constitute consuming protein?

            3. Laughing at their dumb asses as they gorge on soy products (non-fermented) is fun.

      2. So, what? He makes a lot of salads?

    3. Beard

      1. NTTAWWT

    4. So gay. He looks like he wouldn’t last a minute running the die cast or cnc machines where I work.

    5. Sarc, she’s always looked like a homo.

    6. Is it just me, or does this guy look like a total homo?

      Has someone been giving Dexter Morgan megadoses of estrogen?

  7. Did Il Duce issue his call for people to remain calm soon after the verdict, or did he not say this until it became apparent that most people were remining calm?

    1. What a buffoon Obama is. Had he shut his trap in the first place, his appeal for calm would have teeth. He’s just a boob. Not fit to lead a great country like America.

  8. At least 38 people have been killed in coordinated bombings in predominantly Shiite cities across Iraq. (2400 since April)

    Just a few “birth pangs” of democracy according to Condi.

    1. It is a very simple process to create a new style of government, especially in a region like the Middle East.

      At least there have not been 38 (or more) people killed since April in the US in an organized way.

    2. BOOOOOSHHHHH!!!1!!

    3. So Democracy is responsible for Al Quada waging war against the Shiites?

    4. I can’t wait for this awful Bush Administration to go.

    5. Yes, like Libya and Egypt were experiencing ‘bumps’ on their way to democracy.

  9. They’re right. It is time for a national conversation on race.

    The topic: The Dave Matthews Band. Really, White people? I mean, c’mon. You have to know they suck.

    1. On behalf of white people everywhere, I apologize for not murdering Dave Matthews yet.

      1. Don’t apologize, Warty. It’s our UVA contingent here, who has the yoke of shame hanging on their shoulders.

        All it would have taken is one frat house fire…

      2. Dave Matthews Band was 60% black. There’s blood on everyone’s hands.

        1. “Hootie” of the Blowfish was black. I’d say HM should have thought about this before going down that road.

          1. And that guy from the Counting Crows is a mulatto. Plenty of shame to go around.

          2. OTOH, Hootie is totally trolling Nashville in his 2nd career, so I applaud him.

            1. His 1st career was pretty much trolling as well.

              Darius Rucker was Huey Lewis.

    2. First topic of discussion: When are white people finally going to get it?

      1. Dave, while under a table, had a dream that all one day this nation will rise up and live out the true nature of its creed…

        That we will take these chances, and place them in a box until a quieter time…

        1. What you did there, I see it.

    3. They’re the Nickelback of the middle of the road.

    4. At some point D.M.B. had a black guy playing some sort of fiddle, so that means he is they are not racist.

      1. At some point D.M.B. had a black guy playing some sort of fiddle

        The drummer too. I’ll defend Under the Table and Dreaming, and I understand the appeal of Everyday. While I won’t consider anything since those albums to be much good, white people have wayyyy more and way worse examples of poor music icons.

        1. white people have wayyyy more and way worse examples of poor music icons.

          Bruce Springsteen.

        2. And the sax man.

          1. He’s been dead for a couple of years. He’s been replaced by Jeff Coffin who is white, but has the most awesome fu man chu in the Americas.

        3. Their best album as a cohesive piece of art is Before These Crowded Streets (1998). Nothing since has been worth a shit.

          They lost what made them great initially, which was working out kinks in their songs live long before putting those songs on a record. UTTAD is composed of songs that they played live for at least 2-3 years before recording them in the studio. They were means tested in a way. Crash was very good because those songs were played live for 3-5 years before being recorded in the studio.

          I don’t listen to jam bands anymore (musically puerile). I’m well past that in my life. But back in the day (mid-late 90s), I was very much in to DMB.

          1. The grateful dead’s most successful studio album (Touch of Grey) was born out in much the same fashion.

    5. I have no idea what virus infected a large portion of the folks I knew in college. I remained immune, thank the stars.

      1. Even I finally succumbed after resisting for about 3 years, and mercifully outgrew them after Everyday was released.

        I did get to see the concert in Boulder back in 2001 that they put out on DVD, so I guess that’s something.

    6. The Dave Matthews Band. Really, White people? I mean, c’mon.

      Hey, don’t blame this whiteboy. I think Dave Matthews is the worst male singer since Dylan.

      and for the record. Y’all don’t know what it’s like, being male, middle class, and white.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34u_3Z9_LUw

    7. Personally, I never got the Dave Matthews thing. I like a lot of different types of music, but Dave Matthews was never one.

    8. They were used a bit on the TV show Ed which I always liked. He was a bowling alley lawyer! Ho ho ho- not a lawyer that specialized in the area of bowling alley law, but a lawyer who happens to own a bowling alley! Yeah, they RAN that joke into the ground pretty quick.

    9. I went to college with a bunch of white girls in the early aughts, and my penis has a Pavlovian response to D.M.B.

      Seriously, right now I am aroused and it is as majestic as it always was.

      1. So ir’s permanently two inches?

        1. That is a pretty short infrared signature.

        2. 2 1/4 inches, thank you, and it is still majestic in its own way.

      2. You beat me to it.

      3. White hispanic girls liked DMB, too.

    10. A few (many?) years ago, I had a party. I have The Pagans on the CD player.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xg2zcfBBUHc

      Girl comes up and asks if I could put The Dave Matthews Band on instead.

      me: *blank stare* No.

      1. needs moar NEU

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAXYMOgHQI4

        works well with converting hippies away from stupid jam bands

      2. How could she see your blank stare with that hockey mask on?

        1. That’s good.

          Plus he could have aced her with his steel-framed 357 S&W at the time.

    11. Yes we know that

    12. Ah, but, counterpoint: Slayer.

      And bonus since the lead singer is Hispanic.

      1. See the right side of the back of this HMMWV in late 2004.

        http://miserabledonuts.blogspo…..-from.html

    13. I admit, with shame, that I don’t mind DMB. In my defense I was an undergrad during the late 90’s-early 00’s and it was ubiquitous at parties which harbored girls. I’d wager that if you make screw enough hot girls with Tiny Tim playing in the background, ‘Tip-Toe through the Tulips’ will grow on you.

    14. One of my coworkers is a DMB fanatic. He has dozens of tickets to shows he’s been to and autographed photos.

    15. I could not be more in agreement. Let us use this as a basis for a mutual understanding and friendship.

    16. You leave Dave Matthews Band alone!

    17. Dave MAtthews was born in South Africa. I guess that makes him African-American

  10. Apologies for Hitler mural, says Chulalongkorn University
    http://www.bangkokpost.com/new…..university

    Chulalongkorn University on Monday issued an apology on Facebook for a graduation mural in the middle of the campus that featured an image of former German dictator and Nazi leader Adolf Hitler among a host of comic book superheroes.

    “On behalf of the Student Club of the Faculty of Fine and Applied Arts, Chulalongkorn University, we apologise for the misunderstanding caused by the mural during the graduation ceremony on July 11 and 12, 2013.

    “The painting, which has now become a topic of debate, is not intended to refer to anyone particularly,” said the university’s statement.

    1. I don’t know, given the prevalence of Golden Age heroes punching him, Hitler might have a place in such a mural – assuming they replicate Captain America’s introductory cover…

    2. Is that an “Apologies for Hitler” mural?

  11. Israeli man’s penis bitten by a snake as he went to the toilet to relieve himself

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..mself.html
    This is international news? Maybe if the thing had been poisonous and caused his dick to shrivel up or explode, but this is just silly.

    1. Allah be praised!

    2. Snake bites snake

    3. The doctor says you’re gonna die.

      1. I know that one!

    4. Yeah, I tried the whole “You gotta suck the venom out or I’ll die! You don’t want me to die, do you?” trick before.

      It’s not worth it.

  12. Is flashing your car’s headlights protected by the First Amendment?
    http://news.yahoo.com/flashing…..16345.html

    Missouri resident Michael Elli wanted to let others on the road know to slow down because they were about to drive into a speed trap, so he did what many kindhearted souls do: He flashed his headlights as a warning.

    Driving_in_the_Monsoon_Rain_(8000987873)Police didn’t take at all kindly to warnings of this 21st century Paul Revere. They flashed him a ticket of his very own for obstruction of justice. Prosecutors eventually dropped the case, but Mr. Elli has now filed a class action lawsuit against the city because he says that the city retaliates against drivers who exercise their right to free speech?and that the government is trying to prevent it because it doesn’t like the message.

    1. Yes.

      Also, Texas law makes it clear that flashing your lights like that is not a violation.

      1. motorcycle gang vs Dallas cop, ff’d to 3 min mark
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?f…..8Vg#at=272
        a bike must be the best way to escape the state

        1. I didn’t think you could ride a sport bike and be in a motorcycle “gang.”

          a bike must be the best way to escape the state

          The only times the cops stopped me on my bike were when I was willing to stop. If I didn’t feel like stopping, I didn’t.

