A.M. Links: Middleton in Labor, EU Puts Military Wing of Hezbollah on Terror List, Norwegian Woman Arrested in Dubai After Reporting Rape Pardoned


Credit: Carfax2/wikimedia
  • Kate Middleton, the Duchess of Cambridge, is in labor. The child will be third in line to the British throne. 
  • European Union foreign ministers have agreed to add the military wing of Hezbollah to a list of terrorist organizations.
  • A Norwegian woman who was arrested and given a jail sentence after reporting a rape in Dubai has been pardoned.
  • Incoming Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has urged Obama to "give peace a chance" on twitter.
  • A reporter from The New York Times has vowed to go to prison rather than testify in the trial of a former CIA employee who is charged with leaking him information.
  • British Prime Minister David Cameron has announced that households that use the internet will have to opt-in for access to pornography.

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.

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

NEXT: ACLU Reverses Stance on Double Jeopardy for George Zimmerman

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. Incoming Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has urged Obama to “give peace a chance” on twitter.

    Just start cutting him checks and be done with it.

  2. Please. “Labour.”

  3. The child will be third in line to the British throne.

    Let the me not caring begin.

    1. Between the idea of a monarchy in the 21st century and requiring one to opt in to porn, isn’t Britain just a sad pathetic shell of it’s former self?

      1. How the limey have fallen.

        1. Decaying Britain?

          1. DKUK

            1. Hah! I like that.

    2. 3rd in line to have his head chopped off.

    3. Exactly. I mentioned this yesterday, the obsession some american’s have with the Royal Family is both sad and pathetic. I should also add that these people should learn a little history.

      1. Tell that to the Kennedys, dude.

      2. However, I dont know which is more amusing, that England is being ruled by a bunch of Germans or them being ruled by a bunch of Scots?

        1. Is it really true that they’re a bunch of Germans? Historically, European royalty, despite its incestuousness, has always been more cosmopolitan than the plebes owing to the demands of politics. I don’t think its correct to pin them down to one nation since their ancestors hail from a line of 1/4 German princes birthed by the Dutch grandchildren of minor Danish and Scottish nobles.

          Royals are their own little strange subethnicity that ironically don’t really tie into the nation-state structure. Kind of like Jews with smaller inheritances.

          1. However many detours have been made along the way, the Queen still traces her ancestry back to William the Conqueror.

            The aristocracy of England distiguishes itself, though less nowdays, by the amount of Norman blood it can claim.

            The lower classes are the Anglo-Saxons and the Celts.

            Preserving the bloodline was still important until recently. Prince Philip is the Queen’s first cousin who was a royal in his own right, Greece and Denmark. Initially, her parents actually disapproved of the match, they finally accepted the fact that she was madly in love with the guy.

            It’s interesting that a woman who made her own choice over her parents wishes imposed an arranged marriage on her son. Though i suppose it shows something about there respective characters.

      3. They’re our royal family and even we don’t give that mush of a stuff.

        Excellent tweet from Australia’s greatest newspaper:

        #RoyalBaby #newmediakid

        1. All of the Australians I know well are republicans and they are split roughly 50/50 between Liberal and Labor. It’s a small sample size but all through the 90s polls were saying that the majority of Australians wanted to get rid of the monarchy. When it came time to vote, however, they chose the status quo.

          The only partisan difference they seem to show is that the Laborites want a constitution chock full of positive rights while Liberals want something a little less expansive. I’ve heard it said that the referendum went the way it did because the Howard governement (royalist to the core) wanted it to fail and had the proposition worded so that neither camp would be satisfied.

          1. actually it failed because the republicans split on the model (direct election vs appointment of the President). The model put forward was the latter, which in effect meant tippexing out “Governor-General” wherever it appeared in the Constitution and writing in “President”. The real problem was that direct election goes well beyond this and requires a fundamental rethinking of our system of government, and this hadn’t been done. And still hasn’t.

            1. I assume, then, that it was the left, with its obsession with “democracy” that killed it.

              My brother told me that Howard had scotched it by making the question to specific but he was short on deatails. I don’t discuss politics with him anyway since he is an old time Laborite who makes Gillard look like Sara Palin. He’s still seething with resentment over the Whitlam affair.

      4. There seems to be a pro-monarchial instinct in human beings – a desire to have a wise (wo)man presiding over the country and enforcing justice, except when bad advisors mislead him/her into doinog something unjust.

        Add to that the princess fantasies of a certain segment of the US population, and I think we have an explanation of this American obsession.

        America has Hollywood, the UK has the royal family.

      5. As far back as the 60s there was a joke in England that you could tell the Yanks in the audience at the end of a film or a play because they were the ones who stood repectfully while God Save the Queen was played. The Brits were all scrambling for the exits.

    4. After the battle of Yorktown we no longer actually have to give a shit. I think it was explicitly mentioned in the Declaration of Independence. I’m not sure. It’s not like they teach that stuff in school any more.

      (Actually, that’s not entirely sarcastic. My son has to learn more about the revolution from me and Assassin’s Creed III then he does at school. God damn social studies. Bring back history.)

  4. A lover having sex on a flight of stairs had to be rescued after getting her head stuck between some banister railings.

    1. The man left the scene before rescuers arrived.


      1. He probably left so his wife wouldn’t find out about his stairwell escapades.

        1. His name was probably Roger Bannister.

  5. ‘We’re racist and proud’: Fury as group stages counter-demonstration against ‘Justice for Trayvon’ marches

    I like the sign that reads “IF THE HEAD IS SPLIT, YOU MUST ACQUIT”

    1. Is it a law that protest signs must be as, um, amateurish as fucking possible?

      1. If you print up profession ones, your opponents claim you are astro-turf fakers backed by moneyed interests.

        1. Kochtapus!

        2. astro-turf fakers backed by moneyed interests

          — like BIG MAGIC MARKER?!

          1. Excellent. There are also the poster board and torn up picket fence industries to factor in.

    2. I must still be half asleep. I first read that as “Furry group stages counter-demonstration”.

      1. I did the same. The fact that it was believable is telling.

      2. thirded

      3. If you’re half asleep what am I? Working from home. And on my 3rd Irish coffee.

        1. I dunno. Half cocked?

          Careful, man. That’s worse than 4-loko.

    3. Countdown until they are identified as libertarians by the media. 5, 4, 3, 2….

    4. I read “Furry group” and got all kinds of confused.

      1. awesome

  6. …households that use the internet will have to opt-in for access to pornography.

    Register with the Crown your intention to masturbate.

    1. Uh oh, what will become of Page 3???

      1. It will probably flourish as the pron sites are deserted in droves.

        1. Imagine having to opt in to access the Warty Hugeman Time travel Adventures. You’d die of shame

    2. Well shit, maybe this guy should flee TN and move to England.

      1. That has to be a joke. No way anyone can make it to adulthood, get a law degree and be that stupid.

    3. Wanker Registry

  7. Another Hole to dig her way out of! Courtney Love ‘owes over $260,000 in unpaid back taxes’ to the IRS

    Will she go the way of Wesley Snipes?

    1. Will she go the way of Wesley Snipes?

      You mean will she be physically fit and attractive for her age with a small, but respectable group of fans and the occasional offer for her talents?

      No, probably not.

      1. I meant prison for tax evasion.

  8. Inmate left alone at East Kingston police station stole heroin, broke into locker containing gun, drove police cruiser say officials

    Rockingham County investigators say a drug addicted inmate trusty working at the East Kingston Police Department was left alone for several hours when he allegedly broke into an evidence room to steal heroin, busted into an officer’s personal locker containing his gun and other equipment and later drove a police cruiser.

    1. The movie version with Jason Statham is coming soon.

  9. Karen Gillan reveals her bald head at Comic-Con after shaving her hair off for new film role


  10. Showing off THAT bikini body: Bar Refaeli reveals her model credentials as she has a splashing good time with girl pals in Ibiza


    1. “Monokini”??

  11. A Norwegian woman who was arrested and given a jail sentence after reporting a rape in Dubai has been pardoned.

    Dubai: Soft on sex outside marriage. The law is the law. If she didn’t want to be arrested maybe she shouldn’t have been raped.

    1. It’s not like her and the rapist weren’t both convicted of the same crime, SF. She needed to check her female privilege.

      1. Well, what’s she doin’ runnin’ around foreign parts gettin’ raped, that’s what I’d like to know…

        1. This is nothing less than the offshoring of good European rapes, and it must be stopped!

      2. They also charged her with perjury. Which means she lied about the assault that led to the charges of sex outside marriage.

        Of course, a more enlighten country would have just made her marry her rapist. Or at least made him pay her father.

  12. Wyatt Earp was a prostitute-loving con man and not the hero vigilante as he is portrayed in movies, new book claims

    Can’t he be both?

    1. Don’t all prostitute-loving con men turn into hero vigilantes in Act III?

      1. Right after they meet the hooker with the golden heart who gets them to settle down and realize what is important in life.

        1. Wait we’re talking about Han Solo now?

    2. You’d think Isenberg was avenging the memory of some great ancestor wronged by Earp at some point.

      If he really wanted to tear down an American icon, why not just say he supported slavery and be done with it?

      1. You’d think Isenberg was avenging the memory of some great ancestor wronged by Earp at some point

        It’s not like he isn’t saying anything that isn’t already well-known by historians and even the general public by now.

    3. In the thirties, my mother went to an ancient dentist who had lived in Dodge city at the time of Wyatt Earp there.

      He apparently told stories of the imed. mostly about how primitive dentistry was without anesthesia or powered drills. One of his other recollections was that Wyatt Earp was kind of a thug.

  13. MSNBC host wears tampon earrings live on air to protest security measures at Texas abortion bill

    Isn’t this the same woman who made that speech about how parents aren’t qualified to raise their own children?

    1. woman is a generous term, but yes. That is her.

    2. Ah yes, I like it when people decide to make sure their delusional biases extremely obvious.

    3. Shouldn’t she be wearing little fetuses if she is protesting abortion restrictions? I don’t think anyone is trying to restrict tampons.

      1. WAR! ON! WOMENZ!

      2. She’s protesting the fact that tampons and sanitary napkins were confiscated from protesters going into the Texas Senate because of worries that they would pelt the legislators. Compounding the rage was the fact that guns weren’t confiscated.

        Of course, if you are really going to throw a tampon, I can think of one place to store it where it wouldn’t have been searched for…

        1. They were afraid and rightly so. Tampons are being weaponized at a startling rate.


          1. Pish. Wait until I unveil my toilet paper dirty bomb. I give it three flushes down.

            1. My 2 year old weaponized her diaper this weekend and proceeded to use it to wage a war of scorched earth against her siblings.

              1. If only she was strapped in the smart nappy

      3. Shouldn’t you be wearing the bucket?

    4. And where do you think she put her earrings?

      1. Nice. ๐Ÿ™‚

    5. Is she turning out to be the liberal female version of Michael Savage?

    6. Same woman:

      Detroit proves what small government can do to a city.

      1. Holy frack, she’s a first class idiot.

        1. Yeah, on the list of dumb shit this woman has done, wearing tampons to protest a tampon ban in a building is wayyyy down there.

        2. Never confuse hyper-mendacity with run-of-the-mill stupidity. She knows exactly what she’s saying and frankly, stupid people would be insulted.

        3. I’m sure PB will be here any minute to defend her.

          1. You mean Buttplug Bob?

    7. Doesn’t she usually carry them anyway, to absorb the cranial seepage she’s prone to experience?

    8. If there were protesters threatening to shoot legislators, I presume they could have confiscated guns. Reflect on the fact that armed citizens are more responsible, and less disruptive of legislative proceedings, than the tampon-throwing retards.

  14. Best 5 gallon beer system to buy? Looking to stay under or around $150 if possible. I’m not especially DIY-savvy, but if it is quite a bit cheaper and doesn’t require power tools (since I have none or limited access), then I’m certainly open to such suggestions.


    1. Are you looking to go all-grain or start with extract first?

      1. I’ve been doing extract brewing for the past year or so on a 2.5 gallon Mr. Beer kit. Kinda hoping to make the move to all grain, but it’s not a necessity.

        Maybe if there is a system capable of both that would give me the freedom to decide which I’d rather do on a case-by-case basis.