          1. I outran the police once – back in the 80s when cop cars were Dodge Diplomats. No match against a ’68 Firebird on the backroads at night.

          2. I knew plenty of guys who wouldn’t take their bikes out except in daylight in good weather because they were stone illegal. No license, no insurance, no registration. They would run from the cops at the drop of a hat.

            Me, I’ve always been legal so I’ll take the ticket and do my deferred adjudication and move on.

            1. Me, I’ve always been legal so I’ll take the ticket and do my deferred adjudication and move on.

              Whether I felt like stopping or not was usually based on whether I was outside of time window on my last defensive driving course or deferred adjudication. And how fast I was going.

              If I wasn’t eligiblye for DD or deferred adjudication or going a speed that might end up in impoundment and arrest, I’d just roll on the gas.

            2. An old friend of mine was nailed doing about 140 or so one Sunday morning. We used to go out and do “hyper-runs” (anywhere between 120 and 150 MPH) on Rt 50 in MD, after they had paved it. Four lanes, light traffic (then) and smooth as glass.

              He didn’t even realize the cop was after him, 5 miles later, after he had slowed down and the cop finally caught up to him. He didn’t get him on radar, but they nailed him for “in excess of 100 MPH.”

              He lawyered up and got the ticket plead down to a reasonable level, that wouldn’t cost him his licence.

          3. The only times the cops stopped me on my bike were when I was willing to stop. If I didn’t feel like stopping, I didn’t.

            This.

            When I rode, my buddies and I blew past cops going twice the speed limit all the time. The few times the cops actually tried to catch us, we just laughed and easily lost them. Most of the time the cop realizes that even with his suped up engine, his crown vic was no match for even the wimpy little Ninja 600 I rode and they just sat there.

            I was watching one of those “craziest wackiest police chase” videos and saw a guy on a ducati attempting to get away from the police and failing miserably. That dude didn’t have a clue how to ride a crotch rocket.

            1. a “suped up” 4.6L SOHC in a Crown Vic isn’t going anywhere (that) fast. Too much weight for too little engine. It’s the limiter remover that gives them a high top speed (but nothing like a bike!)

              1. You can outrun the car but you can’t outrun the radio. I saw some Connecticut state troopers stop a bike on I-84 by setting up a roadblock. Brought everyone else to a halt, but the troopers got the motorcycle.

    2. but Mr. Elli has now filed a class action lawsuit against the city because he says that the city retaliates against drivers who exercise their right to free speech

      Glad to see people like this not just settle and go about their way.

    3. Tell me, if the goal were to reduce speeds which would be more effective having unmarked cars drive around randomly flashing their lights signaling an impending speed trap, or having a speed trap which no one see’s until after they are past it?

      I mean this is all about public saftey and not in any means a revenue generation scheme right?

      1. I mean this is all about public saftey and not in any means a revenue generation scheme right?

        Thanks for that, funniest thing I’ve read all week. But then, it is Monday.

    4. The good thing about the government’s reaction here is that it makes obvious the reasoning for speed traps. It’s not to slow people down; after all, that’s what the guy accomplished by flashing his lights. It’s all about money.

  13. These don’t count as riots, but it’s still more than I expected to happen.

    What’s that? You wanted Unforgiven to be remade in Japanese? Well, good.

    1. Blocking the 10 freeway in LA?! Inconsiderate fucks.

      1. Did they really slow things down, though? Isn’t the 10 a parking lot most of the time anyway?

        1. True, but not on Sundays. Monday through Friday, I never went near that freeway and no one would notice if they were protesting today.

    2. Yeah, I’ve seen more damage done after a big U of Maryland basketball loss (or victory). All these protestors are idiots, but I’m pleasantly surprised by the lack of violence.

    3. I was expecting some sort of Japanese remake of a Metallica song.

    4. To be followed in the next ten years by a U.S. remake of the Japanese remake of Unforgiven.

    5. “These don’t count as riots”

      Are you sure? The first definition of “riot” in *Black’s Law Dictionary* is “An assemblage of three or more persons in a public place for the purpose of accomplishing by concerted action – and in a *turbulent and disorderly manner* – a common purpose (regardless of the lawfulness of that purpose).”

      From the article, I noticed some description of “turbulent and disorderly” behavior.

      “Demonstrations, from Florida where the trial took place to Atlanta, DC and New York, remained largely peaceful, though Los Angeles protesters managed to shut down an entire freeway and thousands of New Yorkers mobbed Times Square and blocked traffic for an hour?.

      “An LAPD vehicle and a local news van were surrounded by angry Angelenos.
      “Some protestors climbed atop cars. Some of the cars were even moving, carrying the demonstrators down city streets toward Hollywood, where people would later fill and block the busy Hollywood and Highland Avenue intersection.”

    1. Well, maybe in Warty’s “nose”.

      1. Well, maybe in ONE of Warty’s “noses”.

        1. Eewww!!

  14. “The burden of proof being on the prosecution is racist and stupid and evil” is a disturbingly popular opinion right now.

    1. It’s like the one remnant of our distrust in government that survives.

    2. For real fun, post: “Better 100 guilty men go free than one innocent man be falsely convicted” on FB.

      1. This concept goes back to the British common law. As Blackstone noted, “All presumptive evidence of felony should be admitted cautiously; for the law holds it better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent party suffer.”

        Franklin added a multiplier to make that 100 guilty people going free.

    3. The opinion of a bunch of angry racists marching around in hoods is probably not the best guide to “justice”.

      1. +KKK

  15. Rare baby pictures show Angelina Jolie with look-alike mother Marcheline Bertrand as intimate details of her childhood are revealed

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs…..ealed.html
    Wow. I mean, wow. Her mom was waaaaaay hotter than the overrated actress.

    1. She was. Goes to show you, the hottest women in the world are not in Hollywood.

    2. Yeah, but she came within 5 feet of Jacqueline Bisset during her formative years, surely some of that rubbed off on her.

    3. What do you have against Angelina-Bob Thornton?

      1. Not nearly enough of me?

    4. Dayum. Nice eye on John Voight.

      Too bad his daughter is bat-shit.

  16. Just in case you didn’t think the 2012 NDAA was the worst law ever passed. It also repealed the ban on the government’s ability to disseminate domestic propaganda. I guess the Dem’s felt that the MSM wasn’t quite up to the task anymore.

    1. Doesn’t it also mean that you can see what VOA and such are propagandizing other countries with?

      Should be a fun new game, too — “spot the propaganda”

      1. Turn on MSNBC and there it is!

        We need a more difficult game.

    2. Why the fuck would they even need it? The current media is doing a fine job of carrying Great Leader’s water. (I mean, reporters are being wiretapped by the government and not a single one of them gives a fuck? What the hell happened to journalism?)

    3. Nah. After actually reading the FL 10-20-Life statute this weekend, it is far and away the worst law ever passed.

  17. Glenn Greenwald, the journalist who first reported on Edward Snowden’s revelations, has said that the NSA whistleblower has enough information to cause more damage to the American government than anyone else in the history of the U.S.

    Good. Release it.

    1. Sounds like he’s holding onto it as insurance.

    2. I doubt it will be that embarrassing. Remember, Greenwald is nuts. He thinks showing the world t hat the US spies on other countries is some kind of scandal. Just because Greenwald thinks it is damaging doesn’t mean anyone else will.

      1. What the devil? Our intelligence agencies conduct foreign espionage?? Does the President know?!

        1. If only Comrade Stalin knew of these appalling acts, they would cease!

        2. he’s waiting for the next news update to learn more.

      2. I do think that it is one thing to spy on governments, as that is kind of expected, and another to mass surveil the German people, which is both ineffective and sort of a dick move.

    3. I don’t know, saying that sounds rather like a deadman’s switch threat to me. It could very much be a way to say to the US Gov “Back the fuck off and let him get to Venezula or we release the shit”.

      Whether or not the data exists or would be released should Snowden successfully get somewhere safe is a very interesting question.

    4. Five bucks says the companies involved are scared shitless. After the Microsoft revelations last week, I would be if I were them.

    5. Glenn Greenwald, the journalist who first reported on Edward Snowden’s revelations, has said that the NSA whistleblower has enough information to cause more damage to the American government than anyone else in the history of the U.S.

      He misspelled “embarrass” because we all know that no matter how egregious, no one here in the states nor internationally will hold the US accountable for the government’s actions.

  18. Turley: Why was Zimmerman overcharged?
    http://www.usatoday.com/story/…..e/2515397/

    Criminal cases make for perfect and often dangerous vehicles for social expression. They allow longstanding social and racial issues to be personified in villains and victims. We simplify facts and characters — discarding those facts that do not fit our narrative. We pile meanings on the outcome that soon make the actual murder secondary to the message. Zimmerman and Martin became proxies in our national debate over race. There was little patience or need for the niceties of rules of proof and adjudication.

    Before the case is lost forever to the artistic license of social commentary, a few legal observations should be considered, even if unpopular, before condemning this jury.

    1. Wow, that’s actually a sensible piece.

      (But I still don’t get why commentators keep saying that “who started it” really matters. Zimmerman could have been the one who started and still have been justified in using deadly force to defend himself.)

      1. I’m actually a little bit uncomfortable with that. If Zimmerman started the fight, and it escalated to the point where Martin felt the need to reach for Zimmerman’s gun to try to save his own life, I don’t think Zimmerman should be exonerated of all wrongdoing in that instance.

        1. The Model Penal Code has a good approach to this, IMO. The aggressor can’t use a self-defense justification if he started the fight with the intent of causing death or great bodily harm.

    2. The problem with the over charged theory is that since manslaughter is a lesser included offense of murder and the state asked for the instruction, the jury was instructed about manslaughter. Sure, he was over charged. But the jury was given the option of manslaughter and still didn’t convict him. So what charge does Turley think they would have convicted him of?

      The “Zimmerman was really guilty of manslaughter but got off because the prosecution over charged” looks to be the well meaning concern troll talking point going forward. But it is complete bunk. They jury had the opportunity to convict of manslaughter and refused to do so.

      1. I was wondering whether some other lesser offense might have been possible, like agg. battery or something along those lines. But if the jury bought self-defense, that seems undoable, too.

        1. The problem with battery is that it was mutual combat. There was no proof one way or the other who started the fight. So there was no way you could ever prove battery. The only hope for the state was to charge Zimmerman with manslaughter or murder because of the amount of force he used.

          1. It’s a loser, however you look at it.

            This case does show the limits of the law, no doubt. If you have an enemy, don’t let him provoke you into attacking him.

  19. Mountie shot dead his wife after she attacked him with a knife because he refused to fulfill the terms of a Wii game bet he lost and have sex with her

    Keith Wiens and wife Lynn Kalmring had hedged a bet over a Wii game
    When Wiens wanted to go to bed instead of have sex with his wife, he says she turned violent
    She came at him with a knife, and in self-defense Wiens said he shot her once in the head
    An expert testified that Kalmring would not have been found with a knife in her hand, or – if she had – it would have been difficult to pry away

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

    1. She came at him with a knife

      Well technically, it was a Wii remote that was used to simulate a knife on the screen, so not really self defense.

    2. I mean, I know this sounds crazy, but you should see my wife after she’s had a few. It’s even money whether I’m getting a piece or it turns all Evil Dead and shit.

    3. Crown counselor Colin Forsyth pointed out that they had been in an argument before when Wiens stopped Kalmring from breaking into Willie Nelson’s dressing room at a concert and flashing her breasts.

      Yeah, who could’ve seen the crazy train coming down the track?

    4. Chicks just can’t handle rejection.

      I’ve got decades of practice so it doesn’t bother me. Besides, it’s a numbers game.

  20. “The burden of proof being on the prosecution is racist and stupid and evil” is a disturbingly popular opinion right now.

    We pretty much already operate under the presumption of guilt. The police do.

  21. Don’t Let Boobs Ruin Your Sports Dreams
    http://www.theatlanticwire.com…..ams/67030/

    Rousey, whose almost-nip slip got GIF’d, says “You don’t see big titties in the Olympics, and I think that’s for a reason.” It depends on what she means by big titties. Though studies vary, the average American bra size is somewhere between 36C and 36D. But the average American woman is chubby. She’s just under 5 foot-4 inches and weighs 166 pounds?overweight, and pushing obese. In other words, not in champion shape. Big boobs for an Olympian will be smaller than big boobs for a regular American. Deirdre McGhee, a senior lecturer at Breast Research Australia, says some girls quit sports when they get boobs: “They’re embarrassed. They don’t want to talk about it. And so they stop.” But that is not the fault of boobs. It is the fault of terrible people on the Internet.

    1. I agree, we need more well endowed women in sports to make them more watchable.

    2. But the average American woman is chubby. She’s just under 5 foot-4 inches and weighs 166 pounds

      Somehow I doubt this.

      1. Measured average height, weight, and waist circumference for adults ages 20 years and over
        Men:
        Height (inches): 69.3
        Weight (pounds): 195.5
        Waist circumference (inches): 39.7
        Women:
        Height (inches): 63.8
        Weight (pounds): 166.2
        Waist circumference (inches): 37.5

        1. “Those aged 60 and over, all Hispanic persons, black persons, and those with low income were oversampled to improve the precision of the statistical estimates for these groups”

          It wasn’t immediately clear in from the sample description how these people were selected or why.

        2. Ah, the completely trustworthy CDC.

          1. Just pointing out that the author didn’t pull it completely out of their ass.

            Spend some time in the South. You’ll be convinced the numbers are on the low side.

        3. Kind of worth noting that the half-ton teens of the world are *ahem* tipping the scales a bit on that.

  22. Why Conservative Americans Admire Putin

    However, when they watch Obama destroying their own country with no hero to save them they become frustrated and look to Putin. Although they hear the same mantra from their TV that Putin is a dictator, Putin is evil, Putin is a murderer; from the internet they see him kneeling at Christ’s Holy Sepulcher which Obama never does when visiting Jerusalem. They see him going to church when they know Obama favors Muslims. They see Putin establishing laws to protect the church and laws against homosexuality. This they admire and this brings them hope. Hope in their crazy world where there is a leader willing to follow Christ. They have no Reagan but they see Putin whom they wish was their president.

    http://english.pravda.ru/opini…..s_putin-0/

    1. Pravda. Seems legit.

    2. As an American who talks to conservative Americans daily I can verify that this is BS.

      1. Probably so, but the text of the article is filled with Fox News propaganda.

      2. They think it’s funny that he pokes Obama in the eye, just like the left thought it was great when Sheehan or the shoe-throwing guy or whoever embarrassed the guy they didn’t like.

    3. Most conservative types view Putin as Stalin2.0. So, that’s pretty dumb.

      1. Yeah, many (most?) conservatives think the “end” of the Cold War was really just halftime.

        1. Berlin Wall dow, Baltics, Ukraine, several ‘stans and Belarus bolt. Real elections in Russia…?

          It’s a Trap! Deception Operations!

          /Cold Warrior who won’t let go

      2. Conservatives in the Anglo world DO NOT like Putin. Fuck off.

    4. Oh man, I love Pravda. Unapolagetically tabloid, horribly proofread, and they make RT seem like it isn’t pure Soviet Russian propaganda.

    5. Well, if you’re going to have a corrupt MF in the top spot in the country it is somewhat more palatable if the guy looks and acts like a gangster made good.

      Rather than this wimpy ‘populist’ we’ve got.

  23. Why the President’s ObamaCare Maneuver May Backfire
    By postponing the employer mandate, Obama has given millions of Americans the legal standing to sue.
    http://online.wsj.com/article/…..on_LEADTop

    One key problem with suspension power?aside from the fact that it destroys the balance of power between the two political branches?is that, when skillfully exercised, it sidelines the judiciary. The Constitution requires that a party commencing litigation must have what is commonly called “standing,” i.e., the party must have suffered or will suffer a legal injury that a court can redress. A determined president can head off litigation by effectively rewriting federal statutes in ways that do not create individual injuries so no party has standing.

    By suspending the Affordable Care Act’s employer insurance mandate, however, the president has potentially given millions of Americans the necessary standing to challenge his conduct.

    1. Die in a fire.

    2. Man, Dave Mustaine was so much cooler back when he was a Santorum-supporting conspiracy theorist wingnut.

      1. You take that back!

        You… just take that back!

      2. But he has never been as cool as he was back when he was shooting heroin and beating the shit out of terrorizing the whinny bitches who made up Metallica.

        1. Metallica has been all downhill since they booted him out.

          1. It was a very slow slide before Cliff Burton died.

    3. Somebody is trying very hard here to be worse than Hitler.

    4. YOU ARE A TERRIBLE INDIVIDUAL

  24. This may be my favorite reaction to the Zimmerman verdict yet:

    The amount of racist bullshit is truly sickening. People keep telling me oh they had to work within the system and the jurors had to do it blah blah and I am like THE SYSTEM ITSELF IS INHERENTLY RACIST. OUR SOCIETY IS INHERENTLY RACIST. WE LIVE IN A SLAVERY/GENOCIDE SOCIETY. THE DECK WAS STACKED FROM THE JUMP.

    1. The system is racist because the people are racist. Therefore the matter should be taken out of the people’s hands and given to the government.

      1. who could never ever ever be racist. Nope. Never!

        1. And if the “government is us” and we are racist, doesn’t that mean the government is racist?

          1. Shut up you palin-loving social-con troglodyte

      2. You haven’t heard?

        The state having to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the only real legal mechanism that protects even more blacks from being put in jail, is racist.