        1. Still not sure what you mean by “system”.

          I have a collection of bits and pieces.

          Bucket fermenter works for either extract or AG.

          My brew pot is 8 gallons, big enough for AG, but you could do an extract boil in it too, obviously.

          I use an igloo cube as my mash tun, obviously that is unnecessary for extract.

          My kegging equipment I was using in my extract days, Ive had it since I started.

        2. If you’ve got an all grain setup, you can do extract whenever you want. The other way around is not true.

          You need the same equipment to do all-grain as extract, plus a couple of extra things for mashing and sparging.

          1. You need the same equipment to do all-grain as extract, plus a couple of extra things for mashing and sparging.

            That is a much shorter and better version of what I tried to say.

        3. Do you have any equipment besides the Mr. Beer? Wort chiller, kettle, etc?

          If you have a basic extract setup, you can “go all grain” with as little as a five gallon cooler and $15 in parts that you screw together.

          1. I will probably need “everything”, whatever that fully entails. My fermenter with the Mr. Beer kit was small enough that I never needed a large pot, so I will likely need a large brew pot, and anything else that comes with moving up to a larger batch.

            I think I’d like to do AG in the very near future, so it makes sense to go all out for that system instead of going bigger extract system and having to upgrade on the fly.

    2. Kegging?


      1. Also what AD asked.

        Im a big fan of bucket for fermenting, and that works either extract or all-grain.

        For carboys, I recommend Better Bottles over glass for the lack of hospital trip factor.

      2. Actually, could be just kegerating too, I guess.

        1. True. The easy way to get a cheap kegerator is to have the husband of your friend’s cousin become diabetic and give up drinking, then the next time you are in Atlanta, you pick up their old kegerator for free, and drive it home in the trunk of your car.


          1. YMMV.

            Personally, driving a kegerator home from Atlanta would probably be more expensive than just buying one…

            1. If you are already in Atlanta, not so much.

              1. I would imagine, but my mileage is a bit more than that.

                1. Approximately 420 miles for me. Im in Atlanta 1-2 times per year.

                  1. About 1100, and I’ve never been.

                    1. If it was 1100, I probably wouldnt be driving there when I go.

                      At 420, flying is more of a pain than driving.

            2. On the bright side, you probably have friends’ cousins all over. Time to locate one and get to work on Type II

              1. On the bright side, you probably have friends’ cousins all over. Time to locate one and get to work on Type II

                Im sure everyone has at least 1 or 2 diabetics within 420 miles of their house.

          2. Hey! I’ve only dropped one carboy. And I’m smart enough to always wear shoes ๐Ÿ˜‰

            1. I still use my glass carboys, Ive never broken one. I always move them in milk crates now though, Ive seen too many pictures.

              1. The plastic carboys pass oxygen through the walls. This is not a big deal for beer which may be in the carboy for a few weeks. But it is a big deal when aging meads for years in carboys.

                1. The plastic carboys pass oxygen through the walls


                  Better Bottles dont.

                  Plastic bucket fermenter does, but thats not a bad thing for primary fermentation.

                  1. http://www.better-bottle.com/technical.html

                    Minute traces of oxygen do permeate through the walls of BetterBottle PET carboys; however, the amounts are less than recommended for micro-oxygenation (MOX) and insignificant when compared with the amounts of oxygen diffusing through, or leaking past, many types of carboy caps, stoppers (especially silicone stoppers), and liquid-filled air locks.

                    Negligible, but not zero.

                    1. Glass isnt zero either.

    3. Here’s a good place to start.


    4. bottled a one-gallon batch yesterday. my 3rd attempt. 1st was good. 2nd was … of poor quality. we’ll see

      1. My third batch was my first and only drain pour.

        I tried to do too much too fast and royally fucked it up.

        Even the time I opened the ferementer and had what looked like a piece of paper on top, but was actually an infection of some type wasnt a drain pour.

          1. I was actually disappointed that it wasnt sour or funky.

            Honestly, though, to sour it up, probably would have needed to age it a year or so.

      2. 1 gallon? Why bother?

        1. I don’t have the space otherwise.

          1. priorities, priorities, priorities

        2. If you do wines ingredients get expensive fast for 5 gallon batches.

    5. I’ve got my first IPA in primary right now. My room smells amazing from those aroma hops.

      Also, does anyone else find the word ‘kit’ irritating? I don’t really have a reason for that, I just do.

      1. Only when referring to soccer uniforms.

      2. I think “kit” is associated with “follow these steps for guaranteed success.” which isn’t entirely applicable here.

        1. I’m not sure if it’s the connotation or I just don’t like the way the word sounds.

    6. following this – I want to brew beer too, just confused on what to buy. Is it worth getting an “all-in-one” kit? Should I start with a 1Gal or a 5Gal setup?

      1. 1 got a 1-gallon as a gift. it’s a nice entry model. and it doesn’t take up much room, which is good for the WAF.

      2. 5 gallon.

        Getting a starter set of equipment, like an “all-in-one” isnt a bad idea. Most sets of equipment come with everything but the kettle, thats usually purchased separate. And that is where the decision point gets made.

        My first one was a smaller one, that was perfect for boiling 2.5 or 3 gallons for an extract batch but was way too small for AG. However, its become handy at times during AG boils too. Ive used the smaller one for things like boiling down first runnings to syrup.

      3. Also, for LH and gB:


        Its first edition, which is a bit dated. It was a bit dated when I used it to learn in 2003. But, its a great resource for getting started.

        And he is on edition 3, I think, which you can buy if you want something more up-to-date.

        1. Great fucking resource!

        2. Yes, very familiar and have read through most of it. Figured I’d consider the opinions of the Commentariat as well.

      4. Definitely start with five.

      5. As everyone else is saying, go with 5.

      6. thanks everyone. Buying will commence.

        1. And feel free to ask for help here.

          Not as good as actually, you know, homebrewing forums, but still works.

          For insanely fast responses, like in the middle of a brew, I recommend the homebrewing forum at beeradvocate.com.

          Ive seen people screaming for help early on saturday mornings when something goes awry and get 5 responses with 10 suggestions within minutes.

          1. thx. I’m looking for a cheaper hobby than building tube gear – now that “student loan austerity” has set in.

            1. As long as you dont think you will actually “save” money vs just buying beer.

              As hobbies go, it is reasonable. And you get to drink the results.

              And throw parties and/or take corny kegs to parties.

              It turns out there are very few circumstances in which hauling 5 gallons of beer to a party is not appreciated by the host.

            2. My homebrews are about $0.50 each but that’s just materials (grain, hops) and excludes utilities (water, propane), labor (orphan), and equipment amortization.

            3. Once you go all-grain then the beer is significantly cheaper than if you purchased it at the store, though you’d need to drink a ton to recoup the cost of the equipment.

              I brew because I enjoy it. I can’t think of a better way to spend a lazy Saturday than brewing a batch of beer.

      7. I’ve been enjoying doing 1 gallon batches, easier cleanup, easier to handle, and likely less money on equipment- I buy the 5L Carlo Rossi wine jugs (dump out the shitty wine, for the love of good don’t drink that!) for something like $9, and I didn’t have to buy a large brewpot, just used the pot we had already.

        I find temp control easier in primary fermentation, as I can fit the gallon jug in the sink with cold water, add ice as needed. Can’t fit a 5 gallon carboy in the sink, and even if I had A/C I’m not going to keep the house at 65-68 degrees.

    7. Hmm. The budget is a little tight, but get a 17 dollar igloo cooler to use as the mash tun. Plastic fermenting and bottling buckets are cheap, but don’t last long. Plumbing equipment to convert the cooler will be about 30 bucks or so. Just do a google search on converting a cooler to mash tun.

      Here’s the thing, you’re going to save a crazy amount of money by switching to all grain. Extract for a 5 gallon match used to cost me between 40-70 bucks a batch. I can do my oatmeal stout for about 18 bucks.

      1. The friend who I brew with built our mash tun from a cooler using a youtube video as a guide. Cost him like $40 bucks and works just fine. He said it wasn’t much work either.

        1. Any chance you can find out the YouTube video he used? If the specific one doesn’t matter, though, I can just google it.

          It looks like I should make a mash tun from scratch to save money on the Igloo coolers that most 5 gallon systems use. How necessary is separate heater? I’ve seen the burners but I think I will be moving into a place with gas stove. Also, is a wort chiller a necessity, or is it just worth it so you don’t have to do ice baths?

          Appreciate all the feedback!

          1. If the specific one doesn’t matter, though, I can just google it.

            I’d suggest looking up John Palmer on youtube. He knows his shit.

          2. I don’t think the specific one matters, but this is the one he used.

            Currently I do everything on my gas stove. Whenever I end up moving to a house instead of an apartment, I’ll expand some more. I’ve got big plans for my future basement.

            A wort chiller is not necessary, but the times I have used it were a lot nicer than the times I haven’t. It’s the next thing we plan to add permanently. I would say that’s something you can leave off your initial purchase, and just add later once you feel you’re brewing enough to justify it.

            1. Excellent. I will definitely have to look into a bit more of Palmer’s online presence. I’ve been using his book for now, but I wanted to get a jumping off point from H&R and then I’ll go from there.

      2. I have an orange water cooler with a spout. I used a braided steel tube propped up with a coiled copper wire. It works great.

  15. Editorial: Creditors need to face Detroit’s harsh fiscal reality

    Pensioners have a different case to make. Yes, they are also challenging Orr’s restructuring plan, and are sending strong signals that they will fight any adjustment to current or future retiree benefits. But they can’t afford not to; banks hedge and insure against potential losses and can make up for bad assets with other investments. Retirees can’t.

    There’s no comparison between retirees ? many of whom live in the city and are familiar with its troubles ? and the bankers who lent an insolvent city money, enabling and hastening its decline.

    1. But they can’t afford not to; banks hedge and insure against potential losses and can make up for bad assets with other investments. Retirees can’t.

      Because banks get their money from…other people. Just like the pensioners. Anyone can hedge against loss.

    2. The pensioners stole from the taxpayers, helping drive the city to bankruptcy; why should they continue to benefit?

      1. Agreed. When they took a pension package they knew that the money wouldn’t be theirs until it was paid out. Pensions are like Social Security. All you have is a promise of future payments, not a bank account in your name. Live by the pension, die by the pension. One great lesson of the last 60 years is that compensation only counts after you receive it.

    3. Retirees chose not to.

    4. and the bankers who lent an insolvent city money, enabling and hastening its decline.

      Not sure I understand this. The bankers didn’t enable Detroit, they just fucked over their investors by lending the city money. It was a bad loan.

      1. Loans that, if not made, would have led to charges of raaaacism.

        1. So now the right-wing lie that banks were forced to loan money to blacks extends to muni bonds?

          1. I think Mohawk’s comment was only half serious.

            1. He is not sharp enough to detect that.

              1. The idiot ‘John’ still believes that banks were forced to loan money to black people with poor credit.

                It is the CRA lie. That law only prevents redlining.

          2. So now the left wing lie that lending to someone who consistantly makes dumb decisions is racist extends to muni bonds?

            Tell us mr shitstopper, what would have happened had those lenders NOT bought those bonds? Why Detroit could not have financed it’s operations and been forced to either cut employee compensation (including those self same pensions), raised taxes on it’s mostly black populace, reduced services, or gone bankrupt years earlier. Do you deny for one second that there would not have been charges of racisim against banks and investment houses who refused to purchase that debt?

            1. Yes, I deny that ridiculous scenario.

    5. There’s no comparison between retirees ? many of whom live in the city and are familiar with its troubles ? and the bankers who lent an insolvent city money, enabling and hastening its decline.

      Yeah, you’re right about that–the retirees are fucking morons, dependent for a city they well knew to be insolvent even as they saw it fall apart in front of their eyes.

    6. “There’s no comparison between retirees ? many of whom live in the city and are familiar with its troubles ? and the bankers who lent an insolvent city money, enabling and hastening its decline.”

      That’s really a ludicrous statement.

      The banks made bad investments, and will now lose their money. But they certainly didn’t “enable and hasten” Detroit’s decline. They delayed it and papered it over. They gave Detroit money, and Detroit spent it. Every dollar they gave put off the day of reckoning, and that was the way Detroit liked it.