        We need to start adjudicating based on our feelings. Proof is so racist.

        /liberals

    2. 91% percent of black murdered in this country are murdered by blacks. So who’s committing the genocide?

      1. I think a lot of people who talk like that are referring to the Indians. The feathers kind.

        1. Those people have a colorable argument. The ones arguing that blacks are essentially still treated like slaves or whatever need look no further than who is really victimizing them. Of course, they won’t.

    3. This case has really brought out the stupid and ignorant.

    4. I’ve got some competition for you:

      As a psychologist:

      You said everything I have surmised from all the videos of him and such. I have zero respect for this guy, he is the epitome of a coward. And he KNEW the gun was the equalizer – and used it the SECOND he was in over his head (and yes, with a gangly teenager that he outweighed by at least 50 pounds!).

      This guy will get his – and nobody is going to have to do anything other than just breathe for it to happen. He’s TERRIFIED of the world, and everything in it. I’m actually shocked he didn’t drive his SUV into the dog path to run Trayvon down – I’m surprised he was brave enough to get out and risk a confrontation. But then again, he KNEW he had the gun on his hip too – and he had already tried to convince the dispatcher that Trayvon had “something in his hand, I don’t know what his problem is, he must be on drugs or something, just leisurely walking around looking at houses”.

      1. cont.

        This guy has Napoleon syndrome, for sure. That’s a given. And all the things he is doing to “prove” that he is a man – my only other guess is possibly bisexual or homosexual and unable to deal with that – I only say that because of the MANY attempts to appear to me “macho” or “manly” or what he perceives to be manly.

        But the “oh, others are getting away with stuff and I’m working for well below what I deserve, financially AND recognition wise” is DEAD ON. Classic right wing thought process, imo. God forbid someone else is “getting away with something” – and I must play god and make it right, bc I’m self righteous and KNOW what’s best for everyone, and I’m always doing what’s right, it’s god’s will. Ugh.

        1. my only other guess is possibly bisexual or homosexual and unable to deal with that – I only say that because of the MANY attempts to appear to me “macho” or “manly” or what he perceives to be manly.

          Rambo has a sad

          1. What is with the Left and the homophobic slurs? Since when is calling someone a twisted queer acceptable discourse?

            1. It’s “gay” when its not proggy enough. John, your right-wingishness is clearly a sign of anal-retention. You reveal signs of desperately needing a woman (palin?) to deflower you with a strapon to resolve your problematic needs for authority-worship. If you only voted for Bloomberg it would be a positive factor.

              1. I swear sometimes I wish I was queer just so I could throw it in these assholes’ faces when they toss out some homophobic slur like it is supposed to affect me.

                1. if you’re gay and republican-leaning its a result of self-hate. never work for you, Gay John

              2. Gilmore, being with a woman, even with a strap on, would just be denying who he is!

                He needs cock. Lots and lots of cock!

                Seriously, though… I thought a big tenet of the left was that its okay to be gay, or into BDSM, or whatever- so long as you don’t hurt anyone with the practice. So why does that change for the wrong political view?

                1. The whole outing people thing from the Left is especially appalling. I thought what you did in your bedroom was supposed to be private? Well not if shaming you with it helps the cause apparently.

                  1. If you’re Republican who wants to hold office, you had better only have sex with the lights off, missionary-style. Even woman on top might be too risque.

                  2. I thought what you did in your bedroom was supposed to be private?

                    I don’t like outing as a political method, but understand why people think it’s acceptable in cases where someone is strongly advocating legal sanction against gays, but getting their gay on on the DL. At that point they’re relying on their connection to power to protect themselves from the consequences of their legislation while publicly foisting them on the common man.

                    At this point though, I think outing is more frequently used by liberals to harm conservative politicians regardless of voting record in favor of electing chosen (straight) liberal candidates.

        2. Ah, left-wing homophobia. So pervasive, yet so often denied.

        3. “This guy has Napoleon syndrome, for sure. That’s a given. And all the things he is doing to “prove” that he is a man – my only other guess is possibly bisexual or homosexual and unable to deal with that – I only say that because of the MANY attempts to appear to me “macho” or “manly” or what he perceives to be manly”

          So, Trayvon was gay bashing when he got shot? Is that cool now? They keep fucking changing the rules on me.

        4. Wow. That second paragraph is some pure projection.

      2. This guy will get his – and nobody is going to have to do anything other than just breathe for it to happen.

        I thin Zimmerman will be just fine after he gets his libel judgement from MSDNC.

        1. CNN will have to toss a few bucks in the kitty too.

      3. As a psychologist

        That’s where you lost me.

        1. Give into the temptation and read it, you know you want to.

        2. “As a psychologist” effectively means “as a woman with a vicious Electra complex”, and often “as someone who couldn’t decide on a major but didn’t want anything too difficult.”

          1. Rule number one in college: Never date a child psychology major.

            1. PJ O’Rouke quote that I will probably mangle trying to remember:

              “You cant understand how the education system is screwed up until you have fucked an El-Ed major.”

              1. I thought it was more along the line of “Anybody who doesn’t know what’s wrong with America’s educational system never screwed an el-ed major.”

                1. Could be, still tracking it down. I think Im to the right chapter in the right book now.

                  1. And I give, I cant find it.

                    But I realize I need to reread some O’Rourke.

            2. Never date ANY psychology major. My theory is that those who go in to psychology do so in the hopes they may discover what the fuck is wrong with them.

      4. (and yes, with a gangly teenager that he outweighed by at least 50 pounds!).

        They’ve got to keep pushing that little kid narrative.

        Trayvon was 5’11” 158lbs according to his autopsy report and Zimmerman at the time of his inmate booking (April 2012) was 5’7″ 185 lbs.

        Not exactly 50+ lbs difference.

        1. Soon, it will be a difference of 100 pounds and Martin will have been only 14 years old.

  25. (Seattle) Pioneer Square merchants: ‘We’ve got people defecating all around us’
    http://www.komonews.com/news/l…..65601.html

    But now, Klotz says the neighborhood he loves is getting turned upside down by people who have no respect for others. He says the lack of civility is killing business for local merchants – and giving Seattle a bad image internationally.

    “The tourists are uncomfortable,” he says. “They walk into that park down there and they are literally aghast at what’s happening.”

    A coalition of business groups known as Alliance for Pioneer Square met Thursday morning to talk about the city’s response to a range of problems – including a complete lack of public toilets.

    1. Ewww~
      But, the last time I was in Seattle (7 years ago?) I saw a guy with dyed dreadlocks getting a Orange Julius out of the trash to drink what was left of it.

    2. So, this is like, literally, the tragedy of the commons.

      1. So, this is like, literally, the tragedy of the commons commodes.

        FTFY

    3. I wonder how long it will take Epi to accuse you of being a KULTUR/REGIONAL warmonger for posting this.

    4. They had public toilets in the square. The street people were having sex in them and shooting up/smoking crack in them, so the city had them removed.

  26. Obama’s broken commitment to human rights in Russia
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..story.html

    When Obama was a college student, he said during a visit to South Africa last month, “I knew that while brave people were imprisoned just off these shores on Robben Island, my own government in the United States was not standing on their side. That’s why I got involved.”

    “We don’t tell people who their leaders should be,” Obama concluded, “but we do stand up with those who support the principles that lead to a better life.”

    A college student today watching Obama embrace Russia ? or China, or Vietnam, or any number of other unfree nations ? might wonder when that standing up will begin.

  27. Israeli man’s penis bitten by a snake as he went to the toilet to relieve himself

    “The doctor says you’re gonna die.”

    *punch line to old joke.

    1. Thanks for the memories.

      1. Hey, Hash, is your refrigerator running?

        1. And is it full of Prince Albert in a can?

  28. The Athens-Clarke County Tea Party Patriots owes thousands of dollars in unpaid speaking fees related to its first annual Liberty Convention held last month.

    One speaker, a conservative blogger based out of Washington, D.C., filed a police report Tuesday stating she was duped out of $11,000. Another, Georgia political pundit Martha Zoller, said she was cheated of her speaker fees as well.

    Before that, the Classic Center canceled the event after a check bounced, Executive Director Paul Cramer said.

    Keyantwon Stephens, the 17-year-old chair and founder the Athens-Clarke County Tea Party Patriots, said a press conference is planned for today to address the matter in more detail.

    In a Friday interview, Stephens said he’s been in communication with each scheduled speaker except Crystal Wright, the Washington blogger, about repayment plans. He said the speakers are owed about $65,000 in total, minus the amount owed to Wright. Stephens said the group intended to sue Wright for defamation.

    http://onlineathens.com/local-…..arty-group

    Athens is still a cool town.