      This argument is just as tedious as the argument that the banks somehow took advantage of borrowers with bad credit during the subprime debacle. The banks took advantage of their own depositors and creditors, but the borrowers made out like bandits. They received large sums of money, which they SPENT, and in exchange the banks now own worthless collateral in the form of foreclosed-on ruins and shanties.

      Detroit borrowed money and spent it. Now bankruptcy will relieve them of the responsibility of paying it back. That’s a win for Detroit and a loss for creditors, no matter how you spin it. Of course, Detroit didn’t buy anything worthwhile with the money they now can’t pay back, but that’s not the bankers’ fault. When you borrow a bunch of money and spend it on the municipal equivalent of hookers and blow, you don’t get to complain when you’re left with nothing in the end.

      1. And it should stand as a lesson to employees everywhere. It doesn’t do any good to extort unaffordable pensions out of your employer. If your employer goes broke, you don’t get anything. I have no sympathy for the retirees. They are the ones who elected their union leaders. People have known for decades that these pensions were going to bankrupt the city and none of the employees cared. For forty years their attitude has been “fuck you pay me” as the city spiraled into oblivion. They never gave back a red cent on those contracts or did anything to help the city. So whatever retirement they lose is the result of their own actions.

        1. Not quite – private employer pension funds will be bailed out, to a certain annual amount which is pretty high ($50,000 a year?), by the Pension Benefit Guarantee Fund (also known as “the taxpayers.”

          1. Then what are they bitching about?

          2. Not quite correct. My aunt actually used to work for PBGC (Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation). They’re a quasi-private government entity. While they do pay out a portion of pension benefits, they fund it through investment income, assets seized through their very, very active pension fraud investigation division (where my aunt worked), and through revenue from bankruptcy sales and forfeitures from pension plan sponsors. They don’t get any tax revenue.

            For a government agency, they’re actually one of the relatively good guys from a fiscal responsibility standpoint.

        2. ” People have known for decades that these pensions were going to bankrupt the city and none of the employees cared. For forty years their attitude has been “fuck you pay me” as the city spiraled into oblivion. “

          That is a rightwing lie, everyone knows that it was only Republican obstructionism lead by Grover Nordquist’s “Starve the Beast” phiolosophy giving massive tax cuts to to the Koch’s that lead to the budget shortfall. How could you for one second lay this on the backs of our heroic first responders who put their lives on the line to protect us and now just want what was promised to them in return.

        3. I certainly feel for some of them. They were promised something in return for something, they gave their something now the city won’t give its.

          Having said that, it is nuts to blame ‘the banks’ for this. It was the Detroit city government that grossly and criminally bankrupted them. The banks, if anything, helped prop them up for a while.

          1. Sort of like Social Security, eh?


  16. A Norwegian woman who was arrested and given a jail sentence after reporting a rape in Dubai has been pardoned.

    So, Dubai doesn’t really need tourism dollars, or are westerners stupid enough to go there anyway?

    1. A lot of business is done there. I can’t imagine anyone going to the Gulf for anything but business. There is nothing there, except incredible heat and tacky Vegas like cities.

      1. “vegas like”. yeah, apparently not so much in this woman’s case

  17. Afghan-Indo film “A Man’s Desire for Fifth Wife” to be released soon

    The scenario of the movie is based on a love story where a man goes on looking for a fifth wife, though he is allowed only four.

    According to The Indian Express the film portrays centuries-old tradition of northern Afghanistan and violence against women in present day Afghan society.

    1. Odd, I was in northern Afghanistan, and when one of the locals we worked with took a second wife he was the object of derision and eye rolling by the other locals for weeks.

  18. all internet users will be contacted by their service providers and given an “unavoidable choice”

    “Cake … or DEATH?”

    1. My choice is “or death?”

  19. Bring on the bombs…

    Belly Dancing Female Wookiee Backed by a Klingon Band

  20. Rhetoric, race and reality in America
    The biggest threat to black youths is other young blacks, not white bigots.

    These leaders know, even if many of their adherents might not, that the biggest threat to the lives of young blacks is other young blacks, not white bigots. Between 2000 and 2010, 4,607 black murder victims 17 or younger were killed by other blacks (4,441 of the killers were 17 or younger), according to the Wall Street Journal. There were 340 black victims 17 or younger killed by (non-Latino) whites. That means black youths were 13 times more likely to be killed by a black person than by a white one.

    The more recent data haven’t changed much. In 2011, according to the FBI, 2,695 blacks (of all ages) were killed, and the killers were nearly 13 times more likely to be black as white (2,447 to 193).

    1. “””were 340 black victims 17 or younger killed by (non-Latino) whites.””‘

      And I would be doubtful about the “(non-Latino) whites classification, looking at police photos a lot of Latinos and even a few people with black ancestors are classified as whites. Just look at George Zimmerman.

      1. It depends on the narrative they have to push.

    2. Obama emphasized this in his press conference Friday.

      It can’t be said enough.

      Quit blaming whitey for everything, black activist community.

    3. And in how many of those cases of blacks killed by whites was there any evidence that it was motivated by racism?

    4. But its the fault of the racist sytem the white man put in place with institutional bigotry (that I am endlessly told exists without one fucking example of it explained to me in clear language) that forces these black kids to kill each other, mmmkay?

      1. Forget evidence, they don’t even have a consistent theory. It’s just petty tribalism wrapped in a pseudo-intellectual veneer.

  21. Roderick Scott: The ‘Black George Zimmerman’ Acquitted of Murder in 2009. Funny enough, nobody gave a shit when this happened (nor should they have).

    Also, fuck New York for requiring him to run away before defending himself. Yep, New Yorkers really love their freedom, according to Stalin’s Buttboy.

    1. Even calling this guy the “Black George Zimmerman” is ludicrous and only cheapens the Zimmerman case.

      At least Zimmerman sustained assault injuries before firing his weapon.

      Scott’s case seems to amount to “They’re headed right for me!” While I don’t know the specifics of Scott’s case, from the cursory overview in this link, Zimmerman’s still seems like an overwhelming slam dunk while Scott’s could have gone either way.

      1. Even without that point, it’s devastating to those who say “If the races were reversed he’d be in jail!”

        Of course, if the races were reversed, you’d have the white guy telling his girlfriend he’s being watched by a creepy-ass-NIGGER. Somehow I don’t think that would have gone over as easy in the MSM as Trayvon’s slur. No doubt they would have hung the entire case on it.

        1. That word is racist, though… Gawker tells me that “cracka” is not a racist word.

      2. If the guy was acquitted, it was probably more than “they’re headed right for me!”

    2. One could argue that “the black George Zimmerman” is…George Zimmerman.

      I mean, given the one-drop rule embraced by the crowd who claims that “a multiracial census classification would dilute black influence.”

  22. China deploys elite gaggle of geese police
    Police forces in rural corners of Xinjiang province have been sending geese officers out on patrol since earlier this year.

    “In some ways, they are more useful than dogs. A household normally keeps one dog [but] an intruder can throw a drugged bun to kill the dog. Geese are normally kept in groups and they have poor eyesight at night making it very difficult for intruders to [poison them].”

    Authorities in Shawan county say their goose-stepping recruits have at least brought a measure of security to the troubled region.

    1. Now I know why my place has never been B&E’d.

    2. “What is it, boy? Do you smell opium?”


      “OK, buddy, you’re under arrest!”

    1. Something to this. Poor management in the colored part of town might reinforce racist stereotypes.

      1. Or maybe the people who went to that store just didn’t buy a lot of asparagus.

        1. That’s the problem I’ve always had with the food desert theory. Shops will stock what people are buying. If people aren’t buying fresh romaine the stock of romaine will be minimal and shitty because the shop owner is selling it at a loss. If you want shops to carry fresh produce then start a charity that does community cooking classes and teach them delicious things to do with kale (is that possible?). Piling shelves high with kale that just gets thrown out doesn’t improve anyone’s health.

          1. Food desserts are tasty!

  23. A CEO’s-Eye View of ObamaCare
    No wonder the employer mandate was delayed. It’s hard to see how it will work.

    This is why I am concerned that the ACA could actually cause the number of our covered employees to decrease, particularly in the first year. The penalty for declining coverage will be low compared with the cost of coverage; and employees will know that if they happen to get sick, they can get insurance after that. So the economically rational decision for young people, like our crew employees, is to pay the penalty and forego the insurance. Despite what the government may believe, our employees are smart enough to figure this out.

    For insurers, it’s simple math: Premiums collected must exceed claims paid. If too few young healthy people enroll, insurers will raise premiums on those who do. This could result in a spiral of rising premiums?causing more healthy people to drop coverage, driving premiums even higher.

    1. http://blogs.militarytimes.com…..-steroids/

      In reading this story on how testosterone supplements often contain the dreaded “illegal steroids” something dawned on me. They have been giving women estrogen replacement for years and no one thinks twice. But somehow testosterone is a banned substance, an illegal “performance enhancer”. It is almost as if medicine has a problem with masculinity or something.

      1. The funny thing about steroids hysteria is that the health risks involved even with abuse are relatively trivial.

        There was no vast public health crisis involved in the use of steroids. Occasionally bodybuilders would keel over from heart attacks, but we’re talking about a miniscule number of events.

        The only real crisis was that people didn’t like the fact that other people gained muscle mass. That was pretty much it.

        1. The East German athletes seem to have suffered from some pretty nasty long term effects. But a lot of them were women. If you are a woman and take a lot of testosterone, you are going to lose some femininity over the years.

          But for the most part yes, they don’t have a lot of long term effects, especially if used in small doses. Most people wouldn’t want to look like Barry Bonds or some body builder. So smaller safer doses would work fine. If you have a guy who has say diabetes and needs to lose weight and gain muscle mass to be healthy, why is proscribing him steroids such a bad idea?

          Or better yet, if you are in your 60s and are starting to lose your quality of life and fitness, why not? What do you care if they can cause cancer after 30 years of use?

      2. somehow testosterone is a banned substance, an illegal “performance enhancer”

        Come on, John. You know that most of the world’s problems are directly attributable to testosterone.

      3. I think it is stupid that performance enhancers are frowned upon and illegal just because they are performance enhancers. But testosterone is a performance/strength enhancer and I don’t think estrogen really is.

        1. Sure it is. It is also a vital hormone that men lose as they get older, just like women use estrogen. If it is okay to give middle aged women estrogen, why is not okay to give middle aged men testosterone?

          1. Funny, they were running a commercial for testosterone this morning. So I’d say that line of argument is invalid.

            1. Really? I have never seen such. And is it real or is it some fake synthetic?

              1. I don’t know, but I see commercials for guys who might have “low T” all the time. There was a King of the Hill episode about it years ago.

              2. It’s usually a gel that you self-administer. It’s real testosterone and is being prescribed for pretty much the same reasons as estrogen replacement.

                And boners, of course.

                Testosterone Replacement Therapy

            2. huh – back when I was seriously into weightlifting, there were tons of ads for “precursors” – basically drugs that would somehow transform into testosterone when taken. I never used the stuff myself… but I never saw T itself – it was banned.

              1. It is banned for all but a “legitimate” medical condition and if you’re not a pro athlete worried about getting banned from your sport it is probably not too hard to get a prescription for Testosterone replacement once you hit 40

          2. Actually, the data showed that giving women estrogen caused cancer.

      4. I think that’s simply a function of what it does, not a function of the downplaying of traditional masculinity. If estrogen made you grow muscle or improved athletic performance somehow, you can bet your ass it would be on the banned list, too. But mood swings aren’t conducive to winning…

        1. But why hasn’t testosterone replacement caught on like estrogen replacement?

          1. Maybe because Viagra works? I don’t know. It is available, though. But only fot “legitimate” medical reasons, not just because you want to be stronger or faster.

            1. Yeah, I’d rather stick with an occasional Cialis bump, and deal with it being more difficult to stay slim and have muscle mass, than dealing with roid rage.

              Or just getting a hot GF so no Cialis is needed.

              The calm and serenity of lesser testosterone poisoning is nice.