  29. The Zimmerman Jury Failed Us

    America is racist at its core. I used to doubt this simplistic claim. Today I cannot. The murder of Trayvon Martin demands total, simple, honesty. A jury in Florida failed us. We have not seen a moral failure this grave since a similarly all-white jury in Simi Valley, Calif., in 1992 acquitted the four LAPD officers who beat Rodney King.

    Writing in the same year as that ill-fated verdict, the distinguished civil rights lawyer Derrick Bell declared that “racism is an integral, permanent and indestructible component of this society.” In most circumstances, I treat this declaration as a foil: a claim to be slowly picked apart as, at best, too easy and, at worst, deeply unfair and wrong. Not today.

    The most elemental facts of this case will never change. A teenager went out to buy Skittles and iced tea. At some point, he was confronted by a man with a gun who killed him. There is no universe I understand where this can be declared a noncriminal act. Not in a sane, just and racism-free universe.

    I DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE LAW OR SELF-DEFENSE AND I’M PROUD OF IT!

    1. At some point, he was confronted by a man with a gun who killed him.

      Using that logic, the Boston Bombers were just two kids headed to New York to party and at some point where confronted by armed police who killed them.

      Zimmerman has really produced a new high in retard. I know there is no such thing as peak retard. But there is such a thing as record retard. And I think the Left’s reaction to the Zimmerman case just set it.

      1. Peak Retard? Nah, it’s an unlimited resource. It’s just going to get worse.

        1. Now we only need to figure out a way to harness Retard to power our planes and such.

        2. That is what I was saying. There will never be a peak. But there will be an endless secession of record retard.

    2. “The most elemental facts of this case will never change. A teenager went out to buy Skittles and iced tea. At some point, he was confronted by a man with a gun whom the teenager then attacked with no evidence of sufficient provocation and continued attacking him until Zimmerman reasonably believed he was at risk for serious bodily injury or death who killed him.”

      It doesn’t matter whether the facts will never change when you leave out the most important ones.

    3. America is racist to the core – because they’re out complaining about correct verdicts that don’t fit their racist narrative.

    4. a similarly all-white jury

      Wasn’t there a black lady on the jury?

      Also, it seems strange that there were only six people on the jury. Is that normal for Florida?

      1. Also, I thought two of the women were Hispanic.

      2. Florida has 6 person juries in all criminal trials except for capital cases.

        1. That’s something I don’t agree with. I think if it’s a felony, you should get twelve. I believe that’s the case in most jurisdictions, though I’m not sure whether the dividing line is misdemeanor/felony or some higher degree of felony.

      3. I kept seeing her advertised on the trial coverage as “Black or Hispanic”.

        I suppose she could be “Black, Hispanic, or Martian.”

      4. I think we only have twelve person juries in capitol cases here.

      5. One of the Rodney King jurors was Asian. The Supreme Court has official confirmed that “Asian” /= “white.”

        But that didn’t fit the narrative, so it was ignored, as this article indicates.

    5. Can we start using Somalia for all the people who claim America is racist? It you hate America so much why don’t you move to Somalia and use the Xeer system? Oh wait. I want to use the Xeer system. Never mind.

    6. They’re already shifting the narrative from whether Zimmerman committed a crime under Florida law to whether Florida law is unjust. “Fine GZ didn’t technically commit a crime. But what he did should be illegal.”

      1. “The law must change.”

        Uh, huh. To what, exactly?

        We were discussing Trayvon’s Law the other evening, but I’m too lazy to look it up.

        1. Stricter gun laws. They think the only people who should be allowed to use a gun in self defense are LEOs.

          1. Lefttards do not see any distinction between self defense and vigilante justice.

            No difference at all.

            They see absolutely no difference between shooting someone while you feel your life is in danger, and shooting someone in the back a month after they committed a crime.

            No difference at all.

            1. They do see it, but just in different shades. It can’t be self-defense if you have “privilege”.

              As absurd as it sounds, that’s how they rationalize it.

              1. Principals, not principles.

        2. The argument I saw on Facebook was that “reasonable fear” should have a different definition, somehow, because Zimmerman wasn’t really hurt that much.

          I gave them examples of how rape often leaves less physical damage than what happened to Zimmerman. Examples of a wife beater who doesn’t leave much damage.

          They then spent about two hours calling me sexist and how there are lingering effects from rape and spousal abuse and how rape and abuse can turn deadly very quickly and how you can’t just judge things by the injuries at the time.

          After they were done spewing, I said, “Hey, thanks for making my argument for me. You just needed a set of facts you like better than the Zimmerman facts, but what you’re arguing for is exactly why the law is like it is.”

          They were… not pleased.

          1. That is too rich. You should have asked them “so if a man beats his wife for years and she finally gets so scared she shoots him, she is guilty of murder because she had never actually been hurt that much?” The same people who want to get rid of the immediacy requirement for self defense in battered wife cases not think reasonable fear is just too low a bar.

            1. That’s what I did. And they spent two hours explaining how women could be justified in fearing for their lives even though they weren’t currently being hurt much. And, again, I pointed out that that was the law for a reason and that was the law they didn’t like because they didn’t like Zimmerman.

              The entire post got deleted about 15 minutes later.

              1. The entire post got deleted about 15 minutes later.

                Tolerant people do not have to tolerate such intolerance!

              2. The entire post got deleted about 15 minutes later.

                Not surprising, considering that their self-affirming hugbox was invaded.

              3. Introducing new sonics into echo chamber is discouraged.

    7. I’m noticing people on these sites are having none of it for the most part.

  30. http://www.talkleft.com/story/…..rman-Trial

    Am I hallucinating, lost my ability to read, or is talk left actually saying something sensible?

    The legacy of this case will be that the media never gets it right, and worse, that a group of lawyers, with the aid of a public relations team, who had a financial stake in the outcome of pending and anticipated civil litigation, were allowed to commandeer control of Florida’s criminal justice system, in pursuit of a divisive, personal agenda.

    Their transformation of a tragic but spontaneous shooting into the crime of the century, and their relentless demonization of the person they deemed responsible, not for a tragic killing, but for “cold-blooded murder,” has called into question the political motives and ethics of the officials serving in the Executive branch of Florida’s government, ruined the career of other public officials, turned the lives of the Zimmerman family, who are as innocent as their grieving clients, into a nightmare, and along the way, set back any chance of a rational discussion of the very cause they were promoting, probably for years. [More….]

    The problems of racial disparity and arbitrary enforcement of our criminal laws are real, systemic and need to be addressed. Criminal defense lawyers see it and fight to correct it every day. From charging decisions to plea offers to sentences, the system is not fair and everybody knows it.

    1. Wow! That’s unusually cogent.

      1. Shocking. It makes me wonder if their site got hacked or someone slipped some LSD into the office coffee or something.

        1. Damn you, squirrels. I was saying that many of the comments are refreshingly level-headed for the most part and can see the big picture as well.

    2. It was like the OJ trial: the prosecution went for the Murder 1 Gorilla Dunk when a Manslaughter Lay-up would’ve been the smart thing to do.

      (The lay-up still would’ve been rejected.)

      1. The manslaughter charge was considered and rejected by the jury. So that dog doesn’t hunt.

      2. The OJ trial was handled poorly by both sides, but extra so by the prosecution. Didn’t defuse the Fuhrman issue, didn’t explain DNA evidence well, blew the chain of custody, etc.

  31. The New York Daily News cover compares Trayvon to Emmett Till and other racially motivated murders.

    http://www.mediaite.com/online…..ront-page/

    1. That’s an insult to people actually murdered by racists. There’s not even the slightest evidence that Zimmerman was racially motivated. In fact, we’ve heard evidence to the contrary.

      1. It is, but you won’t hear any of the professional race-baiters saying otherwise. This will be a game of one-up-manship to see who can be the most inflammatory.

        1. It amazes me how cheaply people sell their credibility. It’s like saying a bartender is worse than Hitler when he serves a 20 year-old a beer.

          1. You know who else did bad things in beer halls?

            Oh, never mind, I see you already went there.

            1. Your possible mischaracterization of my comment makes you worse than Hitler.

  32. http://sayanythingblog.com/ent…..b-traffic/

    Daily Caller passes jounrolist Politico in traffic. I used to like Politico. It started out as a leftish but still entertaining and fairly reasonable news source. But in the last few years they have gone full lefty retard. I don’t understand it. Don’t they want to make money? Did they think the lefty retard market is being under served?

    1. Daily Caller tried to rat-fuck that NJ Senator. That lie sent their traffic way up.

      1. Re: Palin’s Buttwipe,

        Daily Caller tried to rat-fuck that NJ Senator. That lie sent their traffic way up.

        Actually, it is much more likely that the DC was duped just like many other outlets – like CNN.