              1. As someone once said, “Finally, I can just be myself.”

          2. I don’t know that it hasn’t “caught on” I see ads for several types of low-testosterone meds every day.

      5. People also regularly take insulin, another hormone, when they need it. It is ridiculous that this stuff is illegal. I have heard some horror stories like bone deterioration from steroid abuse, but I’m sure most of that could be minimized with proper medical oversight, which people would get if it weren’t illegal. Also HGH, which isn’t a steroid, but another hormone. This stuff helps people recover more quickly and get stronger when they take it. There is evidence it can lengthen and improve life quality. It is naturally produced in the body, but production falls after 30. There is no reason why we shouldn’t be giving it to everyone to take.

        1. That is what is stupidest about the PED freakouts. It seems like there is definitely a way to take performance enhancers like steroids or HGH in a way that is safe and allows people to be stronger, recover faster from injuries and perform better in athletics. Why the fuck wouldn’t you do that if you were an athlete?

      6. Yes, those who society cant geld with obligations must not be allowed to power up completely.

      7. MT is a good place for that story, since they have started to test some urine batches for steroids. Last thing you want is to take a supplement you bought legally (sometimes at the GNC on base) and wind up with an administrative discharge.

    2. Despite what the government may believe, our employees are smart enough to figure this out.

      Either he’s got some really smart employees or he’s giving them too much credit.

  24. Iowa Trip Sows a Tea-Party Rivalry
    Senate allies Rand Paul and Ted Cruz compete for conservative support.

    Regarding Paul, Cruz simply calls him an ally. He leaves any 2016 tension untouched in our chat. “We’re side by side on virtually everything in the Senate, and I expect that to continue,” he says. “No offense, but I try not to pay attention to what the media’s saying; I try to focus on the substance.”

    Paul chuckles when I mention a potential rift. He says he and Cruz work together daily in the Senate, and that it’s far too soon to speculate. “I think Iowa people are similar to New Hampshire people,” he says. “They say they’ve got to meet you five more times before they make a final decision.”

    1. They say they’ve got to meet you five more times before they make a final decision

      Nobody says that. Only politicians and journalists say dumb crap like that. Living in NH, I suppose I could meet most presidential candidates if I wanted to and put a little effort in, but I’d rather hit myself in the head with a hammer.

  25. Robert Samuelson: Americans are defining prosperity down

    Americans are defining prosperity down, to paraphrase the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan. They are aligning attitudes with experience. The consequences are profound for our economy and politics. Judging themselves more exposed to business cycles, Americans have become more hesitant and precautionary in their spending. These worries and the resulting restraint are both a cause and consequence of the weak recovery.

    Politics increasingly involves scapegoating ? who “lost” prosperity? ? and a search for greater public protections against rising private insecurities. Obamacare is perhaps an unintended prototype of this quest, illustrating how difficult it can be. The experience in Europe, with more public protections and a darker economic outlook, teaches a similar lesson. The prosperity paradox is this: America has plenty of it, but not enough to sooth social conflict and allay economic anxiety.

    1. The prosperity paradox is this: America has plenty of it, but not enough to sooth social conflict and allay economic anxiety.

      There can be no peace until everyone can be rich without working and never have to worry that conditions might change.

      1. There can be no peace until everyone can be rich without working

        But everyone told me since grade school that I should follow my passion and I would never have to work a day in my life?!

        1. They told me to follow my passion and to work hard.

          1. They told to me shit down and shut up or they’d send me to the principal again.

            1. I think I like it better with the typos…

              Catholic school: breeding ground for fetishes.

          2. as they should have.

  26. Don’t you have to “opt-in” every time to view internet pornography? Or anything on the internet?

    1. I was just getting around to raising this point. It’s not like your computer turns itself on and starts displaying bestiality porn without anyone touching it.

    2. Derpgressives don’t understand voluntary association. Any transaction that doesn’t involve the use of force is completely foreign to them.

      1. In the US it is SoCon Christo-fascists like the Family Research Council that want to ban porn.

        Reagan/Meese is their hero.

        1. Tu quoque. Thanks for failing again.

      2. Is David Cameron ‘derpgressive?’ I thought he was head of a Party called “The Conservative Party?”

        1. That mean jackshit in Europe. Hell, George W. Bush was largely progressive.

          1. Is Cameron a Scotsman as well?

            1. If you wanna argue that the founder of the Progressive Conservatism Project is not progressive, then make that argument.

              1. Can I just point to the second word?

                1. Yes, you can be lazy and ignore the man’s and the organization’s actual policy preferences.

                  1. He’s also the current head of something called The Conservative Party of England.

                    1. And North Korea calls itself a democratic republic.

                    2. English conservative != American conservative. Context is everything.

                    3. English conservative != American conservative. Context is everything.

                      So which is Reagan?

                    4. I dunno, go dig up his corpse and ask him.

                    5. Nobody here cares about Reagan except for you, so why don’t you tell us?

          2. GWB was a compassionate conservative. Compassionate conservatives are progressives who give speeches in opposition to abortion.

            1. I guess one could say Bush is to the left of some, but he was certainly ‘right of center’ by any objective measure I can think of. He became an embarrassment for the right, but before that they were voting for him.

              1. Bush was the consummate conservative who pulled in the SoCons, the Business Cons, and the NeoCons.

                Now they call him progressive to distance him from the GOP.

              2. Partisans vote for whomever has the right letter after their name.

              3. “I guess one could say Bush is to the left of some, but he was certainly ‘right of center’ by any objective measure I can think of.”

                Then you are not very imaginative. Even ignoring the inherent internal dichotomies in the 1 dimensional left-right paradigm (like how is it that Hitler and Stalin, about as far to opposite ends of that spectrum as one could imagine look so much alike) one must still define the scale that you are grading on.

                On Social issues, sure Bush was right of center (but not anywhere near as far as you’d think).

                On foreign policy, well politically the “right” in the US has been historically non interventionist to isolationist with the left being the side that championed foreign military adventures in the name of nation building.

                With Economics, Bush wasn’t even close to being on the political right, he was pro technocratic interventionism and social welfare programs from day 1. Sure his interventions and programs looked different from those of the Democrats but that does not stop them from being anti free market interventions and therefore left of center.

                So even merging those 3 scales Bush is only clearly right of center on 1 of them and you are trying to argue that you can’t imagine any where he isn’t right of center?

            2. Why are you defending conservatism? I thought you were a libertarian?

              (rhetorical question)

              Santorum 2016?

      3. I was just thinking… Ever notice that those on the left who are hostile to the idea of emergent order within society or the economy support the idea of emergent order within the universe? Think about it. They are hostile to anyone teaching anything remotely close to creationism, yet they believe that no order can exist among humans unless it is controlled by the guiding hand of an all-powerful government. Then again, what do you expect. Consistency requires principles, and the left has no principles. Only principals.

        1. That is an interesting point. Good catch.

        2. -yet they believe that no order can exist among humans unless it is controlled by the guiding hand of an all-powerful government

          Certainly not all of ‘those on the left’ (which is pretty broad, no?) believe this. I recently read an article by Jesse Walker on Saul Alinsky that noted this.

          1. Talk about missing the point.

            1. It’s not missing the point but noting your key premise is underinclusive.

              1. Key premise? What premise? I’m making an observation, not an argument.

                1. Your ‘observation’ is that ‘the left’ “are hostile to the idea of emergent order within society or the economy” but “support the idea of emergent order within the universe?” Which might be interesting if the first part were true.

                  1. Your denial of the obvious doesn’t make it less obvious. It just makes you look like a fool. Thank you for playing.

        3. Heaven does not exist, so we must create it on Earth.

          1. /progressive

        4. Yep, they’re economic and social creationists.

          1. That man could through cooperation have a pronounced effect on human society doesn’t sound like the stretch that cosmic creationism is. Of course progressives would do well to learn that man concsciouly created ‘order’ often is usually quite awful. Government is more like the evil genie.

    1. in 1957, Detroit was, on most measures, the city with the highest per capita GDP in the United States.

      How the limey lion have fallen.

      1. This is what you get for towing the lion.

  27. Le Tour dee France is over. I haz a depressed.

    How long until hoofball?

    1. Here in Murika, sports start back up this week, and get going for real in another 50ish days.

      1. 50 days?!?!? Fuck.

        I guess I’ll watch the U.S. Pro Challenge, then.

        1. Cycling seems to have a good following among women. You are like the 4th woman I know who follows it.

          1. I don’t think the riders are hot, though (except Thor Hushvod, who wasn’t in the Tour this year). I like the strategery. And Peter Sagan’s antics.

            1. The riders are too skinny to be hot to most women. They are the male equivalent of female distance runners; no body.

              1. Yep – the really successful ones are small & wiry. Keep your eye on Nairo Quintana. Once he figures out the strategy involved (and once his team decides to teach it to him), he’ll be the next Big Thing.

                At least this year’s Tour winner is not a gigantic douche like last year’s.

                1. The effects of having even an ounce of extra muscle let alone fat over that distance is enough to take you out of contention. Wiry is putting it mildly. I wonder what drugs they are using this year.

        2. 50 days?!?!? Fuck.

          Only if you ignore training camps and preseason!

          1. Doesn’t college hoofball start sooner?

            1. Probably. Between growing up in the northeast, going to undergrad at a D1 school with no football team, and going to grad school at an Ivy, I don’t follow college anymore than enough to know who wins the Heisman and who will be the top 3ish draft picks.

              1. I don’t follow it either (grew up in VT and CT and went to a colege with no team), but usually I’m pretty desperate by late summer so I’ll watch anything.

              2. Weird.

                Pro football is only interesting to see how the guys you followed in college are doing.

                /southern thing

                1. You try growing up in New England and seeing how big of an impact college football has. Who would you root for? UVM? Maine? UNH? I know – RISD! Or the Merchant Marine Academy! Colby? Bates? Bowdoin?

                  1. Boston College?



                    Yeah, okay, that last one was a joke.

                    And the first two only slightly less so.

                    1. Syracuse is not in New England, for cryin’ out loud!

                    2. Sure, technically.

                      But from as far away as I am, its close enough.

                      Does a person from NE have to cheer for a New England team?

                    3. My god, can you imagine? Rooting for a new York team?


                    4. New York State team.

                    5. My god, can you imagine? Rooting for a new York team?


                      I know – WTF?

                    6. Just checked:

                      In my lifetime, BC has had 11 season of 9+ wins and 16 losing season.

                      As NE sports teams go, thats pretty good. I doubt even the Patriots fair that well (although better at the top).

                    7. Eh, I was wrong, 14 losing seasons, 19 playoff years for Patriots.

                      This last 19 years really turned that franchise around.

                  2. UVM has been undefeated for 30 years.

                  3. You try growing up in New England

                    Also wanted to point out your first mistake.

          2. Which all right thinking people do.

            Just found out how much season tickets in the new college stadium for the wife’s alma mater are going to cost. $700 bucks a ticket to get comparable seats. I think they’re gonna lose a lot of season ticket holders unless the team kicks all kinds of ass this year, which ain’t likely.

    2. You just like seeing guys in those tight pants. :-p

    3. On Saturday we went to the local park on the river. Turns out there was a regional Rugby match. Thing I learned – Grand Rapids actually has a rugby team and no one, except for friends of the teams, actually comes to the damn things.

      My wife, however, was er, impressed by the athletic quality of the men playing.

      1. Rugby, a barbaric game played by gentlemen. Soccer, a gentlemen’s game played by barbarians.

        1. Those prissies are all actors. You ever seen the whining that goes on after even the illusion of contact?

      2. When I played, if more than 50 people watched, we wondered what was happening – did some tour group get lost and wander over to our pitch?

  28. Direct all your Royal baby-related excitement to the comments

    If I’m going to get excited over someone I’ve never met’s baby and talk about it here, it’s going to be Brett’s or Spoony’s.

    1. Fuck you, Auric.

      Just for that, we’ll have another baby next year…and the year after…and the year after until you show a little excitement.

      1. She’s like one now.

        1. She’s 7 1/2 months old and the next one is 17 weeks away. There’s room for some excitement in there.

          Besides, how could one not get excited about this beautiful little girl.

          And here’s another pic to gush over.

          1. She’s cute enough. Continue with your breeding program.

            What did you end up deciding on the bellybutton issue?

            1. Still up in the air. Looks like we’re going to get a year or two to think about it. (By the way, that thing under her is her belly, not her right knee.)

              Next one is also a girl, and it looks like we’re settling on “Liberty”. Middle name rules from the last one still in effect. So if you’re planning on bidding, people, it gonna end up being “Liberty __________ Spicer”. Bid accordingly.