    1. “They are not white,” Bogado wrote. “Yet Zimmerman’s apparent ideology ? one that is suspicious of black men in his neighborhood, the ‘assholes who always get away’ ? is one that adheres to white supremacy. ? When Zimmerman was acquitted today, it wasn’t because he’s a so-called white Hispanic. He’s not. It’s because he abides by the logic of white supremacy, and was supported by a defense team ? and a swath of society ? that supports the lingering idea that some black men must occasionally be killed with impunity in order to keep society-at-large safe.”

      Bogado took a swing at Thomas Jefferson, the third U.S. president and author of the Declaration of Independence, sliming him as a “slave-owning rapist.” She also took the curious position of condemning media outlets for “fanning the flames of fear-mongering” by suggesting some may riot after the verdict, while at the same time voicing support for any such riots.

      1. It doesn’t matter what Zimmerman looked like, he is culturally white. You know, he had a house and was concerned about people robbing him and wanted to work for a living. That is nothing but white privilege straight up.

        1. Holy fuck, what a racist comment. Minorities don’t want to work? Now the hood is clearly visible for all.

          1. Epic reading comprehension fail.

            1. White culture, huh?

              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6VHBEFh4BQ

              Watch the Beckerhead squirm.

              John won’t though.

              1. It was sarcastic retard. It was summarizing the point of the article not endorsing the view. It was yet another example of Lefty racism. You know, the stuff you post all the time when you say black people are stupid and can only get ahead using affirmative action.

              2. You really should stop embarrassing yourself. I think I’ve watched or listened to maybe 10 minutes of Glenn Beck in my entire life.

                Now go re-read this thread until you actually comprehend John’s comment.

                1. If you try to wrestle a pig, you just get all muddy and the pig loves it.

                  It’s nothing but a vile shit-throwing monkey. Don’t play its stupid little game.

          2. Beyond epic fail.

          3. Re: Palin’s Buttwipe,

            Minorities don’t want to work?

            Because they would otherwise be admonished by their peers for “acting White.”

            And it’s all YOUR FAULT!

      2. It’s amazing she can even type. What, with that Atlas-esque chip on her shoulder, and soul made entirely of dog shit.

      3. It’s fucking amazing how white men are at fault for a hispanic shooting a black kid and being subsequently acquitted by a jury of 6 women.

        The only white male involved was a defense lawyer.

        1. To be fair, White (Hispanic) is how GZ would be classified on a gov’t document. White, Black, Asian, and Native are the typical race defaults, with Hispanic being an ethnicity.

          -not arguing or opionating…just sayin’

    2. “They are not white,” Bogado wrote. “Yet Zimmerman’s apparent ideology ? one that is suspicious of black men in his neighborhood, the ‘assholes who always get away’ ? is one that adheres to white supremacy.

      PATRIARCHY

    3. I’m convinced that left-wing publications have been in some kind of secret competition to see who can post the dumbest reaction to the verdict. Because it’s been even dumber than I expected, and I expected a lot of idiocy.

    4. wow, Stormfront has quite the reach.

      1. The number 8 is racist, LH. That’s how far Stormfront’s tentacles extend, to the very roots of mathematics.

    1. I’d totally give that person a job. Takes responsibility, has a sense of humor, has no problem trolling idiots.

  33. Greenwald: Edward Snowden has ‘blueprints’ to NSA
    http://news.yahoo.com/journali…..25933.html

    Glenn Greenwald, a columnist with The Guardian newspaper who first reported on the intelligence leaks, told The Associated Press that disclosure of the information in the documents “would allow somebody who read them to know exactly how the NSA does what it does, which would in turn allow them to evade that surveillance or replicate it.”

    He said the “literally thousands of documents” taken by Snowden constitute “basically the instruction manual for how the NSA is built.”

    1. Excellent. Release them now.

    2. If that is true, I blame the NSA more Snowden. If the NSA is so incompetant it let some contractor be privy to all of its means and methods, then I doubt the information will be news to any of our adversaries. Snowden is not that special regardless of his delusions of grandeur. If he knows that, so the Chinese and Russians and anyone else who matters.

      1. Yeah. If Snowden can get all this stuff and release it publicly, then there is no way a Russian or Chinese spy hasn’t been able to get them and bring them back to their government.

        1. Exactly. And unlike Obama, when sane national governments score intelligence coups, they don’t do a victory dance in front of the world. The information is only good if the other side doesn’t know you have it.

      2. I pity whoever signed off of Snowden’s clearance. Those people probably have an impossible job, but they’ll still get blamed and no one on the outside will ever hear about it.

        1. I pity whoever signed off of Snowden’s clearance.

          I don’t. Another government parasite who will continue on with their gold-plated pay and benefits and will suffer no adverse consequences whatsoever.

          1. You’re just jealous.

          2. Most of the investigators are contractors.

            1. ^This

              The folks who interviewed me for my clearance were contractors.

        2. The real problem in this case is…on what basis were they supposed to deny him a clearance?

          The NSA’s problem is the same problem the GOP has:

          Up until the moment when we’ve seen enough and decide to fucking betray you, Paulian or Randian types look like the straightest citizens of all.

          I’ve never been arrested. I don’t take drugs. I was a registered Republican for decades. My taxes are paid and my papers are always in order.

          If I didn’t have a trail of internet ravings that looks like the Mississippi, there’d be no reason to deny me a security clearance.

          And I’d betray your asses so fast it would make your heads spin.

          1. They are called moles. It is the same problem the GOP has with everyone. But the problem is not people like you betraying them. It is people deciding that becoming a concern troll for the left is a better career than being a Republican.

            1. No, it’s not even a mole problem. It’s an authenticity problem.

              Why did Ron Paul betray the GOP?

              Because he really believed in the small government rhetoric the GOP claims to believe in.

              The man most likely to betray them was…the most loyal man of all.

              It’s a paradox.

              Unless Snowden’s revealed persona is completely a lie (which I’ll admit is possible) Snowden betrayed the US because he actually believed in the ideals of the United States.

              So how do you test for that?

              Basically you’d have to exclude from security clearances the very people who scored the most patriotic, and who believed in the United States the most fervently.

              “We can’t approve those people. As soon as they find out we’re full of shit, they’ll betray us!”

              How do you write the manual for a process like that?

              1. You use the same hiring process as the cops do.

              2. How do you write the manual for a process like that?

                If you are honest about what you are, it is easy.

                Of course, that is an even worse thought.

                An NSA that internally acknowledges that it is an orwellian nightmare or a GOP that acknowledges that it is a power mad org not interested in the constitution may both be worse than them deluding themselves.

              3. But it is an authenticity problem. How do you know the guy means what he says? You don’t. What happens when Rand Paul decides he can’t win the Presidency so being the Washington Post’s favorite Republican Senator is the next best option. The liberal establishment can offer any Republican who wants to defect all sorts of benefits, a guaranteed soap box, praise for being a reasonable and heroic person, big paying jobs in the media or academia. Being a Republican who sells out to spend the rest of their career concern trolling other Republicans for the Left is a very lucrative career.

              4. Stalin did it when he replaced the true believing commies with psychopaths in the 30s.

              5. He didn’t betray the US; he betrayed the government.

                L’?tat n’est pas moi.

          2. If I didn’t have a trail of internet ravings that looks like the Mississippi, there’d be no reason to deny me a security clearance.

            First Amendment says “Here’s your TS!”

      3. I think the question is whether Russia or China ever got one of their people into position as a sys admin, first inside NSA and then at a contractor.

        A finite number of people have held such positions. If one of them was a foreign operative, then the NSA’s secrets are generally known. If none of them were, then they aren’t.

        1. Not necessarily. They listen too. But even still, the chances that they got one or two in there over the years are very high. And since Snowden was apparently granted access to everything, it apparently only takes one.

      4. During my first internship, I rubbed elbows with some people who did contract work for the NSA back when it didn’t exist, including a couple of guys who would go on to play a major role in the development of a bunch of modern programming languages and computer platforms.

        From their allusions, it was clear that their counterparts in the NSA were top flight computer guys who really knew their shit. My guess is that Booz has the IT security hole, because contractors have very different incentives.

        1. Guys who really know their shit dont hire contractors who dont.

          1. Guys who really know their their shit in the government don’t hire contractors. Government purchasing agents do.

            1. Government purchasing agents dont have the ability to grant clearance (and I dont mean in a government clearance sense, but it a “give someone an account on the server” sense).

              Im guessing that back in the “NSA doesnt exist” days, they didnt have to go thru government purchasing agents either. The people that really know their shit got sick and left in the 30 years since then.

              1. Probably so, but from what I’ve seen of the government contracting business, it’s a corrupt and broken system.

    3. The government didn’t seem too concerned about means and methods when Obama and his cronies were busy leaking every detail about the Bin Ladin raid and the intel operation that led to it.

      And it is a pretty piss poor terrorist who didn’t already know the NSA was listening to phone calls and reading emails. Just who thinks that doing that unencrypted is a safe way to communicate?