              1. So, you’re creating libertarianism’s answer to the Spice Girls.

                1. Scary Spice may create a problem, but otherwise yes.

              2. I’m not sure if I want to make a joke involving “Liberty” or a joke involving the spice from Dune.

                1. The Dune connection with my last name opens up all kind of possibilities. Maybe someday I’ll get around to reading the books so I understand it (and several posters on here) a bit better.

          2. The poor thing, she looks like you, sloopy.

            Nah, I’m just kidding, she’s adorable. Although, your child tolerance is much higher than mine. Two is plenty.

            1. We took her to one of those dumb photo in the middle of the mall booths the other day and there was a group of about 25 people ooh-ing and aah-ing over her when they took her photos. Then some fat, ugly baby got put in front of the camera and they all took off.

              Since they’re otherwise not useful, that’s about as proud as an infant can make a parent.

            2. I saw a woman on a bus bench yesterday who had five kids (all under five) and was several months pregnant. Why would a poor person have so many fucking kids?

              1. Obama didn’t give her enough contraceptives for free?

              2. So they can outvote your classist ass?

                1. I mean, large families used to be the norm. Now we face a population implosion in many countries. Thank God for people like the bus-station woman! Who else but these kids is going to pay for old peoples’ benefits?

                  1. In my neighborhood, not a one of them will hold a job.

                    1. Of course it’s desirable to marry before having children, and to get a job before being married.

      2. Kinda like a libertarian version of the Quiverful movement?

  29. so I’m reading: American Gun: A History of the US in Ten Firearms

    Discussed as the most important American guns:
    American Long Rifle
    Spencer Repeater
    Colt Single Action Army handgun
    Winchester 1873
    1903 Springfield Rifle
    M1911 Pistol
    Thompson Submachine Gun
    M1 Garand Rifle
    American Police Handgun (.38 and .357)
    and the M16 Assault Rifle

    it’s a quick read but full of little stories of the history of the gun and actual real-life use.

    1. I should clarify “most important” according to the author.

    2. That is a good list. The only quibble would be maybe you could put the BAR in over the Thompson. The BAR was the world’s first effective light machine gun, as opposed to a machine pistol like the Thompson.

      1. The Thompson is hardly a machine pistol. At approx 12 lb loaded, it carries a 30 round stick mag (drums only available on the older 1928 and 1921 models), firing at a significant cyclic rate of about 600-700 rpm. The BAR, while more powerful, carried only a 20 round mag (30s were eventually available) but had a cyclic rate of only about 300-600 rpm. While the Thompson only uses a pistol cartridge, 600 rpm of 230 grain bullets is pretty significant at any range up to 100 yd.

        “Machine pistol,” while a technical term applied to many submachineguns, is not quite descriptive enough when applied to the Thompson.

        1. It is a machine pistol. It fires pistol rounds. That makes it a machine pistol. The BAR is a true automatic rifle and fires full rifle loads.

          Not that the Thompson isn’t a great weapon. It is. But the BAR was the first portable machine gun. It was the forerunner of today’s SAW. Before the BAR machine guns were all crew serve weapons. The BAR was the first machine gun that could be carried and operated by a single soldier. It allowed for the development of the modern infantry squad and modern infantry tactics of movement and fire. It is a very significant weapon for that reason. More significant than the Thompson I think.

          1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_pistol

            A machine pistol is a handgun-style,[1] magazine-fed, self-loading firearm, capable of fully automatic or burst fire, and chambered for pistol cartridges.

            The Thompson ain’t no MAC-10. It’s a submachine gun.

            1. But it is not a true rifle either the way the BAR is. The Thompson didn’t revolutionize warfare the way the BAR did.

            2. according to the book, it is a submachine gun. The designer – Thompson and Co – went with the smaller pistol ammo to deal with some feeding issues they had with the early prototypes. (from memory, don’t have the book at my desk)

            3. Yeah, I’d say the fixed shoulder stock and long barrel pull the Thompson out of machine pistol territory.

              Machine pistol is Mac-10/Mini-Uzi/Skorpion territory.

              Shit, now I’m gonna spend the morning wondering if an M3 is a submachine gun or machine pistol. Thanks a lot.

              1. It is the round it fires T. And M3 doesn’t fire a pistol round. Maybe I am on an island of one here. But I think the round it fires, not how it looks, should define what it is.

            4. And I would argue that what makes it a “pistol” is the rounds it fires. the MAC-10 and the Thompson both fire pistol rounds. The Thompson just has a longer barrel and is prettier.

              1. That makes no sense. What would you call the lever actions chambered in .38/.357 then?

                Long shooty pistol lever doodad?

                A machine pistol is a submachine gun but a submachine gun isn’t necessarily a machine pistol.

                The MP5 and Thompson aren’t machine pistols.

                I mean we’re really splitting hairs here but that’s about the gist of it.

                1. What would you call the lever actions chambered in .38/.357 then?

                  Depends on the powder load. If they fire true .357 pistol rounds, they are in a sense, lever action pistols. They are not true rifles if they don’t fire rifle loads.

                  1. A friend of mine used to have a Ruger .44 Magnum carbine. .44 Magnum is a pistol round but it was definitely a long arm, so is it a pistol or a rifle?

                    1. Just that Rasillo, a carbine. Carbines are long barreled weapons that shoot pistol rounds. I had for some reason let that term slip out of my mind this morning.

                      So, I guess a Thompson would be an automatic carbine.

          2. “Machine pistol” is sometimes applied to submachineguns due to the use of the German term machinepistolen, which was the term used for submachinegunes in Germany since the Broomhandle Mauser. Hence the MP38, MP40, MP5, etc.

      2. The BAR was the world’s first effective light machine gun,

        Are we thinking the Lewis gun was too big, not effective, both? Regardless, the Tommy Gun, and the lurid accounts of Machine Gun Kelly, et al, using same, are what drove legislation like the 1934 NFA, not the BAR.

        Fun argument all the same, and I’d love to have both. And a Bren Gun and/or an MG42 too, as long as we’re dreaming.

    3. This list is ridiculous. They left out the Red Ryder Carbine-Action Two-Hundred-Shot Range Model Air Rifle?

      1. you’ll shoot your eye out, kid.

  30. The dumbest article you will ever read about the Martin/Zimmerman saga. Long story short: woman initiates argument about Martin, gets owned and gets emotional.

    That was when I started to cry. Not that loud, annoying, sobby-girl crying, but the silent-and-powerful kind of crying when you really don’t want to cry, but you just can’t fucking help it. I cried out of frustration, out of anger, out of embarrassment. I cried for Trayvon and for all of the people like him who have ever been automatically and wrongfully categorized as dangerous because of their age, sex, and/or race. I cried for the people who genuinely believe that we live in a post-race society. I cried for the people who refuse to see that though this case is about many things, race is definitely one of them.

    However, I cried mostly because how could I, an art historian, make a difference in this racist society when there were lawyers who thought and acted this way?

    1. However, I cried mostly because how could I, an art historian, make a difference in this racist society when there were lawyers who thought and acted this way?

      You could start by making rational arguments and not crying all of the time.

      1. The guy had the temerity to point out how reasonable doubt works as a system, John! You heartless monster, A CHILD IS DEAD and you want to talk about logic, systems, and standards of proof?

        1. Me and my mansplaining and bourgeois logic and facts.

          1. see, the KKK never died, it just hod itself behind the white subconscious.

      2. Wow, who knew John was such a supporter of the patriarchy and the Klan?

      3. I left him there, still finishing his second beer, looking as though he knew he had fucked up but would never actually admit it aloud.

        That look was either the look of extreme relief that he found out how batshit crazy you are so early in the process of the look of wonderment that you can dress yourself and find your way home. Or at least dress yourself. I’d think you’d be quite familiar with both looks by now, but I suppose that doesn’t mean you’d have learned to interpret them correctly yet.

        1. “I strutted out of that bar with my head held high, and although due to a combination of a naturally horrible sense of direction and intense anger I couldn’t find the train home for 20 minutes”

        2. I liked that bit of projection too.

        3. Yeah, this is a girl who definitely has stable relationships:

          How many times did I leave you before I was finally set free? Do I fit into the statistics? Was it 8, like my sister told me? 8 times before I no longer had to suffer at your hands? 80? 800? You had me in your pocket. You had me in a noose.

          1. It has been a year and a half since you set me free. Since I set myself free. A beautiful, sparkling, sunshine-filled year and a half. And I want you to know that I finally forgive you.

            This reads like it was written by some tween girl who thinks she is more mature and smarter than she is. Yeah, I want to read your story when you have no understanding of sentence structure or punctuation beyond the period.

      4. Summed up more succinctly:

        Something sad happened

        We must make all sad things illegal

    2. T he date started off fine ? I mean, aside from the fact that he essentially called my field of study complete bullshit and literally could not stop looking at my boobs.

      who then followed his douchey tirade by saying he would pick up the tab, “unless I wanted to overthrow gender roles.”

      HAHAHAHA! This dude fucking rocks.

      1. If your field of study renders you illogical and feeble, then yep, it’s complete bullshit

      2. If only he had capped it off with “You know, you’re *cute* when you’re angry!”

      3. aside from the fact that he essentially called my field of study complete bullshit and literally could not stop looking at my boobs

        I like this guy. Definitely not a proglodyte.

        1. Maybe some of the womenfolk can explain a phenomenon that has been puzzling me:

          In at least 2/3 of my first dates, my companion has been fidgeting with her decolletage. Basically, when I’m in the middle of answering some question they’ll suddenly pull their sweater closed or cover their chest. It’s done pretty deliberately and flagrantly with no attempt at being subtle. Since I am not looking at their chest, it’s very unexpected. It will happen every 15 minutes or so until the end of the date. Often when this happens, what follows is a second date and never a third…

          I don’t think they’re signalling a physical interest. It’s happening too often for it to be coincidence. I’m puzzled by this. Thoughts?

          1. Since I am not looking at their chest

            Stated versus revealed preference. They say they don’t want to be just a pair of breasts, yet when you aren’t looking at them, they feel inadequate and call attention to them.

          2. You need to date less uptight women.

            1. I was gonna say…my only thought was “what kind of women are you dating, dude?”

              1. At my age, with two kids full time, my dating pool is not the greatest, particularly here in Boston.

                The sad thing is I met some really lovely people; there were a couple of single moms that were great. One even became my girlfriend for a few months. But the logistics with juggling child care etc were exhausting and we ended up calling it quits.

                1. Any interest in the other team? That’s a much easier route ๐Ÿ˜›

                  1. Any interest in the other team?

                    Nope…. I’m more hetero than what Sarcasmic claims to be.

          3. Maybe the fact that they are pulling their sweater CLOSED and COVERING UP their chest is a sign that they aren’t into you all that much, and that you should skip the wasted second date?

            If they touch you on the arm (or anywhere else) or tilt their head to the side or laugh a lot at your jokes or their pupils widen or they touch their hair, that is a sign of attraction. Ask those chicks out a second time.

            1. There are other signs of attractions — google it. Pretty such covering up their breasts is not one of those signs.

            2. Maybe the fact that they are pulling their sweater CLOSED and COVERING UP their chest is a sign that they aren’t into you all that much

              That’s what I am thinking, but often they tell me that they had a good time and would love to see me again, and appear sincere.

              Which leaves me puzzled.

              1. They sound nervous to me. Fidgeting with clothing is a nervous thing, for me at least, and fidgeting in a way that covers me up more means I’m either just not comfortable in what I’m wearing or not comfortable wearing it around the people I’m around. If they’re doing it when you’re talking, answering questions, could it be that they are a little bit intimidated? Maybe you’re sounding too smart or something? I don’t know, it sounds like the kind of thing I would do if I were trying to “appear small,” you know, so maybe they’re just nervous to be on a date?

                1. could it be that they are a little bit intimidated

                  I’ll bet that’s it. I tend to answer questions thoroughly… as in there’s a massive brain dump of facts, context, jokes and digressions.

                  Of course, somewhere out there is a woman who will think that that is perfect, and I will then be in heaven.. ๐Ÿ™‚

                  Or maybe I should dial the intensity down a little bit…

                  1. Well, just remember that even some of these women might think it’s perfect or at least A-OK, but they could be worried that they’re not up to answering in kind. Especially if they’re shy!