      And moreover, the last few terrorist attacks have been by people who practically advertised on facebook their membership in the Future Martyrs of America Club.

      1. And it is a pretty piss poor terrorist who didn’t already know the NSA was listening to phone calls and reading emails.

        Supposedly bin Laden knew that back in the 90s.

  34. I’m convinced that left-wing publications have been in some kind of secret competition to see who can post the dumbest reaction to the verdict. Because it’s been even dumber than I expected, and I expected a lot of idiocy.

    Trolling their own readers.

  35. Looks like no riots so far. Is it time for all you people who were certain that there would be massive riots to step up and say you were wrong?

    1. I won’t gloat about this until the end of the week. You never know. Something could happen today. But I doubt it.

      As I said yesterday, people are going to forget about this story. It has no hot women accused of killing someone, no dead children, no porn and no kitties. Without one of those, no story can last in the internet age.

      1. I think it was very fortunate politically for the Dems that there were no riots.

        1. I think so too. I think riots would have been a disaster. You wouldn’t know it by reading the news, but white people are still a majority in this country. Moreover, other minorities like Hispanics and Asians would have also been targeted by such riots. If there had been riots a whole lot of people would have blamed the Democrats.

      2. Something could happen today.

        “Zimmerman Shoots (Another) Black Attacker” might set it off.

      3. So what does this mean? Is America becoming more docile or is the media losing its ability to work people up into a riotous rage?

        1. LA was special.

          Riots don’t happen because people are mad.

          Riots happen because people are mad, and enough people are in the streets that somebody realizes he can’t commit a crime and the police won’t stop him.

          That’s why we have more “championship celebration” riots these days than political riots. Because sports produces a big enough crowd.

          There’s much, much more “Woo hoo! The cops can’t get all of us! Time for fun shit!” in riots than “Waa! I’m angry!” Always has been.

          1. Sorry, that should say “…he CAN commit a crime…”

          2. That is it. There is a big difference between being pissed off and actually committing a crime. Riots happen when there is a critical mass of people who are willing to commit a crime such that the police can’t immediately do anything. And most of the people in a riot are there opportunistically. A core group of people create the environment and then a bunch of other people show up because they want some free shit or it is fun to destroy things. That is a really hard atmosphere to create.

            1. I guess that speaks to the character of Americans then that the last major riot was in 1992. The Greeks and French seem to riot at the drop of a hat.

      4. I think you are right. It will be forgotten for the most part in a week or two. Right now it looks like we mostly have protests by the usual suspects pushing their established agenda. Sort of like the reactions to shootings; no one has learned anything or had their views changed. It’s just an opportunity to make some noise while there is a national platform available.

    2. I posted here yesterday, that there would not be any major or long lasting riots.

      There won’t be until the free shit train goes off the tracks.

      1. There won’t be until the free shit train goes off the tracks.

        This makes me extremely happy to live in a rural area and posses shit loads of firearms and the means to make my own ammo.

        The chances of mass rioting are low, and I have the means to protect my home in the very low likelihood it were to happen.

        1. The chances of mass rioting are low, and I have the means to protect my home in the very low likelihood it were to happen.

          We keep a rifle downstairs, a shotgun upstairs, plus a handgun in each room except the bathrooms. All of them are out of view, and well out of reach of small hands. If we aren’t set, I’ll need professional advice.

  36. After the verdict was announced Obama called for calm.

    Pretty disingenuous for him to state that we are a “nation of laws” and calling for calm after he stuck his nose in the whole affair to begin with and helped fan the media-fueled flames.

    I told a buddy of mine who was freaking out about the verdict that this was a textbook case of the media manipulating a divisive, confirmation-bias affirming narrative centered on race and gun control in a naked effort to boost ratings. The fact that so many people believe this was about Stand Your Ground, for example, contrary to the actual facts, shows just how successful they were.

  37. White Supremacy, Meet Black Rage

    No, George Zimmerman is not white. But his assumptions about black men are rooted in the foundational assumptions of white supremacy and his treatment by the justice system have conferred upon him privileges usually reserved for white men. The malleability of white supremacy for non-black bodies says something about the singular power and threat of the black body in this kind of racialized system.

    Though much of the mainstream media who have covered this case have convinced themselves that race did not play a role in this trial, a black kid is dead because being young, black and male, and wearing a hoodie in the rain is apparently a crime punishable by death.

    When I think of the jury in this case, five of them white women, I am convinced that at a strictly human level, this case came down to whether those white women could actually see Trayvon Martin as somebody’s child, or whether they saw him according to the dictates of black male criminality.

    (I’m fairly sure that Pauli Murray, the famed African-American civil rights attorney and feminist activist who successfully dismantled the all white, all-male jury system in the case of White v. Crook (1966), a decision that made an all-female jury possible, is somewhere turning over in her grave.)

    Remember ladies: REAL women are liberals.

    1. Of course no one is allowed to see Zimmerman as someone’s child. Only Martin gets that privilege. The scary part about this kind of stuff is how casually they completely dehumanize the other side. Zimmerman isn’t someone’s child in this woman’s view. He isn’t really a human being. And sending him to prison for the rest of his life is not something anyone should ever feel guilty about. Now you see why leftists find it so easy to murder people. They don’t look at their opponents as people.

      1. Step one is to dehumanize your enemy.

    2. I’m so fucking bored with this half-baked racial handwringing. Jesus wept.

  38. You guys really got under the intestinal blockage’s skin the other day when you tagged him for his racist bullshit about Cain.

    Nice work.

  39. After the verdict was announced Obama called for calm

    There will be calm soon enough. The first of the month is just a couple of weeks away, and those food stamps don’t just spend themselves. Which means all of the potential rioters will be at the Walmart.

      1. I knew you were going to say that…

        1. And I have an especially racist view towards the fat white liberal women who tend to always show up at these type of events.

  40. Looking for the exact source of the O’Rourke quote above (which is hard when you arent 100% sure which book it came from), I ran across this gem:

    “When James Watt invented the steam engine, thousands of ten-year-old boys who had been hauling coal carts were put out of work. However, this left them free to do other things, such as live to be eleven.”

    1. In the same chapter he also explains comparative advantage using John Grisham and Courtney Love.

    2. He is such a great writer.

      1. I think you will like this one:

        “Not to be partisan, but Huck’s combination of fearless individualism and abysmal ignorance make this one of the great conservative Republican moments in American literature.”

          1. Careful, now, you lot. You’re shitting all over Shreeky, the Wonder Gibbon’s narrative that we all have an (R) after our handles.

            1. And his narrative that I am some kind of crazy fundamentalist.

              1. Well, yes-that was foremost in my mind when I posted.

                1. ^ And by that, I mean his trope, not that I agree with him.

    3. Eat The Rich, pg 108

      Economists don’t really know much about efficiency, and neither does anyone else. Doubtless the citizens of eighteenth-century England thought they were producing as many lumps of coal and wads of knitting as they possibly could. One more coal miner would mean one less stocking knitter. Then, James Watt invents the steam engine. Pretty soon, coal carts are hauling themselves, and knitting mills are clicking away automatically, and everybody has more socks and more fires to put wet, smelly stocking feet up in front of. Efficiency is constantly changing, and economists can’t keep up with this because they have to grade papers and figure out what Y equals.

    4. When James Watt invented the steam engine

      Murikan was just here a couple days ago to educate us about how only government invents things. Didn’t you learn anything?

      James Watt didn’t build that steam engine!

  41. The malleability of white supremacy for non-black bodies says something about the singular power and threat of the black body in this kind of racialized system.

    How the fuck do you read this shit? I actually “hovered” over a Slate link yesterday (Emily Bazelon, I believe), thinking I could dip a toe int the fever swamp and get a feel for what those people(!) were saying.
    I couldn’t do it. I feared for my sanity.

    1. It is the “black body”, as if there are not tons of truly terrifying white people in the world who you wouldn’t want walking through your neighborhood.

      1. Whites are afraid of blackbodies because they absorb all incident light, rendering them invisible when they do their crime stuff.

        On second thought, I might be mixing my physics class with my AA studies.

    2. At first read I don’t even know what that means… but once I put on my “pseudo-intellectual hat” it all becomes crystal clear.

      1. Would Captain Subtext please translate that for me? Because I have no idea what she is saying.

        1. White privilege gets extended to anyone who acts white enough and kills a black person.

          It stands on a stack of unprovable assumptions that towers into the sky.

          1. It’s racist elephants all the way down!

          2. No the strength of black bodies bit. I honestly am baffled. Is she having some Jimmy the Greek moment?

            1. Ah. White people are afraid of black people because they are more authentic and closer to true human nature. What they fear, they hate and attempt to subjugate.

              1. So they…they’re, uh, noble savages?

  42. So I’ve asked this question once and was promptly called a racist for it, but do we have any evidence that Trayvon Martin *wasn’t* casing houses? I’m just curious here.

    1. We don’t. It’s possible he was a multi-tasking. 😉

      We also don’t have any evidence that he wasn’t planning to betray humanity to the Giant Alien Squirrels of Aldebaran IX. FWIW

      1. Let’s be honest here: there was quite a bit of evidence that Mr. Martin was a teenager headed in the wrong direction. His school found one dozen pieces of women’s jewelry in his book bag, for example.

        And much has been made of the fact that George Zimmerman called 911 a bunch for burglars, but weren’t some of those successful? What if Zimmerman had it right? He seems to be experienced enough to be able to tell. Maybe this actually was another potential one. Everyone acts as if Martin was a longtime resident, but that isn’t true. Everyone assumes Zimmerman was just paranoid and overzealous, but he could have been right.

        1. I agree. If surveillance video were to show up showing Martin casing houses, I would be utterly unsurprised.

          He had been sent to live with his dad for a reason, and it wasn’t because he had been making good life-choices with his mom.

          Of course all of that is irrelevant to the question of manslaughter;

          If Martin had been casing houses, Zimmerman lacked the legal power to use force to detain him.

          If Martin hadn’t been casing houses, the fact Zimmerman had been following him didn’t give him the legal power to physically attack Zimmerman.

          Furthermore, as has been repeatedly pointed out, the question isn’t who started the fight, it’s whether Zimmerman had reason to fear for his life, and all the evidence points to yes: Zimmerman was on his back having his head slammed repeatedly into concrete for many seconds. Even if Zimmerman had instigated the fight he would have the right to defend his life.

          Moreover, John’s point, made in another thread, is very persuasive: if Zimmerman wanted to detain Martin, he would have pulled the gun on him (and been arrested for false arrest). He would not have gone the riskier route of taking on a guy who was clearly fitter and nearly his size.

          The only way Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter is if he behaved in ways that not only were counterproductive to his stated/revealed goals, but in strong opposition to the personality he had shown in the past.

          1. It is relevant to the narrative, however.

          2. Even if Zimmerman had instigated the fight he would have the right to defend his life.

            I get lost with this one. Starting a fight means that one has weighed the consequences and decided that getting an ass whooping is acceptable. If you didn’t weight the options (or do it well enough), it’s your fucking fault. You shouldn’t have the ability to kill someone because you didn’t think they could kick your ass.

            But the state couldn’t prove anything beyond Martin being shot which was stipulated in the self defense claim.

            1. Except there is a world of difference between getting your ass kicked and getting beaten to death.

              A person instigating a fight should be prepared for the possibility they are going to lose. It does not mean they have waived their right to life.

              1. Sure, that’s true. But Zimmerman doesn’t seem to have been anywhere close to death after the beating.

                But who (that is not directly involved) cares? There was no evidence to contradict Z’s story and the jury made the right decision based on the facts available.

                1. When your head is being pounded into concrete, you *are* one blow away from death.

                  It’s not like a game where each hit takes so many hit points off of your health. The skull protects the brain until it fails.

        2. Everyone acts as if Martin was a longtime resident, but that isn’t true.

          Even that doesn’t matter.

          A couple of years ago, my neighborhood had a rash of burglaries concentrated on one street. Turns out the perpetrator was a 19 year old boy that has lived on the street for a lonnng time and was found with most of the loot in his bedroom.

          A lot of kids that age are just unbelievably stupid

          1. My street has had too crime waves.

            One ended when the FBI swooped in and arrested Dad and older son living three houses down (dad was apparently fencing shit stolen in NH, ME, CT and RI and was one of the biggest fences since the first picket came to fency-town)

            The other ended when the single mom with unmanageable monster-teen moved to KY. Funny how that works.

            1. fucking homonyms… how do they work?

            2. God help you if one of your neighbors has a legitimately criminal teenager. You are fucked. The cops never do anything to juveniles and if you take the law into your own hands you will go down on child abuse charges. Unless you live in a Castle Doctrine state and the little bastard is dumb enough to break into your house while you are there giving you the right to shoot him, you will have nothing but aggravation and misery until he turns 18 and moves away or finally gets caught and goes off to prison.

              1. Get a dog.

                Seriously.

                A beagle or larger sized dog, one who is smart, and loves his family. The criminals move on to easier pickings.

                1. Absolutely Tarran. My family always had German Shepherds and never had any problems the criminal element teenage or otherwise. Criminals are for some reason terrified of large dogs.

                  1. Dogs don’t give a shit.

                    They don’t worry about being arrested. They don’t know there’s a three-bites-you-get-put-down law. Often, all they know is “Bad Stranger In My Den Threatening My Pack”.

                    And the thugs know that… or learn quickly.

                    1. Yup. And watching one of those dogs take apart a steak bone or a tennis ball was a bit unnerving when you thought about what would happen if they ever really nailed you. Hell, even a medium sized or small dog has a bite you really don’t want to have happen to you. Only time I ever got bit by a dog was by our terrier when he was scared of another dog at the fence and I made the mistake of trying to pick him up. He nailed me without thinking. Little fucker about took my hand off. And this was a 20lb dog. Can’t imagine what the 80lb ones could do to you.

                    2. Can’t imagine what the 80lb ones could do to you.

                      I give my dogs those beef bones with marrow in them. I’ve seen both of them, 90lbs and 60lbs, bite down on a fresh one and crack the bone open to get at the marrow. This is a thick cow bone, your hand would be like pudding.

          2. I never understand folks who commit crimes close to their own homes. I mean seriously. I wouldn’t even do anything close to my own town if I had the gumption to do a crime like this.

            I guess we’re lucky that the average criminal is pretty damned stupid. But our other problem is that law enforcement is just as stupid.

      2. I thought the Giant Alien Squirrels of Aldebaran IX were busy running HampersandR?

    2. Those who called you a racist were, I suspect, either racist gas bags or ignorant or both.

      1. It’s projection, to be sure.

    3. Unless you can read the minds of dead people, I’m not sure what would constitute evidence that he was not casing houses. How can you distinguish casing houses and walking around looking at houses? There is no evidence that I wasn’t casing houses that night either.

      It’s certainly not racist to ask, but it is a pretty stupid question.

  43. I think the best thing we can do is STFU about the Zimmerman/Martin Incident. Let Martin’s supporters grieve and vent. They’ll run out of steam faster if there’s no pushback.

    Save your energy for the inevitable attempt to roll back SYG laws, and not when these bills are merely introduced, but when they look like they might make it out of committee.

    1. What they need is affirmative action in criminal litigation. For traditionally oppressed minorities, the burden of proof should remain “beyond a reasonable doubt.” For the oppressor classes, it should be determined by a committee of civil rights activists.

      1. You jest, ProL., but that seemed to be the direction some dim bulb I engaged on Twitter yesterday was headed.

        1. It’s an inevitable conclusion to the mindset of people who seek “great social justice” in a case that’s about a criminal charge and not a proxy for every wrong or perceived wrong in the U.S.

      2. We must end repressive due process.

    1. Nancy Grace spreading inflammatory and prejudicial lies about people who are accused of crimes? What next, a sunny warm day in July?

      Truly the world is going topsy turvy!

      1. Where’s the proof of this? Where? How racist could Zimmerman be with a black grandparent? Maybe he’s a closet Klan member, but there’s no evidence of that at all.

        1. It happened on the Chapelle show didn’t it?

          1. Zimmerman isn’t blind.

          2. That was effing hilarious – thanks for reminding me of that!

    2. Will she be dropped like Paula Deen?

      1. Gosh, if only. Could we switch them? Paula Deen does witch-hunt shows and Nancy Grace does cooking?

        1. Paging Barfman, Barfman. Barfman, please pick up the red courtesy phone.

  44. How racist could Zimmerman be with a black grandparent? Maybe he’s a closet Klan member, but there’s no evidence of that at all.

    Just like Herman Cain, he denies his true essence.

    1. Or Clearance Thomas.

      1. If you’re not on the Democrat Plantation, then you’re not truly black/female/gay/etc., and you’re self hatred is strong.

  45. Is she having some Jimmy the Greek moment?

    *outright, prolonged laughter*

  46. Thing is, because he was buying skittles doesn’t mean he was up to no good. The narrative assumes he was just walking home with a bag of skittles.

    How are Hispanic/Africa-American relations now that the black-victimhood machine has been unleashed and going medieval on the Latino community?

    I have no idea if Hispanic and Latino are one and the same.

    1. I have no idea if Hispanic and Latino are one and the same.

      They are not.

      A Brazilian is a Latino, but not a Hispanic.

      1. Thank you. Now I know what happened last time at the spa.

  47. Have the progs gone apeshit on the women jurors yet like that douche Falcons football player?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.