                  2. Of course, somewhere out there is a woman who will think that that is perfect, and I will then be in heaven.. ๐Ÿ™‚

                    Online dating, tarran. About the only thing Salon has ever been good for, after they ran off Ask The Pilot.

      4. Sarah Baran is a sophomore in the college pursuing a Government major with a minor in Education, Inquiry, and Justice.


    3. -I cried mostly because how could I, an art historian, make a difference in this racist society

      OK, this is either made up or one of the most laugh inducing things I’ve read in a while.

      1. I don’t want to live in a country that can’t be transformed by an art historian.

    4. but the silent-and-powerful kind of crying

      haha. no such thing

    5. I very carefully stated that I believed that the Trayvon Martin case was a perfect example of the justice system failing the people, emphasizing that I absolutely did not want to discuss the case itself any further

      In other words, I wanted to say something inflammatory and ridiculous and not be challenged on it, and when so challenged, I cried.

      1. Wow.

    6. As a member of a field, Art History, that is still attempting to break a centuries-old tradition of institutionalized prejudice

      Does that strike anyone else as a strange comment?

      1. To the leftist, every place and year is Selma, 1965.

      2. I think she’s saying art historians are racist.

        My only direct interaction with an art historian suggests that they are hot, great at kissing, but virgins much older than they should be.

        1. Will and Kate Cambridge both studied art history. Make of that what you will

          1. I had to google to figure out who you meant…

          2. When your grandma is worth a cool billion or so that you’re set to inherit, you can get any kind of jackass degree?

            And if you’re trolling for rich dudes, the useless degree programs are the place to be?

      3. The art world is a wholly owned subsidiary of Grievance Inc. and specializes in frivolous diversity for its own sake.

        “This piece talks about my experience as a left-handed bisexual Aspie one-legged lapsed Catholic abuse survivor.”


        That’s a hell of a place to look for “institutionalized prejudice”.

      4. Nah.

        Basically, art historians are critics who sort and pick apart art, and spend a great deal of time researching and discussing ‘oo influenced ‘oo. And it’s frequently an anlysis based on very subjective criteria.

        So, for example, if you, through prejudiced, automatically treated Spanish artists as creators, purveyors and influencers of crap, it would skew the results of your analyses and the theories/histories you tought to your credulous readers/students.

        If your views were widely held, they’d be institutionalized.

        It’s not really that important… it’s art. It’s like Television Studies, but the way it will be in the year 2500…. without the orgasmatron.

      5. Does that strike anyone else as a strange comment?

        Not coming from a delusional neo-liberal. It sounds completely normal, when taken in that context. It makes no sense at all, in other words.

      6. Art History : looking down our noses at stupid proles for a good two centuries at least. And … oh ya … also something about breaking down institutionalizes prejudice.

    7. Thought Catalog is like a million times worse than Slate, dude. It’s like Slate^Salon^HuffPo.

      1. Anything raised to the zeroth power is 1.

        1. +1 for you!

    8. The funniest thing about that post is that she accuses the guy of interrogating her about the subject, but then later in the story confesses that SHE BROUGHT THE SUBJECT UP.

      What a bitch.

      Yeah, it’s your date’s fault that you two talked about the subject that YOU BROUGHT UP.

      1. He’s supposed to just say “Yup, your conclusion is totally right! You’re so smart and educated on current events! Tell me more about how awesome you are!”

        1. That’s what her daddy would have told her.

        2. And under many circumstances, a man would.

          What she’s actually upset about is that by not immediately agreeing with her position, he basically was telling her he was not interested in sleeping with her.

          1. Right, exactly.

            There are women who have never encountered any other treatment from men but courtship behavior, and they are shocked as well when they finally do.

            A friend of my wife’s who plays those crazy card games (you know, like that Magic the Gathering stuff) started to branch out and play some online multiplayer game, and claimed she was “shocked” at the “sexist abuse” she suffered there. Apparently people made fun of her when she didn’t play well, and gave her nicknames that were kind of insulting. I tried to explain to her that what she was seeing was actually acceptance, because that is how men treat their friends, and that the guys there were actually welcoming her and treating her as an equal. She just couldn’t grasp the concept. To her anything that diverges from the fawning treatment she gets when guys want to get into her pants is abuse.

            The guy on this date was treating this woman as an intellectual equal. And that horrified her, because what she expected was sycophancy.

            1. To her anything that diverges from the fawning treatment she gets when guys want to get into her pants is abuse.

              Women who don’t understand this, never make it in the workforce outside of totally female dominated fields.

          2. So it was his way of saying “you’re a cow” and that’s what drove her to tears? It’s at least as credible as her own rationalizations after the fact.

            I still say she’s just upset because she likes to think of herself as the smartest person in the room and this guy put her in her place.

      2. Well, duh, Fluffy. She wanted to pull a Lois Lerner and only give her side:

        Because, silly me ? saying you don’t want to talk about A Thing gives the other person free rein to bombard you with questions and accusations regarding The Thing. (I’ll have to just put that reminder in Evernote later so that my poor little liberal woman brain can remember it for next time.)

    9. Maybe as an art historian you should write something about art history instead of whining about something that you clearly haven’t paid much attention to.

    10. [The author] is a recent graduate from DePaul University, where she received a degree in Art History with a concentration in Latin American Art.

      I’d probably be pissed too if I’d just hocked my future for a useless degree from a mediocre university.

      1. It also says she likes to learn, but then she cries when someone tries to educate her.

        1. I think that there are a lot of people who like to collect facts and trivia, but don’t like having their preconceptions challenged.

    11. She cried because she was beaten in an argument by a smarter, more informed person. The rest is just her rationalizations after the fact. Gotta protect that ego.

      1. I find this all hilarious. She, as an art history major, goes out with a law student (whose passion would likely be the justice system), and proceeds to bash his profession with the whole “justice system is broken” BS. Then, when he effectively pulls rank and shows her what a moron she is, she cries like a baby. It sounds like she brought skittles to a gunfight.

    12. because I enjoy obsessively mulling over the whos whats wheres whens and whys of our frustratingly racist society to myself in my own brain


      1. Of course she enjoys it. She’s building up a massive reservoir of excuses for her failings. Everybody enjoys having a rock solid safety net.

    13. What are the odds that this never happened, and it’s a scenario she made up in her head? I’m going with at least 95%.

      1. it’s probably based on several dates. some of which she was actually on.

      2. Especially the part about him staring at her boobs.

    14. I cried for Trayvon and for all of the people like him who have ever been automatically and wrongfully categorized as dangerous because of their age, sex, and/or race.

      Except that Trayvon was correctly categorized for sucker punching someone for no reason and then beating the stunned, prone person.

      But yeah other than that he’s exactly the same as a bullied fat middle school girl.

    15. “for all of the people like him who have ever been automatically and wrongfully categorized as dangerous because of their age, sex, and/or race. “

      So did she cry for every man who has ever been politely asked to stop attending his daughters gymnastics class because he made some of the mothers uncomfortable, or all of the ones who have been told either directly or indirectly that they are rapists just for being men?

      Somehow I’m thinking not.

    16. “I cried for Trayvon”

      And you got mad at the person responsible for Trayvon’s death, right?

      Oh, wait, the balance of probabilities is that the person responsible for Trayvon Martin’s death is…Trayvon Martin. But how can you turn that into an indictment of Society?

    1. The irony is that Hitler was a vegetarian. How could you kill and eat an innocent chicken? (Unless you’re Himmler, former chicken farmer, but otherwise they’re solid)

  31. “[Feeney!] Ye dirty Sassenach! Free Irishmen will never bow down before the British Crown!”

  32. Has anyone ever actually been involved in a surprise party? I’ve never seen one done in real life (besides bridal showers, I guess). I was very surprised, but it took a bit for being pissed off about canceling bar plans to wear off.

    1. My mom has done them for my dad on every ten-year birthday. They were really fun when I was a kid, but the best was his 30th–his birthday is in January, and mom had to ask him to shovel our front steps, and he was all, “Why, no one is coming over?!?” He always really likes them though.

      1. I’m not sure if they count as surprise parties if they happen in such a predictable pattern…

        1. I would agree if he didn’t seem consistently surprised. She does change up the locations and dates, so I guess maybe it’s more like you don’t know exactly when and where it’s coming, or who will be there. (She does a really good job of getting a huge amount of his old friends together that he normally might not see all year, too.)

    2. I was involved in one. The 85 year old lady gueat of honor was so surprised she started crying and looked like she was having a heart attack.

      1. I had literally no idea, but I was busy being pissed off that my girlfriend had dragged me back home as soon as we got to a downtown bar. Like, we did the 45 minute trip downtown, got to the point where we were standing in front of the bar but not in it yet, and she says we need to go home.

        1. was it really a surprise party? Or an intervention for your H-ampersand-R addiction?

          1. I mean, there was a keg and cheesecake…

  33. For insurers, it’s simple math: Premiums collected must exceed claims paid.

    This is some sort of racist subterfuge promulgated by the Koch brothers!

    1. Evil profits at work again.

  34. http://freebeacon.com/doj-decl…..d-scandal/

    DOJ declines to prosecute officials involved in tax record scandal.

    1. It’s not like they were making guitars out of wood imported from Madagascar, John!

      Have you no sense of proportion?

    2. Until we replace “DOJ declines” with “Mr. Joseph Anon-Idiot declines” this shit will not stop. If these people are upstanding civil servants, shouldn’t they *want* the public to know they are doing their jobs well? 8-(

    3. This is why grand juries should regain their power to issue presentments without a prosecutor’s permission. This possibility is explicitly contemplated in the Fifth Amendment.

  35. a former CIA employee who is charged with leaking him information

    Tonto not traitor. Tonto hero! Tonto leak him information.

  36. Paul Krugman being Paul Krugman: Detriot!

    So was Detroit just uniquely irresponsible? Again, no. Detroit does seem to have had especially bad governance, but for the most part the city was just an innocent victim of market forces.

    What? Market forces have victims? Of course they do. After all, free-market enthusiasts love to quote Joseph Schumpeter about the inevitability of “creative destruction” ? but they and their audiences invariably picture themselves as being the creative destroyers, not the creatively destroyed. Well, guess what: Someone always ends up being the modern equivalent of a buggy-whip producer, and it might be you.

    1. Ah yes, nothing says “market” quite like “city government”.

      1. That’s the point Krugman misses. He blames Detroit’s failure on the changing international market, rather than on the city/state governments that wouldn’t let Detroit adapt to those markets. He says “Market forces have victims?” like it’s a bad thing that must be stopped. Apparently, if Krugman were king (shudder) the buggy-whip producers would still be here, living off “redistributions” from the auto industry.

    2. Pittsburgh diversified from steel.

      Here in the South the mill towns can’t adjust unless they build an auto plant near one.

      1. I think the fact that the auto plants are being built in the south is the larger point.

        1. I wonder why that’s the case.

      2. What mill towns in the south are you referring to, PB. Please show your work explaining how they were going to fail until they attracted an auto plant with smart incentives.

    3. I love this part.

      So by all means let’s have a serious discussion about how cities can best manage the transition when their traditional sources of competitive advantage go away. And let’s also have a serious discussion about our obligations, as a nation, to those of our fellow citizens who have the bad luck of finding themselves living and working in the wrong place at the wrong time ? because, as I said, decline happens, and some regional economies will end up shrinking, perhaps drastically, no matter what we do.

      So, the economies are going to contract no matter what we do, but we should underwrite those regional economies because?

      How about getting government out of the way of people so they can make their own living? Detroit doesn’t suffer from a dearth of inspectors and bureaucrats.

      1. And let’s also have a serious discussion about our obligations, as a nation, to those of our fellow citizens who have the bad luck of finding themselves living and working in the wrong place at the wrong time

        Buying every auto worker in Detroit a greyhound ticket would be cheaper than most government plans.

        [SLD, of course]

    4. The pathetic thing is Detroit could be big. Cleveland could be big.

      Liberalize the economy, fire 3/4 of the civil servants, slash taxes, and there would be a fucking rennaisance. When I was in Ohio I was pretty impressed by the large number of people with side businesses in everything from vacuum cleaner sails to machine shops manufacturing custom parts on demand.

      The politicians are sitting on a fucking gold mine and treating it like pyrite.

      1. vacuum cleaner sails

        How do those work?

        1. vacuum cleaner sails

          I am starting to understand why some people think I am a sock-puppet of john…

          1. You get your sail and the wind to power it both in one package. If you can find a place to plug it in.

      2. I like to sail my vacuum cleaner to the Bahamas once a year.

        1. Alas, I only have a dustbuster dinghy, but at least I can use it to go fishing on the harbour

          1. Might I recommend the Bissell Pro Heat Pet 2x? It’ll get you ’round the world and back.

            1. Thankyou, but I’m hoping James Dyson will get around to designing a maritime conversion kit for my DC22 Motorhead. You know, I really only bought it because I thought it played “Ace of Spades”

              1. Aww, keep going! I am just sitting back and admiring this exchange.

      3. The politicians are sitting on a fucking gold mine and treating it like pyrite.

        Probably because those small companies are run by people who hate government meddlers.

        1. ^^^^ THIS.

          Not enough opportunity for graft going after small businesses. That’s why government favors the big ones.

      4. The politicians are sitting on a fucking gold mine and treating it like pyrite.

        These cities developed in that region for a reason. Stable environment, good access to international transportation, cheap land, etc. Only government could ruin a gig like that. All this being said, the Detroiters (Detroitians?) brought this on themselves. You deserve the government you want. This is what they want.

      5. Michigan can easily become the Vermont of the midwest.

        Pretty foliage in the fall. Good hunting. Many excellent beer craftsmen.

    5. It’s the market’s fault that the government bet that the boom times would never end and proceeded to spend like a drunken Keynesian.

    6. It was just bad luck all of those productive people left. The governance that was so bad even Pauli Krugnuts can’t deny it, had nothing to do with it.

      Even if it were true that market forces wiped out the auto industry there (which it is not), other cities have lost their flagship industries and done just fine after a period of adjustment. Houston was once a cow and rice town. It seems to have survived the death of the rice and cattle industry. Kansas City once made more cars than any city but Detroit and its stockyards were second only to Chicago. Today the stockyards have been closed for 20 years and there isn’t a single car plant in town. But somehow it is still a clean, livable and economically viable city.

      Market forces give as well as take away. That is, if you let it.

      1. This is just crying out for this Heinlein quote:

        Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded- here and there, now and then- are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.This is known as “bad luck.”

        1. That was the very quote I had in mind when I said “bad luck”.

    7. And let’s also have a serious discussion about our obligations, as a nation, to those of our fellow citizens who have the bad luck of finding themselves living and working in the wrong place at the wrong time

      We have absolutely no obligations of any kind to them.

      Even if you could convince me that it was theoretically possible for such obligation to exist, a minimum requirement would be that those citizens stop electing politicians who still think there’s money left to squeeze out of the stone.

      Here we see, yet again, that despite the term “progressive” what the left actually wants is stasis – they want to freeze economic conditions in whatever frame best enables them to seek out a host and act as a parasite. “How are we to live as parasites – ” they exclaim, ” – if our hosts are allowed to die?”

      1. Politicians are uniquely incentivized to provide stasis. They fear change.

      2. “We have absolutely no obligations of any kind to them.”

        I disagree.

        we have the obligation to provide them with a society where they are free to relocate to somewhere with better job prospects.

        What’s that, we already have that**? well good then obligation fulfilled.

        ** = For now at least, the Homeland Security department shows every intention of eventually planning to put a stop to that freedom of travel if we let them so I think we do have an obligation to work to prevent that from happening.

    8. “but they and their audiences invariably picture themselves as being the creative destroyers, not the creatively destroyed.”

      Well, given that the places being destroyed shade to the BLUE, it seems they’re right.

  37. Someone always ends up being the modern equivalent of a buggy-whip producer, and it might be you.

    Think of all those poor bookkeepers thrown into the street by Quicken. Let us lament their ignominious fate. Now, if only Intuit would perfect their self-generating “NYT Political Hack Masquerading as an Economist Three Times a Week Column” software.

    1. And if your industry becomes obsolete, you end up like Detroit. No other industry ever arises in its place.

      That is just Krugnuts being mendacious. Even in Kruginuts currently diminished state of sanity, he knows good and well nearly every city in America no longer relies on the industry that built it.

      1. That is an unforgivable comment for a supposed economist. Reallocation and repurposing of capital and labor is an inherent part of the business cycle and absolutely necessary for a thriving market. Of course, Krugman doesn’t believe in the business cycle, he believes the government can step in and eliminate it through Keynesian spending.

        1. The tool and dye industry is just as dead in Cincinnati as the auto industry is in Detroit. They don’t build ships in Brooklyn anymore. The list goes on and on. And even beyond that, the auto industry is still huge in America. They just don’t build cars in Detroit anymore. Now, why would that be? Why would people want to build a plant in Indiana or South Carolina rather than Detroit? Oddly, Kruginuts never addresses that question.

          1. That’s because one of the “obligations” Krugabe thinks we labor under is the obligation to never undercut a union’s wage demands or a municipality’s tax demands.

            If we had honored our “obligation” not to compete with Detroit, all the jobs would still be there, and all the tax revenue would still be there. See?

            1. That is actually a good point. That seems to be what Kruginuts actually believes. I don’t even know what to say to that it is so stupid and juvenile.

              1. It also shows how low of an opinion Krugman has for the working class. He honestly thinks they are incapable of learning new skills and competing in new industries.

          2. “They just don’t build cars in Detroit anymore. Now, why would that be? Why would people want to build a plant in Indiana or South Carolina rather than Detroit? Oddly, Kruginuts never addresses that question.”

            That’s not accidental, John. Addressing this issue requires you to admit that the economic model progressives live by is an abject failure.

        2. That is an unforgivable comment for a supposed economist.

          Krugman stopped being an economist when he took the NYT gig, perhaps before. Now he is a political commentator capitalizing on his air of authority regarding economic matters.

    2. Yep, and the travel agents. Think of what teh internetz did to travel agents! They should demand reparations from Priceline and Expedia!

      1. Don’t forget all the tellers the President was crying about.

  38. “British Prime Minister David Cameron has announced that households that use the internet will have to opt-in for access to pornography.”

    What a crock! Which reminds me, I mentioned here before that the city of Minneapolis wants to take over the electric grid. I recently learned that one of the reasons is so they can shame you into reducing you energy use. Right now, they do not have access to electric customer data, as it is private, but if they take over the grid, they will then have it. They want to use Google Maps to shame the citizens. Every home will be represented by a bubble on the map. The bubbles will be green, yellow and red. Anyone with Internet access will be able to click a bubble, which will provide all the assessor info (sq. ft., etc.) and energy use. Evil energy wasters will get red bubbles. Saintly energy conservers will get a green bubble. What a bunch of power-mad fucks.

    1. Somebody needs to create a competition to get the biggest bubble.

    2. I refuse to even travel through UK, AUS or NZ (not that I was planning the latter anytime soon). The Commonwealth makes the US look like a beacon of liberty even with all the NSA crap. Oh and Canada… I’m watching you.

    3. Prediction: The police will be monitoring those bubbles for excess energy usage. Somebody is going to get raided on suspicion of housing a marijuana grow house/meth lab/whatever solely on the basis of energy usage.

      1. I figure at some point, there will be fines for having a red bubble.

        1. Fines?

          You’re not thinking large enough.

          The word you were looking for is “drones.”

      2. Dead on, Andrew S.

  39. British Prime Minister David Cameron has announced that households that use the internet will have to opt-in for access to pornography.

    I predict the Conservative Party takes a beating in the next election due to pissed off men sending a fuck you via the ballot box.

    1. amazing and tragic

  40. Krugabe-

    the Boston College estimates suggest that overall pension contributions this year will be about $25 billion less than they should be. But in a $16 trillion economy, that’s just not a big deal ? and even if you make more pessimistic assumptions, as some but not all accountants say you should, it still isn’t a big deal.

    “No biggie. When we run out of money, we’ll just steal from the people who aren’t fools.”

    1. This is highly disingenuous.

      If you fail to make that $25 billion in contributions, you aren’t just $25 billion behind as a result.

      You’re behind the future value of that $25 billion and all investment earnings from it for the entire period under consideration (namely, decades).

      1. That is $25 billion a year every year for eternity. And that $25 billion will also increase every year.

    2. Well, he would be right if it were a single year issue, even if it was a handful of years during a recession. The problem is that Pensions have been being underfunded every year for decades and show no sings of ever being able to meet the current funding requirements because the money just isn’t there.

      Furthermore that’s rather Generous of him, making his grandchildrens spending decisions for them, I mean what we have essentially done is decided that we want that $25 billion to have fun with now and in 40 years our grandkids can pay it back for us. So sure, $100 billion (the $25 Billion plus lost interest) won’t be much compared to the $50 Trillion economy that will exist then, that still doesn’t give us the right to decide for our descendants that this is how they are going to spend that money.

  41. NY Times accuses Goldman Sachs of aluminum price manipulation.


    But Aluminum is down 40% off highs and Goldman only warehouses 5% of supply.

    1. NYT, the paper of Paul Krugman. Oh, and Walter Duranty.

      ‘Nuff said.

  42. Three decomposing bodies found in Cleveland home, more expected to be found in possible serial killer find.

    Seriously, Cleveland? Are you trying to outdo Detroit in the worst way possible?

    1. STIMULUS! I really hope the killer turns out to be a Keynesian trying to stimulate the funeral/home defense industries.

  43. Am I the only person on the planet with zero interest in the “royal baby watch”? Because, to watch channels like CNN, which has taken a break from its 24/7 saturation condemnation of George Zimmerman to broadcast minute-by-minute analysis of the royal event, you’d think that everyone in the U.S. can think of absolutely nothing else.

    1. Is it any worse than any of the other celebrity news? If I had to choose, I would rather hear about Kate Middleton than the Kardasian whores.

      1. I’d definitely rather hear about Kate Middleton than George Zimmerman, too.

    2. everyone in the U.S. can think

      Well, there was the first flaw in your analysis.

    3. I’m 100% apathetic about this (or anyone else’s) baby. Sorry Brett & sloopy.

    4. Paying attention to the Alpha Apes got us fed, sheltered and sexed up for millions of years. It’s a hard habit to break.

    5. I don’t care at all. Nor really about any celebrity news that doesn’t involve attractive models in bikinis or underwear.

  44. http://thehill.com/homenews/ad…..he-economy

    For blacks empathy with Obama trumps his economic record. Isn’t that just a polite way of saying “blacks are too racist to hold one of their own to the same standard they would a white President”?

    1. And why would African American blacks empathize with Obama so much? He was raised in various exotic places by a white family and white friends. He’s basically a white guy who happens to have dark skin.
      So the only reason is skin color. Which I would have to say is racist.

      1. He is has nothing in common with the typical black experience in this country. They only empathize with him out of skin color and media propaganda that tells them they should.

  45. I mentioned here before that the city of Minneapolis wants to take over the electric grid. I recently learned that one of the reasons is so they can shame you into reducing you energy use.

    My parents told me the power company sent them some sort of “power use analysis” which showed they use more energy than comparable homes.

    I said, “I hope it came in the form of a thank you note.”

    1. I really can’t imagine how they would “shame me” into using less electricity, especially in a place like Minneapolis where it is inhumanly cold a lot of the year. They could price me out of being able to use it, though that would be hard. But shame me? You have to be kidding me. The whole concept makes me want to run home and put my thermostat down to 65 for the day.

      1. I really can’t imagine how they would “shame me” into using less electricity

        By making you embroider a scarlet E onto your clothes, presumably

        1. It would be a badge of honor.

      2. I don’t get that either. I might use something like that to try to save some money on electricity, saving money is good. But why the fuck would I be ashamed?

        1. Because you’re killing the planet with your carbon burning ways! Sinner! Sinner! Repent! Repent and join the crusade to save the planet from the scourge of fossil fuels and the sinners who burn them!

          Together we can save humanity from itself and prevent THE END OF THE WORLD!

  46. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/201…..e08xazDtK0

    I don’t really see why this is such a hard case. If the strike is in a place where combat operations are taking place, then too bad, leave it to the military. But if it is outside such a place and is against a US Citizen, then yes, the military is going to have to answer to the courts. The deference given to the military in fight wars was never intended nor should it extend to times and places where there are no combat operations occurring and the target is a US citizen.

    1. But national security bureaucrats must not be distracted from killing Americans overseas sans due process!

      1. You have been reported to the authorities, sir…

        Ignore that drone noise outside.. the pain will soon be over.

  47. http://www.claremont.org/publi…..detail.asp

    Micheal Barone gives the honest and sane account of what happened to Detroit.

  48. Daniel Hannan on Detroit

    This is a failure, not of the private sector, but of the state. And, even now, the state is fighting to look after its clients: a court struck down the bankruptcy application on grounds that ‘will lessen the pension benefits of public employees’.

    1. What does that judge think the end game is going to be? They have no money. No money is forthcoming from the state or the feds. They can’t print their own. So what alternative is there? Are we going to be treated to the circus of watching the Detroit city government stopping all operations and services except collecting taxes to pay pensions?

      1. No kidding. These people presumably think that if they ordered the sun to rise in the west, it would obey.

        I need to reread Atlas Shrugged. I thought it was absurd hyperbole when I was a teenager, but real life seems to be converging to it at an alarming rate.

        1. That book doesn’t work as a novel only because it is too realistic. Good fiction can’t be too much like real life.

  49. Alabama lawmakers look at shutting state run liquor stores
    ‘Bout damn time.

    As long as the state is also not the distributor anymore this will make things great. Even non-ABC stores have to go through the state to get their booze. Prices are too damned high because the state, as the middle man, marks up the price. And there’s some stuff you just can’t get because the state won’t offer it.

  50. In March 9, 2010, Christine O’Donnell issued a press release concerning he kickoff of her senate campaign the next day. On that same March 9, an unidentified Delaware public official accessed O’Donnell’s confidential income tax records at the IRS.

    Many had tried to intimidate, threaten, and smear O’Donnell to keep her from running. So her March 9, 2010, press release was “Game on!” — a signal that O’Donnell was actually in the race for real. So March 9, 2010, became a politically significant day in Delaware politics.

    Next, also on that same March 9, 2010, the IRS unlawfully issued a tax lien upon a house which Christine O’Donnell did not own. This lien was absolutely illegal because the IRS was not finished yet with its highly-suspicious audit of O’Donnell’s 2005 tax return. No tax was legally due because no final decision had been made yet. Imagine collecting money when maybe no money is owed! The IRS cannot legally issue a tax lien without first finalizing the amount owed. Yet they did.

    Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com…..z2ZmjenuH1
    Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

    1. Furthermore, on March 9, a copy of that tax lien was illegally leaked to the news media — before it reached O’Donnell herself. At O’Donnell’s March 10, 2010, campaign kickoff news conference, reporters already had a copy of the March 9, 2010, tax lien in their hands. So the IRS notified reporters before the taxpayer was notified, while the document was still traveling through the mail. O’Donnell was asked about a tax lien by reporters without her knowing anything about it. This was carefully designed to try to wreck the kickoff of her U.S. Senate campaign.

      Scumbag does not go far enough to describe these people. And they are going to get away with it.

      1. From my article:

        Like Detroit, America’s governing institutions are increasingly the corrupt enforcers of a one-party state ? the IRS and Eric Holder’s amusingly misnamed Department of Justice being only the most obvious examples.


        1. And the worst part is that they had the media to spread the lie. The media just dutifully repeated that she had been audited and had a tax lien and slandered her as a crook. They never bothered to see if it was true or if the IRS was doing something wrong. No, she was a crook. Disgraceful.

        2. Department of (political) Justice

  51. This article is only moderately smarter than the comments following it.

    WARNING: It’s Pauli Krtugnutz on Detroit! Enter at your own risk.

    1. Or you could just join the discussion several posts above…

      1. I got sidetracked with some work and missed it. My bad. This day is gonna be stress-filled. I’m up on a pretty big deal head-to-head against my old boss and company. Cut me a little slack.

        1. Its not your bad – the thread is nearly 500 posts.

          Never let it be said that LM does not cut people slack.

          If its already been addressed upthread, too bad:

          How about Lefty? Don’t know if you are a golf fan, but what he did yesterday was pretty special.

          1. Slack be praised!

          2. That was one hell of a finish. I really wanted to see Westwood win it, but he choked again.

  52. Don’t see anything about this:
    “IRS chief counsel’s office involved in targeting controversy”
    It’s not the oval office, but it’s a call-button away

    “IRS lawyer Carter Hull said his superiors told him that the chief counsel’s office, led by William Wilkins, would need to review some of the first applications[…]No evidence so far has definitively linked the White House to the agency’s actions.”

    Well, you could say that, so long as “definitively” is carefully defined:
    “IRS Chief Counsel William Wilkins a Big Donor and Loyal Democrat”
    “As Carol Platt Liebau points out, there are some questions about how the White House was left in the dark about the IRS’s probing of conservative groups when its own appointeee appears to have known about the investigations”

    1. the progs are being their usual lying selves and just moving the goal posts. “No link to the Obama Administration” has now become “no link to the White House” as if a political appointee being behind it means it is somehow not a scandal since we don’t yet have direction from the White House.

    2. “When I said ‘will no one rid me of this meddlesome Tea Party,’ I had no idea that my political appointees would take it so…literally.”

      At least Henry II underwent penance for his crimes.

  53. “Or better yet, if you are in your 60s and are starting to lose your quality of life and fitness, why not? What do you care if they can cause cancer after 30 years of use?”

    There is no credible evidence AAS cause cancer. And fwiw, there are tons of anti-aging clinics that will prescribe reasonable (not supraphysiological) doses of T and HCG (HCG taken concurrently with T prevents testicular shrinkage and keeps the HPTA loop working properly. )

    The only AAS that are remotely dangerous are the ORAL versions that are methylated because they are liver toxic (much like tylenol is). Injectable versions like T-enanthate or T-cypionate are completely non-toxic. While AAS do not CAUSE cancer, they will accelerate the growth of cancer just like they accelerate the growth of TISSUE in general. That’s what anabolic MEANS.

    1. I work with a guy (and fwiw he’s a SWAT member) who went to a clinic and got a prescription for T. He injects once a week. Progressive doctors will prescribe for people who have natural T in the lower part of the “normal” spectrum, which is defined RIDICULOUSLY wide fwiw (200 – 800). You are basically SUCKING at 200, but it’s still in the “normal” range. Getting supplemental T to get you up to 600 – 800 or so will make huge differences in improving mood, appetite, body composition etc. and contrary to media hysteria about “roid rage’ that’s not a concern at reasonable doses and/or if you are not taking methylated nightmare versions of AAS like halotestin or methyl-test.

      I realize it’s a cliche, SWAT jockeys on T, but he’s said it’s greatly improved his quality of life (he’s mid 40’s) and society’s prejudice against T and AAS are bogus. Fwiw, the DEA testified AGAINST making steroids a controlled substance during the hearings that followed the Ben Jonson “scandal” (he was caught with Winstrol in his system).

    2. Right, but will they prescribe the oral versions or the gels?

      The gels are incredibly hazardous to any women or children living in the same house as anyone applying them, but AFAIK it’s nearly impossible to get the oral versions now.

      1. I learned this from watching House.

      2. No, they prescribed him the injectable – Testosterone Cypionate.

        Testosterone has AWFUL oral bioavailability UNLESS it is methylated, and methylated versions of test have awful side effects and are hepatatoxic. There is one version of oral test that has an ester that makes it slightly orally bioavailable, but generally speaking, it is prescribed either gel, patch, or injectable.

        I said in my post that he INJECTS once a week. Iow, he was prescribed the injectable version of test.

        The oral (NONMETHYLATED) version of T is called Andriol and uses the undecanoate ester. It’s that ester chain that makes it SOMEWHAT orally bioavailable, but T unlike E (which is what birth control pills are) is simply not effective when taken orally

      3. depending on the clinic, anavar is available

  54. Yeah, a $750 fine and loss of a job seem like reasonable penalties for kidnapping, assault, theft by force, conspiracy to commit fraud and myriad other crimes committed under color of law.

    No. Double. Standard.

    1. At least we know it’s not ‘roid rage that makes them behave that way

      1. Congrats . You FINALLY found a case with a apparent double standard. And of course sometimes there is a double standard for cops. Sometimes, they get favorable treatment, sometimes they get worse treatment (like the WA case with the cop with no felony priors who got a 20 yr sentence for a mere felony assault charge and I challenge anybody to find any case in the history of WA state where a non-felon got 20 yrs for assault. So far, no examples)

        I am not familiar with filing standards in that jurisdiction, but as a matter of common sense, that seems like an astonishingly light sentence.

        And of course sometimes cops get such astonishingly light sentences (double standard) just like sometimes they get astonishingly severe sentences, like in the assault case I mentioned where the judge publically stated he gave a more severe penalty because the defendant was a cop.

  55. SF Firefighter, drunk on duty, runs down motorcyclist with fire truck, leaves the scene, and there’s a question whether he’ll get fired since he’d lose his retirement benes:
    Yes, folks, it’s good to be paid by the taxpayers!

  56. Butthurt woman doesn’t want to respect private property rights. Television stations give her a platform.

    1. I live in Kansas City, only a short drive from the Independence water park in the story. My understanding is that it is owned by the city, and they contract out the management and operations. From what I’ve heard it was just a couple of teenage girl employees that decided to play fashion police that day.

  57. All this stuff converges.

    I was treated to a dissertation by one of the Ascended One’s most fervent acolytes the other night, about how the Affordable Care Act (he refuses to use the term “Obamacare” because it is not the approved Party nomenclature) is driving down insurance premiums and providing us all with free unlimited health care. He ignored me when I suggested the only possible result would be to drive all the insurance companies into bankruptcy. He is a retired teacher, who believes public employee union contracts are handed down from God on stone tablets and are not merely nonnegotiable, but self-funding.

    These people have no conception of what produces wealth. They have no understanding of where the money for government programs actually comes from. They seriously think taxes can be raised to infinity with no consequences, and that every service can be provided by the government better than by private industry.

    We’re not all Detroit yet, but we will be, eventually.

  58. I guess the Ohio State Highway Patrol just can’t find any good officers, what with the horrible pay and lousy benefits. What else could explain this fucking idiot keeping his job.

    Stay classy, Cleveland.

    1. OH already has way too many state troopers, as anybody who has ever driven the OH Turnpike can attest.

      1. As usual, you don’t understand how the process works. He very well may or may NOT keep his job.

        “Post Commander Lt. Brian Holt said Thursday Fantone’s status has not changed. OSHP spokesperson Lt. Anne Ralston said the patrol’s administrative investigation is ongoing. Once that is completed, it will be reviewed to see if any rules were violated and if Fantone will be disciplined”

        see? The dept. investigation has not been completed. ONCE it is completed, THEN they decide on discipline, which COULD include firing.

        In story after story, you make this mistake, assuming that officers won’t be disciplined PRIOR to the disciplining decision being made.

        As I have explained, when an officer is accused of CRIMINAL misconduct, as in the instant case, usually the department investigation (which is when discipline is decided) is not started until after the criminal investigation is complete.


        Because the dept. investigation is broader, can include evidence not allowed in the criminal trial (various sorts of hearsay etc.) and of course testimony can be compelled.

        They have to set up a Chinese wall between the two investigations until the prior one is complete, lest they taint the criminal trial.

        So, again, you make false statements about ofc. discipline. Check back in a month or two and you will find if the ofc. was fired or not.

  59. Oh btw, you claimed that assault while armed with a gun is a FELONY in your state. The only statute I can find for felony assault and a gun is ADW which is an assault BY MEANS OF (with) a deadly weapon. I see no statute in cali that makes assault a felony if merely armed (but not actually using ) a firearm. Can you cite it please?

    I have been a cop in three states, and am familiar with penal codes in about a dozen, as well as the model penal code. In none of those instance does assault become a felony merely because somebody is ARMED with a handgun.

    In many states, robbery or burglary is a more serious charge merely if the person is armed (even if they don’t use the gun), making it an aggravated charge, but I can find no example in any state law of assault becoming a felony merely because the person is armed.

  60. Give peace a chance :!

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.